Current cycle feedback

Miscellaneous topics about the campaign

Moderator: Moderators

obese pigeon
Posts: 852
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 10:51 am

Re: Current cycle feedback

Post by obese pigeon » Tue Jun 05, 2018 9:14 am

Doesn't smoke dissipate after a few turns?

Lumpi
MegamekNET Moderator
Posts: 355
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2016 5:24 pm

Re: Current cycle feedback

Post by Lumpi » Tue Jun 05, 2018 2:24 pm

yes it does without a fuel source
"was interessiert mich mein geschwätz von gestern!" Konrad Adenauer German Chancelor
"what do I care about my chatter from yesterday!"

Illician Lancers
Posts: 146
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 10:34 pm

Re: Current cycle feedback

Post by Illician Lancers » Tue Jun 05, 2018 2:50 pm

Lumpi wrote:yes it does without a fuel source
Maybe it does but I still don't see a single game where the smoke dissipate after the fuel source is gone and I'm talking things like 8 to 10 turns after the trees/building are gone. So my question is how long takes to dissipate the smoke and I don't mean the BT rule i mean in megamek? Because I don't see it happening so far. :cry: :?:

Lando
Posts: 295
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 4:18 pm

Re: Current cycle feedback

Post by Lando » Tue Jun 05, 2018 5:45 pm

Stereg wrote:After playing to about 1300 xp this new cycle, I feel that vehicles in general are unbalanced. With the low economy and limited bays, playing with 5-8 units is the only way to be competitive currently, with either multiple lrm vees or saladins. This sort of play isn't fun or interactive in the least. I feel that knowing that if you lose 1 initiative phase, you either have to move completely LOS or have a unit ripped to shreds is not fun.

As for ways I could think of to adjust the cycle for the future, I feel that Saladins in particular should be looked at as a 8/12 hover with an AC20 that is frequently on the BM for 100cbs is too powerful and under priced. I know others I have spoken with have stated that they have lost every game they have played vs a Saladin so far this cycle. As for unit numbers in armies, I don't know if there's anyway to combat this issue. I do not work with the actual code, nor do I have an programming experience so I can't comment on the options available there.

I will say that the beginning of the cycle and the even unit games I have played have been very engaging and fun, while also pretty quick compared to previous cycles I've played with double blind. So I really do enjoy this cycle. But I see no reason to play if I'm gonna have to slog through a game where the opponent has 5 units and 2 inf (1 of those being an AC10 field gun), while I am forced to rush it or play griffin jump games.

/my2cents
I have played with Saladins and against them in this cycle. They aren't a problem. I won a game against 4 hovers. 2 of them were Saladins, and he won ini. If you move for a ToHitModifer of 3 and he has to flank to get in short range, he shoots with a 9. On the other side, the Saladin has only 5 Armor at the sides and rear and can only shoot to the front. So the player has to be very careful, that he didn't kill the STG with his AC/20 but loose the Saladin to another mek, shooting to him from a side.

Saladins were lot nastier with double blind, when you don't see them, until they are Standing before you.

User avatar
Dwight Derringer
Posts: 365
Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2013 7:07 pm

Re: Current cycle feedback

Post by Dwight Derringer » Thu Jun 07, 2018 6:16 am

Saladins are nasty, but it's like Lando said - if you keep your movement mods high you'll usually win a war of attrition against them since the 'eggs in one basket' style of play that the Saladin has isn't exactly tilted in its favour. Hovers in general are squishy, and a Saladin is squishy for a hover.

If you need to throw a round of fire at it with every unit, that's what you should do. One or two hits will kill it - and even if they don't, there is a fair chance that it'll be crit in a way that will make it very vulnerable the following turn.

Now, a Drillson (SRM) is a unit that needs to be looked at.... :P

User avatar
Nastyogre
MegamekNET Moderator
Posts: 4133
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 4:46 am

Re: Current cycle feedback

Post by Nastyogre » Thu Jun 07, 2018 4:18 pm

(Rises from the grave)

Any "gimmick" unit is a problem if you aren't prepared for it. Saladins, Warrior-C's, etc. It's a debate/problem/just the way it is, in many tabletop games with different forces. There is always an element of Rock/paper/scissors. Balanced forces typically can handle the gimmick units and forces, not always and never as well as the natural counter to that specialty force.

I can't comment on the economy. I haven't played except during the "trial" phase of the current cycle. I like the idea of a tight economy, but it still has to be loose enough to play. After reading the posts (and I still do) it may be that the victory conditions need to change. If we are playing "mad max" where units (especially mechs) are valuable, hard to repair and rare, then we perhaps we should allow surrenders earlier (at full payment) and auto-vic to happen easier to represent the experience of units withdrawing well before they take serious losses. (as was the situation in Btech's early days)

User avatar
Dwight Derringer
Posts: 365
Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2013 7:07 pm

Re: Current cycle feedback

Post by Dwight Derringer » Thu Jun 07, 2018 10:58 pm

I hate surrender. In my mind this campaign is kind of like playing marbles for 'keeps'. When you bring an army into a game, you're gambling those marbles against your opponent's.

The expectation of being able to bow out and keep your marbles when things start to not go your way devalues the game.

Maybe make maps a little smaller to facilitate a quicker retreat should a player want to flee.

User avatar
Nastyogre
MegamekNET Moderator
Posts: 4133
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 4:46 am

Re: Current cycle feedback

Post by Nastyogre » Fri Jun 08, 2018 2:12 am

Dwight Derringer wrote:I hate surrender. In my mind this campaign is kind of like playing marbles for 'keeps'. When you bring an army into a game, you're gambling those marbles against your opponent's.

The expectation of being able to bow out and keep your marbles when things start to not go your way devalues the game.

Maybe make maps a little smaller to facilitate a quicker retreat should a player want to flee.

I tend to like to play for keeps too. With the brutally tight campaign, doing so will make haves and have nots very quickly. If the economy mirrors the "mad max" era of Btech, it simply seems appropriate to mirror the idea that few battles were fought to the death.

User avatar
Dwight Derringer
Posts: 365
Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2013 7:07 pm

Re: Current cycle feedback

Post by Dwight Derringer » Fri Jun 08, 2018 5:53 am

Haha, I've been reading the novels a lot this past year. I've gone through about a dozen so far, and so far every battle has been to the death - they just recycle the corpses.

Illician Lancers
Posts: 146
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 10:34 pm

Re: Current cycle feedback

Post by Illician Lancers » Fri Jun 08, 2018 6:10 am

Dwight Derringer wrote:Haha, I've been reading the novels a lot this past year. I've gone through about a dozen so far, and so far every battle has been to the death - they just recycle the corpses.
You need to read the sourcebooks they retreat off planet as soon things starting to go badly. cowards :twisted: but yes a lot of commands are destroy to the last man 8)

TigerShark
Mekwars Server Operator
Posts: 704
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 8:28 am

Re: Current cycle feedback

Post by TigerShark » Fri Jun 08, 2018 6:22 am

They're that way in the (novel) fiction, but not often in canon. Very seldom will you see armies stand-and-fight until annihilation. It's usually in extreme circumstances, such as the Wars of Reaving, Operation Bulldog, or the Jade Falcon "rending" between Malvina Hazen and Jana Pryde. Even during the Jihad, the fanatical Shadow Divisions preferred the "live to fight another day" approach rather than chucking themselves at a wall of Clan firepower.

Erich
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2015 1:29 am

Re: Current cycle feedback

Post by Erich » Fri Jun 08, 2018 8:37 am

With the possibility of using RP points for repair the economy isnt hard at all anymore (compared to the testphase). Im already sitting at 2,5k c bills + a full hangar and even some rp's left with only average stats (W/L 5-5).

And yes the early surrender trend is really bad this cycle, some even calling it after the first major hit received. Im already considering not grantig it anymore.

Lumpi
MegamekNET Moderator
Posts: 355
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2016 5:24 pm

Re: Current cycle feedback

Post by Lumpi » Fri Jun 08, 2018 5:31 pm

From my experience so far this cycle is a bit tighter than before but it is not brutally tight either. I faced no real Problem to Keep my Hangar full and I tend to be very mech heavy. And I have so far a rather mediocre win loss Ratio.
Units are dirt cheap to buy and the bys are full as economy is roaring

To sum it up: it is far from being hardcore or Mad Max style
"was interessiert mich mein geschwätz von gestern!" Konrad Adenauer German Chancelor
"what do I care about my chatter from yesterday!"

Lando
Posts: 295
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 4:18 pm

Re: Current cycle feedback

Post by Lando » Fri Jun 08, 2018 6:09 pm

Lumpi wrote:From my experience so far this cycle is a bit tighter than before but it is not brutally tight either. I faced no real Problem to Keep my Hangar full and I tend to be very mech heavy. And I have so far a rather mediocre win loss Ratio.
Units are dirt cheap to buy and the bys are full as economy is roaring

To sum it up: it is far from being hardcore or Mad Max style
I agree.

obese pigeon
Posts: 852
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 10:51 am

Re: Current cycle feedback

Post by obese pigeon » Sat Jun 09, 2018 2:34 am

Lumpi wrote:From my experience so far this cycle is a bit tighter than before but it is not brutally tight either. I faced no real Problem to Keep my Hangar full and I tend to be very mech heavy. And I have so far a rather mediocre win loss Ratio.
Units are dirt cheap to buy and the bys are full as economy is roaring

To sum it up: it is far from being hardcore or Mad Max style
Agreed. After cost of repairs got toned down it is fairly easy to accumulate a lot of cbills. The only limiting factor is hanger size, which is pretty small given the limited number of bays. This makes it hard to field heavier and interesting lances. On the other hand, an open BM and the general ease of accumulating cbills makes it very easy to fill the limited bays you have with cherry-picked 'good' units.

Also, remember to use RP to repair heavily damaged mechs. Saves you a ton

obese pigeon
Posts: 852
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 10:51 am

Re: Current cycle feedback

Post by obese pigeon » Sun Jun 10, 2018 10:22 am

0 obese pigeon[M] is attempting a Patrol on Dar-es-Salaam with PNT-9R [4/5], STG-3R [4/5], Saladin Assault Hover Tank (Standard) [4/5], CN9-A [4/5]; BV: 2669. ChiricahuaDragoon is defending with ON1-K [4/5], BMB-10D [4/5]; BV: 2769

What a matchup..

After my force chased his around the map for about 9 turns with no conclusive engagement, we cancelled..

obese pigeon: hmm are you ok if we cancel the game?
ChiricahuaDragoon: i suppose so
obese pigeon: ok i gather you are just gonna keep the distance open and no decisive engagement is going to take place
ChiricahuaDragoon: better strategy than getting an ac20 to the rear
obese pigeon: indeed

One of the downsides of mismatched lances - To be fair, the map was big volcano, eminently good for running around of.

Edit: to clarify, im not griping about anyone's lance composition. I just think these kinds of mismatches can be minimized if say, the minimum number of non-infantry units in an army was set to 4 instead of 2

Spork
Mekwars Developer
Posts: 3889
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 10:23 pm

Re: Current cycle feedback

Post by Spork » Mon Jun 11, 2018 10:17 am

Lumpi wrote:From my experience so far this cycle is a bit tighter than before but it is not brutally tight either. I faced no real Problem to Keep my Hangar full and I tend to be very mech heavy. And I have so far a rather mediocre win loss Ratio.
Units are dirt cheap to buy and the bys are full as economy is roaring

To sum it up: it is far from being hardcore or Mad Max style
So, you're saying I should tighten it up a bit?
Never had much, grew up with nothing
But the music, well it was something
Been down and out, I've been on top of the world,
World that keeps on spinning on a turntable.

Karl Martell
Posts: 49
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2012 1:02 am

Re: Current cycle feedback

Post by Karl Martell » Mon Jun 11, 2018 12:49 pm

You could randomly turn a mech into a SHD-H (or a COM-2D, in case you want to punish me :D ).

I'd be interested in how many "undersized" lances there are in regular matches.

And how matches with a different number of combat units end. Does the side with more units stand a chance?

And how much INF do people use lately?

obese pigeon
Posts: 852
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 10:51 am

Re: Current cycle feedback

Post by obese pigeon » Mon Jun 11, 2018 1:10 pm

Spork wrote:
Lumpi wrote:From my experience so far this cycle is a bit tighter than before but it is not brutally tight either. I faced no real Problem to Keep my Hangar full and I tend to be very mech heavy. And I have so far a rather mediocre win loss Ratio.
Units are dirt cheap to buy and the bys are full as economy is roaring

To sum it up: it is far from being hardcore or Mad Max style
So, you're saying I should tighten it up a bit?
From what i've seen, the tightness and challenge this cycle is not from cbills, but the lack of hanger space. Players hangers lack the depth to create multiple good lances.

I have no problem donating or scrapping damaged units. Picking up good units from the BM is not an issue either. I've found no cause to use the factories or the faction bays - I'd rather pay double of the faction bays to be absolutely certain i'm getting a good unit, rather than pay half price and not be fully certain what i'm getting.

You purchased the TDR-5S for 401cbs. My first heavy mech :) Since its probably going to be the only one in my hanger, i need it to be multi-role. TDR fits the bill perfectly. The way to success this cycle as i see it is to make extensive use of the black market. Downside is if everyone realizes this, you may start seeing very similar armies with only 'good' units. The reason why 'good' units are so important this cycle is a player doesn't have the hanger depth to be able to field winning lances that contain sub-optimal units. You have really few units to begin with, what you have better be good...

For myself, I'm not suggesting any changes, just trying to give you an idea of how i approach this new environment as a player so you can see if it gels with your vision for the new environment.

Lumpi
MegamekNET Moderator
Posts: 355
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2016 5:24 pm

Re: Current cycle feedback

Post by Lumpi » Mon Jun 11, 2018 2:11 pm

If it is possible I would restrict the double use of units. Only allowed for below 1k exp Players.
Additionally my personnal opion is that a blind BM and a bit increased unit Prize from house bays would fit/or downsize the churnout of the factories(Bays are full, all of them).
"was interessiert mich mein geschwätz von gestern!" Konrad Adenauer German Chancelor
"what do I care about my chatter from yesterday!"

Tuco
MegamekNET Campaign Operator
Posts: 2813
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 10:23 pm

Re: Current cycle feedback

Post by Tuco » Tue Jun 12, 2018 1:10 pm

Bays are full because tick time is half of what it used to be and comps needed is lower while planetary production weight is more or less the same.
When the injustice is great enough, Justice will lend me the strength needed to correct it.
None may stand against it.
It will shatter every barrier, sunder any shield, tear through any enchantment and lend its servant the power to pass sentence.
Know this: there is nothing on all the Planes that can stay the hand of justice when it is brought against them.
It may unmake armies. It may sunder the thrones of gods.
Know that for ALL who betray Justice, I am their fate... and fate carries an Executioner's Axe.

Illician Lancers
Posts: 146
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 10:34 pm

Re: Current cycle feedback

Post by Illician Lancers » Tue Jun 12, 2018 2:16 pm

I played today a raid vs Obese Pigeon and both agree after the game that was an useless ops for everybody involved.

I won the game and got 2 assault vees that were strait to bays instead of my hangar, then I won 409 cbs i think it was while OP won 960 more or less and I was the attacker. He lost 2 mechs and I didn't lost any units. why to take a risk to go into an op that cost cbs to launch to lost units fighting to get if you win units into bays instead of your hangar?. To do what fishing those units from bays in case you get lucky and get a good unit. Personally and I think OP agree with me if you take the risk the units should you to the attacker hangar if he wins no to bays. That was the first and last raid I will launch as a attacker this cycle.

obese pigeon
Posts: 852
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 10:51 am

Re: Current cycle feedback

Post by obese pigeon » Tue Jun 12, 2018 2:28 pm

I think what Illician is saying is that the raid op as it stands does not seem to fit well in the current meta.

The payout is extremely low. I do understand that payout is perhaps low because the unit extracted from the factory is meant to be the payout in itself. However, the unit reward goes to the faction bays, which are already full of junk anyways, making it difficult to pull what you won from the fight.

I'm not actually suggesting the raid ops be altered, but as it stands now, there is almost no reason to play it.

Ceorl
Posts: 526
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 4:43 am

Re: Current cycle feedback

Post by Ceorl » Sat Jun 23, 2018 3:41 am

My 2 cents.

I enjoyed in prior cycles buying factory units, not house bay, because of the small chance to secure rare units (good or bad it was the rarity that was fun). I would go active to flu farm, produce components, and buy units hoping for a rare pull.

Now the build tables no longer have rares, you rarely can purchase from factories and have to rely on house bays (oh look a condor or 3 vedettes!) or the BM. Without flu, and component production being almost meaningless, I have no incentive to go active unless it looks safe to do so.

I'll always support changing things both to spice up gameplay and improve the server, but the inability to build fun lances based on random pulls, and instead only focus on spending BM money to create the best min/max doesn't excite me.
Clans? I call you by your true names: Scum of the Star League, traitors of free will come back to lord over freedom-loving people. Come ahead, you steel-eyed robots! Come ahead and taste what a million like-minded people think of you and your damn Clans.

Spork
Mekwars Developer
Posts: 3889
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 10:23 pm

Re: Current cycle feedback

Post by Spork » Sat Jun 23, 2018 4:34 pm

Tuco wrote:Bays are full because tick time is half of what it used to be and comps needed is lower while planetary production weight is more or less the same.
Planetary production is way lower than it was.

But yes, the comps are way lower, too. I am happy to slow it down.
Never had much, grew up with nothing
But the music, well it was something
Been down and out, I've been on top of the world,
World that keeps on spinning on a turntable.

Post Reply