BattleMonkey
Member
So after all these days and tons of matches, I've yet to get in one match in the new friggin map 
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
MechWarrior Online - News and Information Thread
- Thread starter Orayn
- Start date
Have the devs commented on what they think of ECMs currently? I don't see how it ever got greenlit other than it was a huge overreaction to LRMs. I mean this thing is a god-tier aoe stealth device that nullifies two entire classes of weapons that does this all passively.
I actually don't see how LRMs are overpowered. There are so many skill based counters. (line of sight, speed on light mechs, etc.) I mean they are devastating if you are in a 50 kph mech and you only want to walk in a straight light directly at the enemy, but then I feel you should get your face melted if you do that. Even if the devs want to tweak it all they had to do was slightly reduce the tracking so lighter mechs have an easier time evading.
I actually don't see how LRMs are overpowered. There are so many skill based counters. (line of sight, speed on light mechs, etc.) I mean they are devastating if you are in a 50 kph mech and you only want to walk in a straight light directly at the enemy, but then I feel you should get your face melted if you do that. Even if the devs want to tweak it all they had to do was slightly reduce the tracking so lighter mechs have an easier time evading.
BattleMonkey
Member
Pre ECM, the LRM swarms was pretty bad. Yea you could counter it with terrain, but mechs have to eventually move and once they were out in the open, LRM boats would be just raining down fire all over the place. It was a bit over the top to be certain. ECM was needed, but they over did it's effectiveness in this game. ECM should operate more like the tabletop game in which it does help, but it doesn't totally screw them over. In the tabletop and in the fluff, the ECM use was not that common as ECM's took up a large chunk of a mech and were heavy.
I think they know it's a touchy subject as it's been debated heavily on the forum and they recently added the EMP effect to PPC attacks that turn off ECM for a period of time. So I think that is partially them acknowledging the ECM being powerful and trying to tweak it now with other factors.
I would prefer if ECM would work similar to AMS which would cause some of the missiles to miss, or to lower their tracking accuracy. Also perhaps reduce lock on range and time. That way ECM+AMS would make you almost shielded completely from many missile barrages but that ECM alone not be the end all solution it is.
I think they know it's a touchy subject as it's been debated heavily on the forum and they recently added the EMP effect to PPC attacks that turn off ECM for a period of time. So I think that is partially them acknowledging the ECM being powerful and trying to tweak it now with other factors.
I would prefer if ECM would work similar to AMS which would cause some of the missiles to miss, or to lower their tracking accuracy. Also perhaps reduce lock on range and time. That way ECM+AMS would make you almost shielded completely from many missile barrages but that ECM alone not be the end all solution it is.
I'm not too bothered by ECM since I really mostly on direct fire weapons, but I do recognize it needs a nerf.
First off, ECM in-game is guardian ecm + angel ecm + null signal. So, really, it should be 3 equipments, ie 4.5t (a heavy price for a light) and 6 crit spaces (a heavy price for an atlas)
Since mwo does not respect TT rules anyway, they should boost other equipment as well. BAP should cancel it for that individual mech (it weighs the bloody same as ecm, after all - at least make it not completely useless). NARC should cancel ECM (3+1 bloody tons, and it's useless enough as it is).
AMS should be much more effective against streaks (1.5t - the same as ecm); would help a lot for non-ecm lights). You'd at least be able to survive against ecm streakers that have no-miss weapons and can match your speed. This easy counter to ecm cheese-streakers would make me a lot more tolerant of them.
That being said, I love my jenner. 4 smalls (though maybe I should switch that to mediums - 10 instead 12 for an alpha, but i'd gain the range) and 2 srm4's. Srm's make great flanking weapons against larger mechs.
First off, ECM in-game is guardian ecm + angel ecm + null signal. So, really, it should be 3 equipments, ie 4.5t (a heavy price for a light) and 6 crit spaces (a heavy price for an atlas)
Since mwo does not respect TT rules anyway, they should boost other equipment as well. BAP should cancel it for that individual mech (it weighs the bloody same as ecm, after all - at least make it not completely useless). NARC should cancel ECM (3+1 bloody tons, and it's useless enough as it is).
AMS should be much more effective against streaks (1.5t - the same as ecm); would help a lot for non-ecm lights). You'd at least be able to survive against ecm streakers that have no-miss weapons and can match your speed. This easy counter to ecm cheese-streakers would make me a lot more tolerant of them.
That being said, I love my jenner. 4 smalls (though maybe I should switch that to mediums - 10 instead 12 for an alpha, but i'd gain the range) and 2 srm4's. Srm's make great flanking weapons against larger mechs.
Well, it isn't. A TAGed mech can be lit up almost like the ECM isn't there, and now that TAG range is almost as long as the missle range themselves, LRM boats don't even need to rely on other mechs tagging for them. The 'issue' I think is with the triple function of bocking radar for allied mechs, jamming hostile electronics AND killing lockon systems for hostile mechs when they're in the ECM bubble. This was done to kill streakboats, and the game is much better for it, but really these three functions should be split between three seperate peices of equipment, each of which can only be activated one at a time.
EDIT:
Oh, yeah, what he said.
BattleMonkey
Member
Yup that's pretty accurate. They made it a one stop shop type of deal in a small nice little package instead of being multiple and costly pieces.
Chance Hale
Member
Finally downloaded this the other day and played for a bit, enjoyable although getting used to removing limbs and throttle based maneuvering is difficult.
Reason for commenting here though, whatever happened to the DX11 features? It's CryEngine 3 and I remember reading that it would support DX10/11 so I was surprised when DX9 was the only option.
Reason for commenting here though, whatever happened to the DX11 features? It's CryEngine 3 and I remember reading that it would support DX10/11 so I was surprised when DX9 was the only option.
DX11 is being tested internally before they roll it out to the public build since there have been a number of issues with it.
I agree AMS needs a buff vs. srms in general. Think it should be proportional to the number of missiles in a salvo since there are more targets grouped closer together, this having a good benefit on silencing some of the complaints about srm cat-a1s. I think the catapult chassis needs a slight downgrade in allowable engine size and torso twist personally, nothing major as I don't have a problem with highly effective cheesebuilds that do one thing good but suck everywhere else.
I don't think they can buff AMS much vs. LRMs. Yea it is basically worthless if you are the only one running an AMS, but if say half your mechs sport AMS and it is buffed no LRM gets through. As it stands right now if you got a bunch of mechs with AMS that is pretty decent LRM defense.
They also need to consume ammo much faster.
And TAG really needs to work and allow lock ons for streaks inside the 180m stealth god bubble.
Heh, just looked it up, huge drawbacks huh. Too bad it doesn't come as standard on any upcoming mechs otherwise they'd 'have' to impliment it.
Though really I'd contend that the only balancing that ECM really needs is to take it off the Atlas. Again, I'll take the current situation over A1 streakboats, man that was boring.
I would agree, and cirtainly this wouldn't mean a comeback for streakapults, but then I remember that Stalkers have just as many missle slots and can mount a tag too. Sure, slower and no jumpjets, but still nothing that I want to be fighting on a regular basis, and lack of a hard ECM counter is probably all that's stopping that from being the case.
Though really I'd contend that the only balancing that ECM really needs is to take it off the Atlas. Again, I'll take the current situation over A1 streakboats, man that was boring.
I would agree, and cirtainly this wouldn't mean a comeback for streakapults, but then I remember that Stalkers have just as many missle slots and can mount a tag too. Sure, slower and no jumpjets, but still nothing that I want to be fighting on a regular basis, and lack of a hard ECM counter is probably all that's stopping that from being the case.
So basically you use it to get into prime position and then drop it for the actually fighting. Imagine something having decent trade-offs.
2 million away from having my Raven 3L fully upgraded, if the problem annoys just be part of the problem I always say.
Edit. Waiting on pugs to adapt tactics for Alpine peaks. Lights should be pretty much only concerned with capturing resource points and skirmishing other lights. So many games end with the team with the most kills losing the resource war. Deathball strategies on Alpine are recipes for getting the most kills but losing the game.
BattleMonkey
Member
Finally get in matches for Alpine peak and it's never with the proper 12 players. 8 v 8 on that map is awful, don't know why it even launches with that. It needs those extra mechs in it
I think it would be better with 12 but I don't think that is supported yet. I also think the way pugs play Alpine is terrible on conquest. Deathballs (all the mechs clumping around the assaults and heavies)that are the only viable strategy for the small maps don't work at all in Alpine conquest.
Also if the matchmaking gives you a heavy tonnage team on Alpine conquest you are screwed.
BattleMonkey
Member
Few matches I've had on alpine always end with someone capping the other base and it being so big, no one can stop another team from winning since pugs just all run out and often don't run defense.
I thought 12 on 12 was turned on for that map already
I thought 12 on 12 was turned on for that map already
Nope, no 12v12 yet. Should be coming in the next few months along with more big maps.
Alpine does kind of suck on assault at the moment, but I'm not sure that 12v12 will make it that much better. I tend to only play on conquest anyway unless I'm in an Atlas, and I freaking love Alpine conquest, even 8v8. 12v12 Alpine conquest should be pretty awesome.
Alpine does kind of suck on assault at the moment, but I'm not sure that 12v12 will make it that much better. I tend to only play on conquest anyway unless I'm in an Atlas, and I freaking love Alpine conquest, even 8v8. 12v12 Alpine conquest should be pretty awesome.
The March update looks huge:
http://mwomercs.com/news/2013/03/618-2013-march-creative-director-update
http://mwomercs.com/news/2013/03/618-2013-march-creative-director-update
BattleMonkey
Member
bueno.jpg
Or a module that costs 6 million and requires "charges".
Where do you see these stats?
EDIT the mech doesn't have basis in lore. Most won't have.
Stickied thread on mwo official forums on the patch.
I guess March 18th is the last day I play MWO if this consumables nonsense goes in. It's a shame. It could work out but now there's this constant doubt that we'll lose a match because they Alpha Strike a bit more because the team is full of dedicated players who paid for those consumables.
I was willing to give them money too but if they're going to implement this consumable nonsense, I'm out.
I was willing to give them money too but if they're going to implement this consumable nonsense, I'm out.
BattleMonkey
Member
I think its a bit premature till we see how they turn out, and especially the cost for the consumables. They said you can use C-bills for them, so if they aren't that expensive that your forced to pay, I don't see the issue. As for coolant flush, main backlash on it was the implementation in previous games, so again it's all about how they handle it in this game. Course the nasty ECM they put in hurts one's faith in how fair they will make some of this....
ColonelSkills
Member
Consumables will make me quit if they aren't balanced at all. And they probably won't be.
The what is no doubt going to be a Call of Duty style airstrike is bad enough but the Coolant Flush is just asking for abuse. Fuck this.
Also the artillery is just a "what". What are they going to let you do? Call in on a grid position? Capping flags will be so fun, no doubt.
Edit: Maybe, MAYBE if they tie it to Command Console only, only a few mechs, and have it be a one and done (costs what you spent on it regardless if you actually use it in a match) then maybe there's a chance.
I just fear the worst here.
The what is no doubt going to be a Call of Duty style airstrike is bad enough but the Coolant Flush is just asking for abuse. Fuck this.
Also the artillery is just a "what". What are they going to let you do? Call in on a grid position? Capping flags will be so fun, no doubt.
Edit: Maybe, MAYBE if they tie it to Command Console only, only a few mechs, and have it be a one and done (costs what you spent on it regardless if you actually use it in a match) then maybe there's a chance.
I just fear the worst here.
BattleMonkey
Member
How are consumables any different from any other piece of gear in the game (and whether is balanced or not) if they let us use our cbills on it?
MisterAnderson
Member
Wait has this game been released? I thought it was still in beta... I bought the founders pack too you'd think I'd have gotten an email saying it launched.
I have a T-Flight Hotas Joystick, should I use that or mouse and keyboard?
I have a T-Flight Hotas Joystick, should I use that or mouse and keyboard?
BattleMonkey
Member
It's open beta, anyone can play and been that way for months. As a founder you've had access to the game since you gave them money essentially. They just did a stat wipe and such before going open beta.
ColonelSkills
Member
It's not a great mechanic.
Fundamental changes to the gameplay structure? I mean, alpha strike gimmick builds are already a thing. Giving them a handful of get out of jail free passes will just make it cheesier.
I'm primarily worried about teams effectively boating artillery strikes. Strikes me as potentially very aggravating. if they tie it to command console/specific chassis/other requirements then it may not be so annoying.
The MC version is supposedly slightly better.
BattleMonkey
Member
Where does this come from? Someone said something like that facebook but yet to see any source on the proof of that. That would be awful if true.
ColonelSkills
Member
The forums are going apeshit over it. To the point of it being difficult to find where the source on it is.
I wish I could give a better answer. If I find it, I'll let you know. It seems to be with the implementation of different levels of modules and/or slots. Either the MC versions are slightly more effective or they take less slots. It's hard to fully grasp from under all the vitriol and piss.
MC flush takes 1 module slot and reduces heat by 35% assuming 10 heat sinks. The real implication is maybe 1-2 extra alpha strikes per match.
Cbill flush comes in two versions, 15% and 20%. You can stack them and get "35%" flush in one go, or you can use them separately - of course, this means you use 2 modules. Both types have their advantages: 1 module only, vs option to use twice (and frankly, being able to cool down on two separate situations is very significant).
Cbill and MC flushes don't stack.
Given the implementation, I'm not too bothered by the coolants. But, the p2w slippery slope is there, so we'll see. The bigger concern is p2w artillery, where someone can carry 1 MC large arty and 1 large air strike at the module cost of 2 smaller cbill arty.
A way to balance it woul be team time limits btw arty strikes. Doesn't matter if the entire enemy team stacked large p2w arty and air strikes; if they only call it every 5 min per team, then the number isn't significant anymore. So, there is a way to balance it, so as to not make arty a must-have.
Which is why I'm at wait-and-see mode for now. I'm not giving PGI a free pass, but I'm at p2w panic mode yet.
Cbill flush comes in two versions, 15% and 20%. You can stack them and get "35%" flush in one go, or you can use them separately - of course, this means you use 2 modules. Both types have their advantages: 1 module only, vs option to use twice (and frankly, being able to cool down on two separate situations is very significant).
Cbill and MC flushes don't stack.
Given the implementation, I'm not too bothered by the coolants. But, the p2w slippery slope is there, so we'll see. The bigger concern is p2w artillery, where someone can carry 1 MC large arty and 1 large air strike at the module cost of 2 smaller cbill arty.
A way to balance it woul be team time limits btw arty strikes. Doesn't matter if the entire enemy team stacked large p2w arty and air strikes; if they only call it every 5 min per team, then the number isn't significant anymore. So, there is a way to balance it, so as to not make arty a must-have.
Which is why I'm at wait-and-see mode for now. I'm not giving PGI a free pass, but I'm at p2w panic mode yet.
BattleMonkey
Member
The cbill costs are pretty cheap as well. But what a clusterfuck having mc only options and them having differences, like less damage for the MC ones than the cbill ones?
ColonelSkills
Member
Nevermind. I stand corrected after getting more info from that thread.
A little less bogus, but I'm still concerned.
A little less bogus, but I'm still concerned.
BattleMonkey
Member
With the cbill costs being so low, it's not that bad sounding and at least they are now talking directly back and forth about it. But still stuff like the coolant flush shouldn't be superior with a 35% use. While it's true using two smaller flushes might be better, folks seeing that the cash only one is higher percentage is going to set folks off.
Be interesting to see also that when they put in the artillery and such in that it ends up sucking or something and not worth a damn.
Can my AMS shoot down airstrikes?
Be interesting to see also that when they put in the artillery and such in that it ends up sucking or something and not worth a damn.
Can my AMS shoot down airstrikes?
I was one of this game's most enthusiastic supporters but I just can't even defend anything about it anymore.
I'm not even pissed at the money I spent, I knew it was a gamble and I certainly got a lot of playtime out of the game. I just can't imagine devs so slow, incompetent and out of touch with their community actually delivering on all that was promised. They'll need years at this rate, I can't see them turning things around before they alienate the last of their playerbase and run MWO into the ground.
I'm not even pissed at the money I spent, I knew it was a gamble and I certainly got a lot of playtime out of the game. I just can't imagine devs so slow, incompetent and out of touch with their community actually delivering on all that was promised. They'll need years at this rate, I can't see them turning things around before they alienate the last of their playerbase and run MWO into the ground.
All you 'really' gain by paying is a module slot. min/maxers subsidise f2pers in a way that doesn't even really give them an advantage, boohoo.
PPC boats get one extra shot per match, I get a game that's actually being funded. Caring = zero.
Non-paid arty does more damage, caring = zero.
PPC boats get one extra shot per match, I get a game that's actually being funded. Caring = zero.
Non-paid arty does more damage, caring = zero.
It's these differences that bother me the most. Why lock tier 3 behind MC? Why not allow people to purchase everything with C-Bills and MC instead?
Shit like this just makes me hate F2P. I would rather just have them charge $40 flat and be done with it.
Why the hell are PPCs useless pieces of junk?
They deal no damage compared to other things.
Well it's not really a game mechanic. It's mechwarrior lore.
I understand the concern though. The p2w is getting closer to being true.
They deal no damage compared to other things.
Well it's not really a game mechanic. It's mechwarrior lore.
I understand the concern though. The p2w is getting closer to being true.