|
Reiterpallasch posted:compromise option: the ability to abuse both bulwark and evasion by vigilance + sprinting/jumping even on an assault is the real criminal here it's only fair when they bring demolishers and SRM carriers that you can't have! 
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 20:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 00:51 |
|
|
The marginalization of light/mediums towards the end of the game is seriously bumming me out, but I can't really think of a way to encourage their use without making things unfun somehow. Like a tax for going over the mission's tonnage rating, maybe? But that would be lame.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 20:53
|
|
|
Rookersh posted:each evasion pip is roughly a 5% chance to hit. so at 7 you get -35% chance to be hit. As far as I know each evasion pip counts for -2 Difficulty to Hit which is usually 10%. Difficulty to Hit (which includes evasion, range, partial obstruction, terrain effects, and possibly gyro upgrades) is 5% per point up to -10 total points (-50%), then -2.5% per point after that. Light mechs have an inherent -2 to be hit, mediums have -1. Edit: Base chance to hit is 65% plus 2.5% per Gunnery skill. Promethium fucked around with this message at 20:56 on May 7, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 20:54
|
|
|
The short answer is that it's just the consequence of focusing on individual small skirmishes.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 20:55
|
|
|
KPC_Mammon posted:I don't get DFA self damage. I have a firestarter with two leg enhancements providing -10 and -20 DFA damage. It is a 35 ton mech. It looks like DFA self damage = DFA damage, but it is applied in two separate hits. Leg enhancements that reduce DFA damage apply to each hit separately. Firestarter normally hits itself twice for 45 damage each, with the leg mods it is reduced to 15 damage each hit. This means with the best leg mods your best bet for infinite zero self damage DFA's is the Blackjack (110 DFA damage).
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 21:02
|
|
|
Argas posted:The short answer is that it's just the consequence of focusing on individual small skirmishes. Basically this. While you could theoretically say "let the player bring 16 lights on a drop" or whatever, the game would just drag on longer, and the action economy of more bots could swing the meta to "never use assaults". Limiting drop tonnage or having costs associated with fueling/maintenance per drop that scales with size is probably the only workable option that doesn't fundamentally change poo poo.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 21:08
|
|
|
Ultimately, I'd rather play a game where I fight lots of mechs/vehicles in a mission and if Bulwark needs to be a little OP to make that happen, so be it (But Disabling turn in place and still getting Bulkwark is a good first step). Certainly more fun than a fair fight against a good AI in campaign mode. Just giving the AI artillery/airstrikes so you can't kill zone turtle every mission, and it would balance out just fine. Extra fun if you can destroy the artillery/aircraft. Of courses that's more
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 21:08
|
|
|
I keep saying I should stop playing soon, just because there's no real new content yet and I have the sort of lance(s) I need. Yet here I am with 970 Board rating and 53 million Cbills in my warchest. I could have a lot more if I just sold off some of the ++ gear I am carting around but I'm saving it for when I inevitably blow an arm or something on my cooler mechs. I've even started hunting for mechwarriors with special traits for whenever they properly implement that stuff.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 21:12
|
|
|
Are there AAA mechs/weapons in the BT Universe?
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 21:12
|
|
|
Eldragon posted:Ultimately, I'd rather play a game where I fight lots of mechs/vehicles in a mission and if Bulwark needs to be a little OP to make that happen, so be it (But Disabling turn in place and still getting Bulkwark is a good first step). Certainly more fun than a fair fight against a good AI in campaign mode. The base attack missions sure would be a lot harder if the base turrets could lock at longer ranges. As it is, you just have to instakill all their spotters.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 21:13
|
|
|
Make monthly operating costs change relative to the amount of tonnage you've deployed on contracts during that month.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 21:14
|
|
|
BurntCornMuffin posted:Are there AAA mechs/weapons in the BT Universe? http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Rifleman E: the JagerMech was also designed as an AA platform.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 21:15
|
|
|
BurntCornMuffin posted:Are there AAA mechs/weapons in the BT Universe? The Rifleman and its variants are http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Rifleman
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 21:16
|
|
|
Zigmidge posted:you're playing a strategy game with some of the worst AI ever. To be fair, the game is perfect for me, the worst player ever
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 21:17
|
|
|
BurntCornMuffin posted:Are there AAA mechs/weapons in the BT Universe? Don't forget the Jagermech
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 21:17
|
|
|
BurntCornMuffin posted:Are there AAA mechs/weapons in the BT Universe? Yeah, the Rifleman is a dedicated aa mech and it's one of the classic original "unseen" designs.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 21:18
|
|
|
Kurr de la Cruz posted:The marginalization of light/mediums towards the end of the game is seriously bumming me out, but I can't really think of a way to encourage their use without making things unfun somehow. Like a tax for going over the mission's tonnage rating, maybe? But that would be lame. I think the fundamental problem is that Battletech sees light>medium>heavy>assault as just being a linear gear progression like going from a +1 to a +2 sword in some RPG rather than having actual different roles. So yeah, I don't see that changing without some major overhauls to how stuff works or just a lame fun tax.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 21:19
|
|
|
Gobblecoque posted:I think the fundamental problem is that Battletech sees light>medium>heavy>assault as just being a linear gear progression like going from a +1 to a +2 sword in some RPG rather than having actual different roles. So yeah, I don't see that changing without some major overhauls to how stuff works or just a lame fun tax. Really just missions that require you to move quickly solve this issue. The storyline mission where you have to destroy the comm tower in 15 rounds or less is tricky with a slow lance, trivially easy with a single jump equipped light. is a decent example of "don't roll nothing but slow mechs". Similar solutions can be done with randomly generated missions. And let us not forget the fun of infantry. Trivially easy to kill, only dangerous at short range, but chew through mechs dumb enough to let them get close. Back when I was doing weekend TT games, dropping with an swarm of infantry against the dudes with their anti-mech optimized murder boats is probably the most fun I had playing the game. Course this game will probably never have them, which is too bad. But yeah, the core base game of mechs slugging it out, tonnage wins. Eldragon fucked around with this message at 21:29 on May 7, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 21:26
|
|
|
Sandwich Anarchist posted:Made a BeforeIPlay page for Battletech. Guys take a look and suggest anything to add? May want to mention that in some cases, you can target the support structure under a turret, which will generally come down with far less of a hit.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 21:32
|
|
|
Reiterpallasch posted:compromise option: the ability to abuse both bulwark and evasion by vigilance + sprinting/jumping even on an assault is the real criminal here Vigilance doesn’t grant bulwark. You get the half stability damage but not the half armor damage.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 21:35
|
|
|
IOwnCalculus posted:May want to mention that in some cases, you can target the support structure under a turret, which will generally come down with far less of a hit. Only some, though. It failed for me at the ammo depot.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 21:36
|
|
|
Nostalgia4Infinity posted:http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Rifleman I never really got the “anti aircraft mech” tabletop design concept like the Jagermech. Ok, so it has some long range firepower but it’s using lovely light auto cannons and aero fighters aren’t made out of tissue paper.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 21:42
|
|
|
William Henry Hairytaint posted:Make monthly operating costs change relative to the amount of tonnage you've deployed on contracts during that month. This is a reasonable solution. However I've never really had money crunch all game long so far, so I'd probably just effortlessly pay for the extra weight.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 21:43
|
|
|
Deuce posted:I never really got the “anti aircraft mech” tabletop design concept like the Jagermech. Ok, so it has some long range firepower but it’s using lovely light auto cannons and aero fighters aren’t made out of tissue paper. If I remember right, aerofighters have to check versus losing control and cratering any time they take hits.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 21:45
|
|
|
Deuce posted:Vigilance doesn’t grant bulwark. You get the half stability damage but not the half armor damage. oh poo poo, really? some certain unpleasant experiences with a highlander are starting to explain themselves...
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 21:46
|
|
|
Reiterpallasch posted:oh poo poo, really? some certain unpleasant experiences with a highlander are starting to explain themselves... This is technically true, as bulwark is a special ability. It gives you entrenched and guarded though, which is better than bulwark. Bulwark only gives guarded.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 21:54
|
|
|
Hell, just look at the numbers that pop up when you get shot after using vigilance. You absolutely take 1/2 armor damage under Vigilance.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 21:55
|
|
|
BurntCornMuffin posted:Only some, though. It failed for me at the ammo depot. See, that was the first time I'd tried it, and it worked on at least one of the turrets.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 21:55
|
|
|
 Dekker. Core'd by a demolisher that moved over the ridgeline before it could be focus-fired down.Apparently asking for him to survive his third core'ing was too much to ask. 
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 21:56
|
|
|
Reiterpallasch posted:bulwark seriously needs a nerf, though "Something actually works. Better nerf it. In fact, swap it with the widely accepted to be garbage skill." Also clearly the REAL pro answer if you can't decide between Bulwark Vs Ace Pilot for your frontliners is to take BOTH  Control Volume posted:HBS is apparently going to to add missions that make lights mobility useful strategically, but as missions and infinite weight limits stand, I think the only real fix to this is making the AI use sensor lock and LRMs more which is kind of a poo poo way to fix things The AI loving LOVES to use Sensor Lock+LRM spam on me even when I'm two feet from my spawn point and my only route is 'out into an open field' or 'up a mountain' that still leaves me in their sensor range "Ugh this sucks. At least it's probably only a Trebuchet I can kill with a stiff breeze-oh it's a missile Jager with master tactician."Though to be fair, routinely poo poo luck will make any AI look like a super genius. Then you get moments where a pair of enemy enforcers go from a problem to a joke as their pathing breaks on an awkward mountain pass when they land next to eachother (Guys, you have jump jets... Which make me jealous as my heavies spends 4 turns sprinting in an awkward zig zag to get LoS). As for lights, I hope they actually make lights themselves more useful. Like, direct advantages for lights that are universal in a way that doesn't favor the AI's ability to spam the poo poo out of them vs your limited unit. Not falling into the common pit of "Okay, what if we make a set of chase targets, time limits, and other hurdles that make weaker faster units LOOK appealing without any actual benefit!" Kurr de la Cruz posted:The marginalization of light/mediums towards the end of the game is seriously bumming me out, but I can't really think of a way to encourage their use without making things unfun somehow. Like a tax for going over the mission's tonnage rating, maybe? But that would be lame. Because as said above, that's just not fun unless you're only in it find validation on the internet based on your robo tactics. Section Z fucked around with this message at 22:03 on May 7, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 22:00
|
|
|
Given how consistently and successfully my Firestarter is loving up whatever I point at it, the only thing Lights need is enough Support weapon slots to make their backstabs stick.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 22:02
|
|
|
Night10194 posted:Given how consistently and successfully my Firestarter is loving up whatever I point at it, the only thing Lights need is enough Support weapon slots to make their backstabs stick. If you could preview the map I would be using my still in the mechbays firestarter way more often, and bring my Jenner out of storage. Rather than keeping it on the ship out of  fear of more shitshow spawns....But seriously, being able to preview the terrain would be a HUGE deal for deciding if you want to bring your more agile mechs, across all mission types. I would have left my heavies home and brought an all medium lance tops for some of the missions I've seen based on how awkward anything without jumpjets or a 150 top speed was to use. "Don't worry guys, our Jagermech is almost finally able to loving see the enemy in the first place! Oh by the way our Centurion is almost out of missiles already." Section Z fucked around with this message at 22:11 on May 7, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 22:06
|
|
|
Night10194 posted:Given how consistently and successfully my Firestarter is loving up whatever I point at it, the only thing Lights need is enough Support weapon slots to make their backstabs stick. Yeah, switch support slots back to ballistic/energy but still let support weapons fire with melee attacks and suddenly lights become a lot more scary.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 22:07
|
|
|
They could also introduce a percentage-based tonnage fee as you drop, so there's an incentive to beat each mission with the lightest total mech weight possible.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 22:09
|
|
|
KPC_Mammon posted:Yeah, switch support slots back to ballistic/energy but still let support weapons fire with melee attacks and suddenly lights become a lot more scary. I can't tell you how disappointed I was to finally get a jenner chassis and find I can't load it up with small lasers and SRMs to complete my old MWO chubby-chaser build. Hieronymous Alloy posted:They could also introduce a percentage-based tonnage fee as you drop, so there's an incentive to beat each mission with the lightest total mech weight possible. But that's basically a fun tax, and those suck. Edit: Maybe instead of a penalty for being overweight, there could be a bonus for being underweight? That might work.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 22:14
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:They could also introduce a percentage-based tonnage fee as you drop, so there's an incentive to beat each mission with the lightest total mech weight possible. I know everyone hates clans, but having a built in incentive to drop as few tons as possible would really help.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 22:15
|
|
|
Deuce posted:Vigilance doesn’t grant bulwark. You get the half stability damage but not the half armor damage. That is 100% not true: "Gain GUARDED and ENTRENCHED and remove all stability damage. Your next Initiative is increased by 1 (to a maximum of 5)." Guarded is 50% damage reduction, entrenched is the 50% stability damage reduction.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 22:15
|
|
|
KPC_Mammon posted:I know everyone hates clans, but having a built in incentive to drop as few tons as possible would really help. Soft deterrents like this sound good in theory and are invariably awful in practice. A hard limit at least gives you something concrete to work around and be creative, a soft limit is just the game scolding you for bringing an assault
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 22:18
|
|
|
Cheen posted:Its not true grognard/minmaxing if its against the AI- Flamer Firestarter to lock down the heaviest mech the opponent has.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 22:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 00:51 |
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:They could also introduce a percentage-based tonnage fee as you drop, so there's an incentive to beat each mission with the lightest total mech weight possible. "Why won't you loving use lighter mechs!? "Because the enemy has 1.7 AC20's per 1 mech I'm fielding." "Oh yeah! Well now you have to pay 50,000 credits extra per heavy mech you drop with!" "That's still less than my last hunchback repair bill, even before destroyed AC20++ I had to replace." "100,000?" "Worth keeping Decker out of the hospital for another 37 days."
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2018 22:18
|
|