Battle Armor revision

This site is best viewed in a modern browser with JavaScript enabled.

MechDaddy

I liked it more (back in 0.6 and before) you could still fight after ejecting with small laser. Right now ejecting is just plain POINTLESS and waste of time. Noobs for instance eject and spend 5 minutes to run to base to have 0 money etc. Anything to help this kind of action would be nice

Knightcrawler

I also liked the Small Laser ejection. It was okay at everything, great at nothing. As it stands, nobody ever buys a Small Laser. It might as well not exist. If a pilot wants to bring a Bear AC, they can replace their Small Laser with it for a small feee. However, I can see why people wanted to remove it. Small Laser actually had decent DPS (better than mpPPC), so the incentive to eject was high. However, the Small Laser jas a very visible beam, so it makes you a target.

Why not have alternate SSRM ammo types? We could have heavy rounds with 3x damage/shake, but they take 10x longer to reload. We could have flashbamg rounds (similar to a tiny nuke flash) that do 0.1x damage, but normal shake. I would suggest smoke screen rounds with a short duration and 5x reload time, but I fear what that would do to framerates. Maybe ATM-like rounds that are better against ASF (can start getting locks at long range, the missiles themselves would have like a 450m range, would be fast and turn well, long reload).

Knightcrawler

I have also been thinking about an alternative to current grenades... remove stickiness globally, make them not bounce (would lead to big problems with lag), and make them remote detonated. First click throws, second click explodes. Does unfortunately decrease potential for "SURPRISE YOU HAVE 3 C8 ON YOU AND I AM ALREADY HTTING YOU WITH MY MHL BY THE TIME YOU NOTICE" but it would let us get in hits with less delay, allows more trickshots, allows hitting multiple units, allows laying traps, legging mechs, and stuff. C8 explosion properties would need to change. NARC Grenades I have two ideas for, but can't explain here at work.

I mentioned skill because the ideas presented showed a lack of understanding about what makes BA effective and fun. I had already said as much politely in my previous post. But I will refrain henceforth.

IMO we need some new viable weapons, too. Plasma Cannon and Rifle, possibly.

haarp

Knightcrawler Plasma Cannon and Rifle, possibly.

Before going that way, let's make the Flamer not suck. Back in the days of old SA_Inferno, being a flamer BA was viable. Deathbane and I had lots of fun annoying the shit out of every mech crossing the infamous ridge.

The grenades you propose could work. Would need a grenade launcher primary weapon to make sense. This actually exists. But at that point, aren't they just missiles without a smoke trail?

Knightcrawler

haarp I don't see why we would need to take up a primary slot to be able to do what we already do. Especially since once you ran out of grenades, you would basically have to take a cyanide capsule. My proposed idea is a give and take in terms of balance. You won't see anymore 0-to-death ambushes on mechs who are running passive or not paying attention to their sensors, but BA gain some flexibility.

The problem with Flamers is it is never better to take a BA than any other asset with a flamer. 1 BA is completely incapable of overheating an asset in anything but extreme circumstances, even if he uses all his Inferno Charges between Flamer bursts. BA don't suffer from heat buildup, which is nice, but even though they have that going for them and their flamer is like 40% stronger than a mech flamer, mechs usually have 2 or more Flamers. Flamer Harassers have 6. Why take 2 BA instead of 2 Harassers? The overheat mechanic is built around those kind of numbers, which is why it is worthless for BA.

We could increase heat damage from Inferno Charges to help BA with overheating. Maybe we could have inferno SSRM rounds. We could double-check if the mpPPC is dealing any heat - I thought it was supposed to do a bit. I am just worried about the grenades being able to 1-hit ASF if we do that. Or maybe they could do some heat, but also decrease heat sink efficiency for a short time, or create an area of hot air (lile my Plasma Cannon idea below). But if that is okay, then...

Flamers as a primary w)could be useful for groups of BA, and BA who want to do it alone could buy a second heat primary, inferno SSRMs, etc..

My idea for Plasma Cannons/Rifles was that Rifles did a little bit of splash damage like a PPC, and Cannons would leave a temporary cloud of heating plasma. I am imagining them being very visible and having a slowish beam of sorts. However, for these to be viable l, they would have to replace the mpPPC in a loadout. And to do that, they would also have to be useful for mobility somehow. They would also have to do more heat damage when used properly than Flamers (for the duration of thr attack, not overall), because they would have a charge-up and would need to be cycled to.

The reason nobody using Small Lasers is because to get its good DPS, you have to use it constantly. That means forgoing your other weapons, which leads to an overall lower DPS.

fire-hound

According to latest game extracts the BA_Beamlaser is the second weakest source of theoretic (i.e. raw) DPS?
Only the BH_MG is weaker.

Knightcrawler

Hmm I dunno then. Should be better than mpPPC at least. Maybe the chart includes splash damage?

Anyway I almost forgot, we could have BA start with your Light MG and no grenades. Then if they buy grenades, the launcher comes with it and replaces the Light MG. They use the same button anyway.

That also circumvents the APC bug.

Marius

Good day.
A series of points covering a number of subjects currently covered.

1.Grenade to SRM
It goes against the core enjoyable mechanic of risk/reward in BA play.
You no longer have to be touching the mech to do your massive damage, 4 srm reload would be busting your load real early and either suicide or walk back and would be dull.

Pilot ejection Bear.
It's a primary anti BA weapon in a world where all weapons are Anti BA weapons with a good shot.
As stated previously the small laser was good all round, master of nothing in particular and still gives a good fighting change.
See:

The player fights the good fight and is engaged by a fully armed BA, on his last legs he ejects and engages, his chances are slim but not impossible, they duel and eventually a victor emerges, heart racing all the way.
It is a definitively a sidearm.
With a bear either player would be dead in 15 seconds.
Its dull.

Flamer weaponry.
What I believe to be the key here is a rework of the inferno mechanic.
At current it hits them with a heat burst, while good, it's never going to be enough.
ADD however an exterior temp build up, a thermal coating that perhaps with a minute/submersion dissapates but in that increases the mechs bottom line temperature.
Coupled with a fighting mech and maybe the flamethrower weapon itself, a determined and well aimed BA could cause a mech to cease function or atleast hamper one or few for a bigger fight with its allies.

More to come soon.

haarp

Marius It goes against the core enjoyable mechanic of risk/reward in BA play.
You no longer have to be touching the mech to do your massive damage

Hence why one idea is to make SRM damage depend on flight time. Point blank = most damage.

4 srm reload would be busting your load real early and either suicide or walk back and would be dull.

The exact same already applies to throwing around 4 C8 charges.

DeimosEvotec

I just found out that getting in and out of any asset also prevents the grenade bug.

Knightcrawler

haarp No, it doesn't. You can carry 8 C8 which are each stronger than your proposed missiles, 5 Inferno, and 3 NARC. Add to that the frustration of random interception of LAMS which cannot be bypassed completely. Most importantly, you always have SSRMs as current BA. You are talking about a proposal with a lower skill ceiling AND lower DPS AND lower survivability.

haarp

Knightcrawler Yes it does. The number of missiles you can carry is yet to be determined. You grasp at this one straw a lot.

Add to that the frustration of random interception of LAMS which cannot be bypassed completely.

Compared to the much much more frequent frustration of grenades not sticking? Also you can bypass any AMS by getting close enough.

Most importantly, you always have SSRMs as current BA.

You'd lose them as soon as you become a pilot.

lower skill ceiling

Oh snap, I didn't consider this. Gotta figure out how to make the game even more difficult and bug-infested for beginners. Our player retention rate is not horrible enough already. Having the skill ceiling involve figuring out how to work around Cryengine bugs is a mighty terrific goal.

lower DPS

fake news.

lower survivability

Now you're making things up. Higher, if anything, due to not having to get close if you are ok with not having full damage potential.

Marius

Getting close is one of the prime mechanics of BA and should not be deviated from.
Risk/reward and all that along with threat calculation from pilots, they know a BA does the most damage when its on them, not 50/100m.
If SRM becomes ammo dependant whilst being buffed to C8 levels of damage, it will simply be a slaughter for any mech atempting to cap a base with a BA, especially if that BA can use a building, they wouldnt even need to buy primary weapons if the base is suddenly lost, jump out and brawl with srms, that would be probably the low and unenjoyable skill level Knight is refering to.
Lots of people attack bases where people are still spawning, if those BA can suddenly jump out with that much damage and rocket them without having to purchase anything in the time it takes to cap... game over for those mechs unless they were uncontested on the way to the base, which is unlikely and hopeful.

I believe an alternative method will have to be devised due to the reactions of three BA mains, however more input is welcome.

EDIT:

Also not to mention whatever wild explanation we would muster to cover the immence damage disparity between BA srm and mech.

haarp

Good point, @Marius, what about the forward base spawns.

We could make it so that BA do not spawn with missiles at all. They'd have to buy them, just as they have to buy primary weapons, which costs time and leaves the BA vulnerable for a short while.

For brawling, BA will now have to spawn, buy their weapons, go outside. For maximum effect, they have to get within knife-range of a mech and fire their SRMs. They have now dealt moderate damage (which, I remind everyone, is tweakable). Meanwhile, the mech pilot has an opportunity to get rid of the toad while its SRMs reload.

It would change mechanics near forward bases, for sure. But I don't think it would be game breaking.

Marius Also not to mention whatever wild explanation we would muster to cover the immence damage disparity between BA srm and mech.

We already have this disparity with the piss laser, which deals more damage than a mech-sized HLL. It's easy, a single MWLL BA represents a star of BT BAs. That's all the handwaiving we always needed

Zweistein000

Has any thought been given to the claw?

Perhaps instead of grenades sticking to battlemechs we could have BA using the claw to stick themselves onto battlelechs. Knowing how mechs move in MWLL this would definitely require a great deal of skill to execute but with a high reward (one you're attached the mechwarrrior is screwed unless an ally fires at him to get you off), thus giving the BA that "High skill" that Knighcrawler is so afraid of loosing. I do recall reading somewhere that BA did do that and it was one of the things that scared Mechwarriors the most.

Also is there any chance of making BA not explode if they are riding on a vehicle?

haarp

It's a moot point anyway. Wandering Samurai tried and failed to make it work since the very beginning. Cryengine is just too buggy. I would very much like to be able to ride on friendlies tho, that would allow whole squads of BA to arrive at the frontlines quickly. fun times.

Zweistein000

Also is there any chance of making BA not explode if they are riding on a vehicle?

Possibly. If we define zones on a vehicle (top, front/back) we might be able to disable collission damage for some of them.

Marius

Zweist, im afraid the claw is a whole other discussion.
You would be incorrect in saying it would maintain a high skill for use, it'd make it obscenely easy if you could just latch onto someones back in safety.

It is lore friendly and I have frequently stated my desire for one, but I do not feel being able to latch onto enemy mechs would make anyone happy unless over all damage was lowered, which would be fun for noone.

Zweistein000

haarp Sad times about he claw.

Marius Have you ever tried to jump onto a moving Mech? It wouldn't be as easy as you think.

Marius

Zweistein000 Have you ever tried to jump onto a moving Mech? It wouldn't be as easy as you think.

Not to divert from the conversation, but do you know the players and their reputations who are speaking in this chat?
Atop that, I am unfamiliar with your experience or even your name.

To answer your question, yes.

Zweistein000

Marius I've been around since before MWLL initial release. I'd count myself as fairly experienced though I haven't been as active since the new team took over.

The point is as long as the mech is moving, it would never be as easy as "just latching on enemy mechs". But this argument is pointless anyway if Cry engine doesn't allow for the claw to work.

« Previous Page