Jump to content

Photo

Ramifications of Universal Air Dodge: Objective View

* * * * * 2 votes

  • Please log in to reply
65 replies to this topic

#1
DerMax

DerMax

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 908 posts

Hey guys,

 

Here are my thoughts on why making air dodging universal without changing how it works might be not as good an idea as some people seem to think.

 

(CQC = close quarters combat)

 

 

1. Some weapons will become obsolete

 

1.1 Hellfires

 

Dodging HFs unscathed on the ground is an advanced, hard-to-pull-off manoeuvre. This is due to their considerable splash radius and peculiar homing algorithm. Dodging HFs in the air, however, is an easy task, as you don't have to worry about the splash, and the homing is just not enough to cut it. For this reason, the time frame for dodging HFs in the air is almost double that on the ground. Thus, in my opinion, making air dodging universal will considerably weaken this weapon, to the point where people will be using it much less often.

 

1.2 EOC and EOC-P

 

Even high-tier players will find it hard to land a high percentage of their pucks on air-dodgers, let alone low- and mid-tier players. It might not be a huge problem in CQC, but in mid-range combat your pucks will likely miss half the time, or more. Making air dodging universal will make these two weapons weaker as well.

 

1.3. Heat Cannon

 

It is possible to land a decent percentage of Heat shots on air-dodgers, but that is only either with charged shots or in CQC. However, charged shots have lower dps, and CQC is not always an option (and it can be evaded by the air-dodger; more on that later). In addition, you won't be able to capitalize on the weapon's large splash radius, except when your opponent flies near a wall or some other map structure, which he can avoid doing.

 

1.4 Rev-GL

 

Landing Rev grenades on an air-dodger takes a lot of skill even in CQC, but doing so consistently outside of point-blank combat is nearly impossible. In my opinion, this weapon will suffer the most from introducing universal air dodging.

 

1.5  Redox

 

Low projectile speed + low damage = almost useless against an air-dodger. Although the tech shouldn't be an attacker in the first place, so it doesn't matter much >:)

 

1.6 Grenade Launcher

 

Because grenades have a low projectile speed, an air-dodger, given a somewhat decent ping, can dodge away unscathed from an incoming grenade, starting at a certain distance that depends on your ping and reaction time. This is a huge problem outside of CQC, because you do have enough time to dodge away most of the time. In point-blank combat it is also a problem, because GL's minimum detonation time is longer than that of the TOW, which means your opponent will have a bit more time to dodge away from your shot or otherwise evade it. Now, the same applies for ground combat, but there is one difference: it is much more difficult to utilize the grenade's bounce against a flying air-dodger, and without the bounce, the Grenade Launcher, even with its large blast radius, is strictly worse than the TOW.

 

1.7 Corsair KLA

 

The grenade mode will suffer due to more flying going on in the game. Hitting flying targets with a KLA grenade is quite a challenge. And again, it will be much more difficult to take advantage of the weapon's large splash radius.

 

1.8 Seeker

 

Conversely, the Seeker will become stronger, because its cooldown is shorter than the dodge cooldown, meaning that you'll be able to dependably hit a good percentage of your seekers. The weapon is quite strong (a quite annoying, frankly) as it is, and making it stronger will make things worse.

 

 

2. Hitscan/TOW meta

 

As you might have noticed, all of the aforementioned weapons are projectile. And all of them, save for the Seeker, will suffer from making air dodging universal. As I see it, air combat will become much more widespread (because there are so few drawbacks to going airborne; more on this later), and this will lead to players — especially low- and mid-tier ones — massively favor hitscan weapons and the fast-travelling, easy-to-use TOW. This will create an array of new balance problems.

 

Now you can say, "Okay, but you just pointed out that everything's fine in CQC for all these projectile weapons! Why not force CQC?"

 

And the answer is this:

 

1. Forcing CQC is often risky, because you have to boost towards your opponent (walking won't cut it), which makes you visible on the radar for the air-dodger's teammates. You can find yourself in a trap once you get into that CQC you strived for. In addition, forcing CQC takes precious seconds that the air-dodger spends pounding you with lead.

 

2. More often than not, the air-dodger can boost backwards mid-air to make forcing CQC more difficult. If his mech's air speed is low, he can air-dodge backwards. So at the point when you get into CQC, you already have too little armor to win the fight. Right now this is not so much a problem, because the Air Compressor occupies whopping 3 slots that you can use for something that makes you live longer, but it will become a problem should air-dodging become universal.

 

 

3. Flying meta

 

There are really few drawbacks to flying when you can air-dodge. Here are some of the advantages:

 

1. With hitscan, you get immediate advantage against enemies with projectile weapons if you can force mid-range combat (which you will be able to most of the time) for the reasons mentioned above.

 

2. A flying enemy has a better shooting angle against a ground enemy, so why be on the ground?

 

3. You don't care about splash damage of any sort.

 

4. Spamming air-dodge against low-tier to mid-tier players or players with high ping works wonders.

 

5. If you're piloting an SS or reaper, being in the air means you have a better reach to the enemy mechs, but without the drawbacks of flight if you can air-dodge. This is especially noticeable on Bunker.

 

The only drawback I can think of is that by going airborne you make yourself more vulnerable to snipers. The fuel thing is not really problematic because a) fuel converter and b) you can continue dodging even after landing with no fuel left.

 

 

4. Conclusion

 

So what will we get in the end? I think we'll get ourselves a Hawken where hitscan and the TOW heavily dominate the meta and everyone prefers going airborne.

 

 

I will welcome your counterarguments and additional points I might have missed :)


Edited by DerMax, 04 April 2015 - 10:47 AM.

  • breadeffect, Guns_N_Rozer, Niels and 13 others like this

#2
CrimsonKaim

CrimsonKaim

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1235 posts

Basically this is my opinion as well. But prepare for funny answers like "Flak requiers skill to hit flying mechs". 


- Sitting next to the sound box in Last Eco -


#3
Panzermanathod

Panzermanathod

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 711 posts

Due to poor framerate I kinda need TOW to have any real chance at an airborne enemy with anything other than a rapid fire weapon.



#4
n3onfx

n3onfx

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 511 posts

I completely agree with all the points, and I'm someone who likes the AC and wants it unchanged balance-wise (a minority on EU apparently). First step before anything else is to make it available from the start to new players, scrap any level requirement.

 

But please PLEASE don't make it universal, running AC should be a trade-off as DerMax described.


t

t

DWEH3ZP.png   CRITICAL  RqKpxHn.png    ASSIST   VDNrFxD.png

t

t


#5
shosca

shosca

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 86 posts

Objective? Really?


  • DerMax, HorseHeadProphet, Hyginos and 1 other like this

#6
Vdragon

Vdragon

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 65 posts

Well, why would AC become universal in the first place, it's stupid and go against the base design of the game.

 

 

5. If you're piloting an SS or reaper, being in the air means you have a better reach to the enemy mechs, but without the drawbacks of flight if you can air-dodge. This is especially noticeable on Bunker.

Can confirm.


0FAtmIq.png


#7
DerMax

DerMax

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 908 posts

Objective? Really?

I tried to be as objective as I could. Would you please point at the bits that were subjective?



#8
HugeGuts

HugeGuts

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 101 posts

What if some numbers were adjusted to address your concerns? In example, universally lowered air speed (now the same as a mech's walking speed,) increased fuel consumption, ground dodging requiring fuel again, and so on. What then?

 

Either way, Air Compressor needs to be a built-in function. It's so powerful, there's no reason to use most of the other mobility internals.



#9
JeffMagnum

JeffMagnum

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 781 posts

Well, why would AC become universal in the first place, it's stupid and go against the base design of the game.

 

That isn't really up for you to decide since you aren't a dev. 

 

 

I tried to be as objective as I could. Would you please point at the bits that were subjective?

 

I'm not trying to speak for him, but it's hard to interpret it as truly objective when you're saying things like "x weapon will be weaker if AC is made universal." Not that I necessarily disagree that some weapons would be made less effective, but statements on value and skill are pretty subjective by their very nature. 

 

However, charged [HEAT] shots have lower dps [than uncharged shots]

 

This is objective, unlike this:

 

It is possible to land a decent percentage of Heat shots on air-dodgers, but that is only either with charged shots or in CQC.

 

There's nothing wrong with a subjective statement on it at all though. An objective one is honestly boring and pointless to make, since anyone would come to the same conclusion if they interpreted everything correctly.

 

 

I'll actually address the main post in a bit, because I think there are a lot of decent points that deserve a pretty comprehensive response.  


Edited by JeffMagnum, 04 April 2015 - 11:21 AM.

  • IareDave, DerMax, shosca and 1 other like this

d1eZeG3.png


#10
Siamenis

Siamenis

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 93 posts

I agree with the OP. Using AC should have a considerably larger drawback than it currently has. For instance, the cool-down between dodges could be increased as well as the fuel consumption required for it.


  • CrimsonKaim likes this

#11
DerMax

DerMax

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 908 posts

What if some numbers were adjusted to address your concerns? In example, universally lowered air speed (now the same as a mech's walking speed,) increased fuel consumption, ground dodging requiring fuel again, and so on. What then?

Yes, as I have written in the original post, these are ramifications for non-modified air-dodging made universal. With modifications it might be a different story.

 

 It's so powerful, there's no reason to use most of the other mobility internals.

And this is why I dislike this internal.


Edited by DerMax, 04 April 2015 - 11:29 AM.


#12
Merl61

Merl61

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 930 posts

Get good. That is all. 


  • IareDave, shosca and OdinTheWise like this

jWZL3Hm.jpg

Thanks to Badtings for this awesome banner!


#13
Epsilon_Knight

Epsilon_Knight

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 98 posts

Most mechs have absolutely horrible air speed.  Many of these mechs rely on speed and burst.  If someone is airborne vs a predator, the predator is playing their cards wrong.  Fuel is also a limited resource, being airborne and air dodging depletes it rapidly.

 

I think for the most part this post is overblown and ignoring how bad most mechs are in the air.  People staying on the ground to avoid being slaughtered are subject to the same gameplay as now.

 

I think gameplay would change mildly if the AC was universal and I think the experience would overall be improved.  For reference though, I play Berserker, Infiltrator, Raider primarily and those are some of the least affected mechs that would benefit most greatly from built-in AC.


Edited by Epsilon_Knight, 04 April 2015 - 11:59 AM.


#14
DerMax

DerMax

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 908 posts

Get good. That is all. 

Says Merl who happens to main the Assault. (Liked by Dave who happens to main the Assault.)


Edited by DerMax, 04 April 2015 - 12:05 PM.

  • Ker4u and Kopra like this

#15
DerMax

DerMax

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 908 posts

Most mechs have absolutely horrible air speed.  Getting airborne and being able to dodge periodically is not going to save anyone from even moderately fast projectiles.  You're not going to dodge both a slow heat cannon AND a grenade unless the infiltrator is incredibly inept.

 

I think for the most part this post is overblown and ignoring how bad most mechs are in the air.

You don't need to dodge both. Just dodge the nade — that's enough to beat the enemy with hitscan/TOW. And you seem to not understand how important the bounce for the GL is.


  • n3onfx likes this

#16
IareDave

IareDave

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 359 posts

The fuel thing is not really problematic because a) fuel converter and b) you can continue dodging even after landing with no fuel left.

 


 

The fuel consumption is huge. You can be a zerker space bar warrior all you want but that wasted fuel gives you no chance to effectively maneuver yourself once the fuel is gone or you land. A majority of your post is pinpointing all of the projectile based weapons and saying why they are ineffective against mechs in the air. I encourage you to test that theory against hestoned on the gren, or jeffmagnum using the heat cannon just to name a few, and we'll see if you can come to that same conclusion. 



#17
Epsilon_Knight

Epsilon_Knight

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 98 posts

You don't need to dodge both. Just dodge the nade — that's enough to beat the enemy with hitscan/TOW. And you seem to not understand how important the bounce for the GL is.

Edited my post upon consideration.  You responded really quickly.  I use an infiltrator fairly often, though I'm not great at it.  Please see the updated post.  This isn't something enemy mechs can do for very long, being airborne makes them a significantly easier target for most weapons, being airborne and air dodging will wipe out a fuel supply in short order, and once the short advantage period is gone, they can be made short work of.  

 

Also the infiltrator should be flanking/surprising, in my experience, not picking frontal one v ones against enemies with full fuel tanks and no cover.  It would be a mistake to work out mech balance that way.


Edited by Epsilon_Knight, 04 April 2015 - 12:11 PM.

  • DerMax likes this

#18
Fantus_Longhorn

Fantus_Longhorn

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 64 posts

A majority of your post is pinpointing all of the projectile based weapons and saying why they are ineffective against mechs in the air. I encourage you to test that theory against hestoned on the gren, or jeffmagnum using the heat cannon just to name a few, and we'll see if you can come to that same conclusion. 

 Is the amount of skill require to hold spacebar and dodge in the air equal to the amount of skill required to hit someone in the air with a projectile (non hit-scan) weapon? Is the advantage gained by being in the air balanced against the skill requirement to hit someone in the air? Is being in the air, and suffering none of the penalties to the effectiveness of your weapons, balanced against fighting someone who is on the ground and has the effectiveness of any ground cover (a map issue) and projectile weapons reduced?



#19
DerMax

DerMax

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 908 posts

The fuel consumption is huge. You can be a zerker space bar warrior all you want but that wasted fuel gives you no chance to effectively maneuver yourself once the fuel is gone or you land. A majority of your post is pinpointing all of the projectile based weapons and saying why they are ineffective against mechs in the air. I encourage you to test that theory against hestoned on the gren, or jeffmagnum using the heat cannon just to name a few, and we'll see if you can come to that same conclusion. 

Please ask Hest how his Gren vs Gren duels with me went when we battled it out. You can also talk with Jeff about his duels with me xD

 

P.S. I don't care about what some of the game's best players are capable of. This game is not made only for pros.


Edited by DerMax, 04 April 2015 - 12:22 PM.

  • 1uster likes this

#20
IareDave

IareDave

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 359 posts

 Is the amount of skill require to hold spacebar and dodge in the air equal to the amount of skill required to hit someone in the air with a projectile (non hit-scan) weapon? Is the advantage gained by being in the air balanced against the skill requirement to hit someone in the air? Is being in the air, and suffering none of the penalties to the effectiveness of your weapons, balanced against fighting someone who is on the ground and has the effectiveness of any ground cover (a map issue) and projectile weapons reduced?

If you are going to have a discussion with me wouldn't it be more effective if you actually stated your opinions on the matter instead of asking me a multitude of questions? There are obvious tradeoffs to the air compressor that I need not go into detail. 

Please ask Hest how his Gren vs Gren duels with me went when we battled it out. You can also talk with Jeff about his duels with me xD

 

P.S. I don't care about what some of the game's best players are capable of. This game is not made only for pros.

I don't care about your performance in those duels I'm merely saying that there are players in this game, myself included, who have no problem hitting targets in the air. You don't have to be a pro to practice hitting targets in the air, you don't need to play this game for hours everyday to hit targets in the air - if you want to get better at hitting targets in the air, then you practice hitting targets in the air. 


Edited by IareDave, 04 April 2015 - 12:45 PM.


#21
DerMax

DerMax

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 908 posts

I don't care about your performance in those duels I'm merely saying that there are players in this game, myself included, who have no problem hitting targets in the air. You don't have to be a pro to practice hitting targets in the air, you don't need to play this game for hours everyday to hit targets in the air - if you want to get better at hitting targets in the air, then you practice hitting targets in the air. 

Good point, but I think many people will still go with a safer option of using hitscan/TOW, even if they can perform well with projectile weapons.


Edited by DerMax, 04 April 2015 - 12:47 PM.


#22
Amidatelion

Amidatelion

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2474 posts

No. Nope. Nevermind. Why the fuzzing hell did I even think replying was a good idea. 


Edited by Amidatelion, 04 April 2015 - 12:53 PM.

  • Crminimal, 1uster and ticklemyiguana like this

#23
hestoned

hestoned

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 252 posts

NONONONONONONONO DONT WANT TO BE APART OF THIS


  • DerMax, RedVan, comic_sans and 2 others like this

#24
JeffMagnum

JeffMagnum

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 781 posts

Hey guys,

 

Here are my thoughts on why making air dodging universal without changing how it works might be not as good an idea as some people seem to think.

 

(CQC = close quarters combat)

 

 

1. Some weapons will become obsolete

 

1.1 Hellfires

 

Dodging HFs unscathed on the ground is an advanced, hard-to-pull-off manoeuvre. This is due to their considerable splash radius and peculiar homing algorithm. Dodging HFs in the air, however, is an easy task, as you don't have to worry about the splash, and the homing is just not enough to cut it. For this reason, the time frame for dodging HFs in the air is almost double that on the ground. Thus, in my opinion, making air dodging universal will considerably weaken this weapon, to the point where people will be using it much less often.

 

HFs are overdue for a rework anyway, and universal AC could be accommodated for in one. With their current mechanics, they're always going to be imbalanced in different ways at opposite ends of the skill spectrum regardless of what's done with them. 

 

1.2 EOC and EOC-P

 

Even high-tier players will find it hard to land a high percentage of their pucks on air-dodgers, let alone low- and mid-tier players. It might not be a huge problem in CQC, but in mid-range combat your pucks will likely miss half the time, or more. Making air dodging universal will make these two weapons weaker as well.

 

I agree that this could be a problem with EOC, but that's mostly due to EOC being a lackluster primary choice compared to the other options on all the mechs that have it. I'm not sure about how well EOC-P would fare, but that's mainly because I'm not a good enough Pred player to comfortably say from firsthand experience. 

 

1.3. Heat Cannon

 

It is possible to land a decent percentage of Heat shots on air-dodgers, but that is only either with charged shots or in CQC. However, charged shots have lower dps, and CQC is not always an option (and it can be evaded by the air-dodger; more on that later). In addition, you won't be able to capitalize on the weapon's large splash radius, except when your opponent flies near a wall or some other map structure, which he can avoid doing.

 

Its charged shot's splash tends to work just fine on account of it having a radius of over 17 m, and aside from against good A-Classes, consistently hitting flying enemies outside of CQC ranges with uncharged shots is easily doable. It's still possible against better players, but it requires a lot of prediction and some luck. 

 

1.4 Rev-GL

 

Landing Rev grenades on an air-dodger takes a lot of skill even in CQC, but doing so consistently outside of point-blank combat is nearly impossible. In my opinion, this weapon will suffer the most from introducing universal air dodging.

 

Rev already suffers from this weakness on the ground or in the air, and I think that's a good thing. It has six less DPS and a time-to-overheat that's only two seconds faster than AR despite being an AOE spam weapon with no falloff, so being weak against targets at a distance or rapidly-moving aerial ones seems like a fair tradeoff. I'm not convinced it would be hit as hard as you think it would be for the vast majority of players, since aside from the top Grens, most people have trouble using it for anything except suppression. 

 

1.5  Redox

 

Low projectile speed + low damage = almost useless against an air-dodger. Although the tech shouldn't be an attacker in the first place, so it doesn't matter much >:)

 

Its projectile speed and firing rate are fast enough to hit most aerial targets without too much of an issue. There might be more problems with Berserkers and possibly other A-Classes, but the impact overall would be minor, especially considering what its role is anyway.

 

1.6 Grenade Launcher

 

Because grenades have a low projectile speed, an air-dodger, given a somewhat decent ping, can dodge away unscathed from an incoming grenade, starting at a certain distance that depends on your ping and reaction time. This is a huge problem outside of CQC, because you do have enough time to dodge away most of the time. In point-blank combat it is also a problem, because GL's minimum detonation time is longer than that of the TOW, which means your opponent will have a bit more time to dodge away from your shot or otherwise evade it. Now, the same applies for ground combat, but there is one difference: it is much more difficult to utilize the grenade's bounce against a flying air-dodger, and without the bounce, the Grenade Launcher, even with its large blast radius, is strictly worse than the TOW.

 

A lot of the things you're describing here are due to GL basically just being a less useful TOW, and I think if it was brought up to par in the current meta, it'd likely be fine with universal AC too. Like you said, most of this happens on the ground as well. Its bounce and splash radius that's 2 m larger are hardly ever good enough reasons to pick it over TOW.

 

1.7 Corsair KLA

 

The grenade mode will suffer due to more flying going on in the game. Hitting flying targets with a KLA grenade is quite a challenge. And again, it will be much more difficult to take advantage of the weapon's large splash radius.

 

What about with MIRV? Raider is primarily meant to be a close-range mech anyway, so it not being able to hit quick flying mechs with one mode of its secondary doesn't seem like an issue. Additionally, I'd argue that this hardly applies to fighting anything outside of A-Classes.

 

1.8 Seeker

 

Conversely, the Seeker will become stronger, because its cooldown is shorter than the dodge cooldown, meaning that you'll be able to dependably hit a good percentage of your seekers. The weapon is quite strong (a quite annoying, frankly) as it is, and making it stronger will make things worse.

 

But would it really be made a better weapon by giving everyone AC, or would it just be impacted less than the ones above? Taking to the air without it makes you a much easier target, and the people who have the most issues with Seeker tend to hover either way. 

 

2. Hitscan/TOW meta

 

As you might have noticed, all of the aforementioned weapons are projectile. And all of them, save for the Seeker, will suffer from making air dodging universal. As I see it, air combat will become much more widespread (because there are so few drawbacks to going airborne; more on this later), and this will lead to players — especially low- and mid-tier ones — massively favor hitscan weapons and the fast-travelling, easy-to-use TOW. This will create an array of new balance problems.

 

This is already the meta at almost every level of play right now. There hardly are any reasons to pick something other than TOW due to it being so good at everything, and sustained weapons have been widely used ever since their buff. 

 

Now you can say, "Okay, but you just pointed out that everything's fine in CQC for all these projectile weapons! Why not force CQC?"

 

And the answer is this:

 

1. Forcing CQC is often risky, because you have to boost towards your opponent (walking won't cut it), which makes you visible on the radar for the air-dodger's teammates. You can find yourself in a trap once you get into that CQC you strived for. In addition, forcing CQC takes precious seconds that the air-dodger spends pounding you with lead.

 

A lot of this is indicative of how hard it is to play offensively in general. As it is, the defending mech is almost always better off due to radar, corner play, and the delay after boosting. 

 

2. More often than not, the air-dodger can boost backwards mid-air to make forcing CQC more difficult.

 

Zerker is really the only mech with this issue, as the rest move slowly enough to make closing gaps only marginally more difficult. Even on Zerker, the fuel drain is large enough to keep it from doing this for very long. The predictable linear movement also makes mechs flying backwards pretty easy targets for most weapons, which can offset the increased time it takes to get to them.

 

If his mech's air speed is low, he can air-dodge backwards.

 

This is one of the most common ways to create distance on the ground too, except that it doesn't use fuel there.

 

So at the point when you get into CQC, you already have too little armor to win the fight. Right now this is not so much a problem, because the Air Compressor occupies whopping 3 slots that you can use for something that makes you live longer, but it will become a problem should air-dodging become universal.

 

 

3. Flying meta

 

There are really few drawbacks to flying when you can air-dodge. Here are some of the advantages:

 

1. With hitscan, you get immediate advantage against enemies with projectile weapons if you can force mid-range combat (which you will be able to most of the time) for the reasons mentioned above.

 

With some hitscan, but those weapons already have the advantage against projectiles at medium range on the ground. This doesn't apply for Vulcan, Flak, PPA, BBY, Miniflak, T-32, Reflak, Breacher, and SMC to a lesser extent. 

 

2. A flying enemy has a better shooting angle against a ground enemy, so why be on the ground?

 

Using a ton of fuel, vulnerability to multiple enemies that wouldn't normally have LOS, and being unable to effectively heal are some huge reasons why flying isn't always the best choice. 

 

3. You don't care about splash damage of any sort.

 

Maybe with some A-Classes, but I think even they're still possible to hit with charged HEAT's splash and maybe the larger SAARE's if it's aimed properly. TOW and GL have hardly any more issues than they usually do due to their remote detonation. 

 

4. Spamming air-dodge against low-tier to mid-tier players or players with high ping works wonders.

 

Yeah, but that's not much different than it is now. AC is definitely the best internal if you're going against players who can't aim for whatever reason, and the three-slot loss is hardly significant due to the amount of damage you can avoid. It'd just let everyone be on the same playing field instead of giving that power to people who are a high enough level to buy it and can afford it. 

 

5. If you're piloting an SS or reaper, being in the air means you have a better reach to the enemy mechs, but without the drawbacks of flight if you can air-dodge. This is especially noticeable on Bunker.

 

This is mostly due to issues with Bunker and Bazaar rather than SS and Reaper. If there was more cover on those maps, I don't think this would be as relevant of a criticism. 

 

The only drawback I can think of is that by going airborne you make yourself more vulnerable to snipers. The fuel thing is not really problematic because a) fuel converter and b) you can continue dodging even after landing with no fuel left.

 

Fuel Converter still requires you to take damage, and it's not terribly useful on A-Classes, which are the mechs that would arguably benefit most from universal AC. 

 

4. Conclusion

 

So what will we get in the end? I think we'll get ourselves a Hawken where hitscan and the TOW heavily dominate the meta and everyone prefers going airborne.

 

This is the Hawken we already have. There's hardly any reason to run something besides SMC/AR Assault, Flak Brawler, or Berserker in almost every circumstance. Incin is a notable exception, but it's still outclassed by the above mechs in a lot of situations without an organized team. At higher levels, players would likely still tend to stay on the ground due to reliance on orbs. 

 

I will welcome your counterarguments and additional points I might have missed :)


  • DerMax, _incitatus, comic_sans and 1 other like this

d1eZeG3.png


#25
Fantus_Longhorn

Fantus_Longhorn

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 64 posts

If you are going to have a discussion with me wouldn't it be more effective if you actually stated your opinions on the matter instead of asking me a multitude of questions?

It's not a prerequisite to a discussion that a question be raised and answered immediately by the person asking it; you can ask something and wait for an answer. Answering questions is part of a discussion.

 

Personally, I don't believe what is gained by being in the air is equal to the requirement of ability to hit someone in the air. A player in the air has more effective options of mobility, weapon usage and view of their surroundings (they can see all targets in the ground and in the air within their FoV). A group of weapons is less effective at hitting airborne targets for the ground player but there is no 'penalty' in the other direction.

The player having to look up is having to sacrifice the view of their surroundings and focus on a target whilst losing site of other potential targets. Combat moves from being on one plane to being on multiple and having to choose whether to stay focused on the ground plane or look up (they lose site of ground players in the FoV). This is before you take into account that there is a limit on how high you can look up, you can look down to a much greater angle. There is no penalty to high far right/left you can look (though there is to fast you can look, obviously).

 

The basic limitations of 'looking' point to elements of the movement mechanics which haven't kept pace with other, newer iterations of movement and the ability to see what's going on where, in a literal sense. Higher air mobility has crept in along with the ability to effectively fight in the air but the ability to look up has not evolved along with it. Focus has, as was usual with ADH, been on the the item/weapon/internal itself and using it, not on playing against it. Orb Lord is one example, great to play as you can heal forever, crap to play against because they just won't die!

Weapons on mechs have not been adjusted to be consistently as effective against air targets as ground targets, rendering some mechs less effective in these situations. The Grenadier is not as effective against air targets as ground targets due to the weapons it has in an equal skill situation. From the Air, the Rev-GL can ricochet of the ground or other map elements negating any potential cover, the same cannot be said for bouncing grenades off air from cover.


  • DerMax, DieselCat and deidarall like this

#26
RedVan

RedVan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 137 posts

Hey guys,

 

Here are my thoughts on why making air dodging universal without changing how it works might be not as good an idea as some people seem to think.

 

(CQC = close quarters combat)

 

 

1. Some weapons will become obsolete

 

1.1 Hellfires

 

Dodging HFs unscathed on the ground is an advanced, hard-to-pull-off manoeuvre. This is due to their considerable splash radius and peculiar homing algorithm. Dodging HFs in the air, however, is an easy task, as you don't have to worry about the splash, and the homing is just not enough to cut it. For this reason, the time frame for dodging HFs in the air is almost double that on the ground. Thus, in my opinion, making air dodging universal will considerably weaken this weapon, to the point where people will be using it much less often.

 

1st:  Not hard to pull off dodging HF's on the ground.  Being in the air makes you the #1 target for HF missiles however...  So any time people are in the air, they're an easier target for HF overall.  Keep in mind, nobody can spam dodge.  In a 1v1 situation, yes, you can easily dodge HF (but that's true in any situation).  In the heat of battle where you have to focus on not getting hit by multiple enemies, you may or may not have a dodge at the ready.  And even if you do, good chance you'll just wind up in LOS with another enemy.

 

 

1.2 EOC and EOC-P

 

Even high-tier players will find it hard to land a high percentage of their pucks on air-dodgers, let alone low- and mid-tier players. It might not be a huge problem in CQC, but in mid-range combat your pucks will likely miss half the time, or more. Making air dodging universal will make these two weapons weaker as well.

 

Nobody really emphasizes using this weapon vs air dodgers.  While possible, it's certainly not optimal.  Considering universal air dodge would not inherently increase the amount of time players spend in the air, the ez mode lay mine method will still be just as useful.  Also, one can say everything you just said while vs a mech on the ground dodging...  Most people don't utilize it as a direct fire weapon.  So it's really a moot point in saying people will have a hard time hitting someone with it while they air dodge...

 

1.3. Heat Cannon

 

It is possible to land a decent percentage of Heat shots on air-dodgers, but that is only either with charged shots or in CQC. However, charged shots have lower dps, and CQC is not always an option (and it can be evaded by the air-dodger; more on that later). In addition, you won't be able to capitalize on the weapon's large splash radius, except when your opponent flies near a wall or some other map structure, which he can avoid doing.

 

"It is possible to land a decent percentage of Heat shots on ground-dodgers, but that is only either with charged shots or in CQC".  Again, it's the same if the mech is on the ground.  If one is aiming for direct hits, whether the target is in the air or on the ground doesn't matter.  And again, air dodge wouldn't make the game revolve around aerial combat, so worrying about taking advantage of the weapon splash (which is stupidly high anyway) is moot as well.  You'll still have most of the game to be a splash monkey :)

 

1.4 Rev-GL

 

Landing Rev grenades on an air-dodger takes a lot of skill even in CQC, but doing so consistently outside of point-blank combat is nearly impossible. In my opinion, this weapon will suffer the most from introducing universal air dodging.

 

Rev-GL isn't designed to counter this, so naturally it's not going to be optimal.  Every game has weapons that aren't optimal for every situation.  Rev-GL is amazing at being a splash monkey weapon in hallways and around corners.  Not every weapon needs to be optimal in every situation.  Also, if you are aiming at someone in the air, and they dodge, you have a fairly high ROF to trace your shots back on to target very quickly.

 

1.5  Redox

 

Low projectile speed + low damage = almost useless against an air-dodger. Although the tech shouldn't be an attacker in the first place, so it doesn't matter much >:)

 

Guess I don't need to counter this as you already did ;)

 

1.6 Grenade Launcher

 

Because grenades have a low projectile speed, an air-dodger, given a somewhat decent ping, can dodge away unscathed from an incoming grenade, starting at a certain distance that depends on your ping and reaction time. This is a huge problem outside of CQC, because you do have enough time to dodge away most of the time. In point-blank combat it is also a problem, because GL's minimum detonation time is longer than that of the TOW, which means your opponent will have a bit more time to dodge away from your shot or otherwise evade it. Now, the same applies for ground combat, but there is one difference: it is much more difficult to utilize the grenade's bounce against a flying air-dodger, and without the bounce, the Grenade Launcher, even with its large blast radius, is strictly worse than the TOW.

 

GL splash is so ridiculously huge, you should never have a shot in any situation that doesn't do at least some damage.  I mean sure, if they're across the map, don't expect it to hit them, but in any close or mid range situation, you should be doing at least a little dmg.  At close range, it's just as easy to use as TOW (but you get the added benefit of a stupidly large splash radius!)

 

As for bounce... that's just another added benefit for when you want to hit someone around a corner.  Why would you even care about bounce if your target is in the air?

 

1.7 Corsair KLA

 

The grenade mode will suffer due to more flying going on in the game. Hitting flying targets with a KLA grenade is quite a challenge. And again, it will be much more difficult to take advantage of the weapon's large splash radius.

 

Yes it is a challenge!  Finally, something that requires skill!  No remote det!  CQC:  Probably shouldn't be in grenade mode.  Mid range: if they in the air, don't use nade mode, or do and just wait until after they've dodged (just as you would were they on the ground).  Long range:  It's just another cover fire weapon anyway...

 

1.8 Seeker

 

Conversely, the Seeker will become stronger, because its cooldown is shorter than the dodge cooldown, meaning that you'll be able to dependably hit a good percentage of your seekers. The weapon is quite strong (a quite annoying, frankly) as it is, and making it stronger will make things worse.

 

Seeker is tard.  But then, any weapon that guides is tard.  What's the fun of having the game aim for you?  Anyway, the disadvantages of seeker will still far outweigh the small increase in usefulness it would receieve based on your perception.

 

 

2. Hitscan/TOW meta

 

As you might have noticed, all of the aforementioned weapons are projectile. And all of them, save for the Seeker, will suffer from making air dodging universal. As I see it, air combat will become much more widespread (because there are so few drawbacks to going airborne; more on this later), and this will lead to players — especially low- and mid-tier ones — massively favor hitscan weapons and the fast-travelling, easy-to-use TOW. This will create an array of new balance problems.

 

Currently, A class is the biggest "problem" with aerial combat.  Already people use all weapons in the game quite well against them.  Allowing B and C class mechs to air dodge, isn't going to increase the difficulty, as they will never be harder to hit than what we've already experienced.  So the balance is there already.  Also keep in mind low and mid tier players are going to be bad regardless of any changes, and balance should not be based on their low skill play.  When you balance a game around low skill, it leaves nothing to achieve, thus everyone just plateaus at a lower skill level.  That makes for a boring game that doesn't keep players around long term.

 

Now you can say, "Okay, but you just pointed out that everything's fine in CQC for all these projectile weapons! Why not force CQC?"

 

And the answer is this:

 

1. Forcing CQC is often risky, because you have to boost towards your opponent (walking won't cut it), which makes you visible on the radar for the air-dodger's teammates. You can find yourself in a trap once you get into that CQC you strived for. In addition, forcing CQC takes precious seconds that the air-dodger spends pounding you with lead.

 

2. More often than not, the air-dodger can boost backwards mid-air to make forcing CQC more difficult. If his mech's air speed is low, he can air-dodge backwards. So at the point when you get into CQC, you already have too little armor to win the fight. Right now this is not so much a problem, because the Air Compressor occupies whopping 3 slots that you can use for something that makes you live longer, but it will become a problem should air-dodging become universal.

 

If everyone has air dodge, then everyone can use those 3 slots on something to help them live longer...  Everything you just described can be dealt with in tactics...  If the enemy can boost backwards mid air while firing at you, what is preventing your team from boosting forward mid air while firing at them?  I can understand how one may consider this a "problem" if it weren't universal, but if it is universal, just counter it with the same tactic lol.  And even now with it not universal, people really don't have problems hitting targets in the air...

 

 

3. Flying meta

 

There are really few drawbacks to flying when you can air-dodge. Here are some of the advantages:

 

1. With hitscan, you get immediate advantage against enemies with projectile weapons if you can force mid-range combat (which you will be able to most of the time) for the reasons mentioned above.

 

For my reason mentioned above, forcing mid range combat will still not be as easy as you seem to think.

 

2. A flying enemy has a better shooting angle against a ground enemy, so why be on the ground?

 

If they can do it, so you can!  Ahhh, the benefits of universiality!  Why be on the ground?  Because adding a universal air dodge isn't going to make all mechs suddenly be able to fly around whimsically.  Ground combat will still very much be the primary form of combat.

 

3. You don't care about splash damage of any sort.

 

This game has remote det!  What of all those quake, UT, tribes players that DIDN'T have remote det, and STILL got direct hits with projectile splash weapons?  You seem to think it impossible.  Remote det makes this game incredibly forgiving.  Laughable almost.

 

4. Spamming air-dodge against low-tier to mid-tier players or players with high ping works wonders.

 

Ping is not a factor.  If someone has high ping, the solution is for more server regions, not balancing the game mechanics around it.  Also, spamming anything against low and mid tier players works wonders lol.  That's why they're low and mid tier players.

 

5. If you're piloting an SS or reaper, being in the air means you have a better reach to the enemy mechs, but without the drawbacks of flight if you can air-dodge. This is especially noticeable on Bunker.

 

At the ranges they'd generally be pop-tarting from, even w/o air dodge most people aren't going to hit them (unless they're really really bad and don't know how to press a strafe key).  If they're closer range where people would generally hit them, just wait for them to dodge (kinda like that thing you do on the ground before you fire a projectile, wait to see where they're going...).  Nobody is going to be able to spam dodge.  It's still on a CD....

 

The only drawback I can think of is that by going airborne you make yourself more vulnerable to snipers. The fuel thing is not really problematic because a) fuel converter and b) you can continue dodging even after landing with no fuel left.

 

The majority of the game is close to mid range, ranges where most average players have little to no problem hitting players in the air.  Currently, if you do not have AC, you're just stupid if you get airborne.  If air dodge is universal, at least you have a little chance of avoiding ONE SHOT (only to get hit by a million more as you're still in the air, and your dodge is on CD).  Being in the air would still be an incredible disadvantage.  Making it universal would only serve to make it a little more useful.

 

 

4. Conclusion

 

So what will we get in the end? I think we'll get ourselves a Hawken where hitscan and the TOW heavily dominate the meta and everyone prefers going airborne.

 

I've seen more hitscan weaponry since starting playing again than I remember in the past, and I'm pretty sure that's due to a damage buff as opposed to the addition of AC.  Even so, I still see all the other weapons used very frequently and to good effect, even when vs teams full of A class AC mechs.  I highly doubt making air dodge universal would change that.

 

Keep in mind, high ROF hitscan weapons are often the go to weapons for low skill players as they are generally always the easiest to pick up on and use.  That doesn't really have anything to do with whether a game has air dodge or not.

 

 

I will welcome your counterarguments and additional points I might have missed :)

 

 

 

 

 Is the amount of skill require to hold spacebar and dodge in the air equal to the amount of skill required to hit someone in the air with a projectile (non hit-scan) weapon? Is the advantage gained by being in the air balanced against the skill requirement to hit someone in the air? Is being in the air, and suffering none of the penalties to the effectiveness of your weapons, balanced against fighting someone who is on the ground and has the effectiveness of any ground cover (a map issue) and projectile weapons reduced?

 

That's an over simplification.  Look at games like UT, can one say "oh, it has a dodge and it's far easier to simply dodge to avoid getting hit than it is to actually hit someone dodging!"  No.  Mechanically, yes, it's easier to dodge, but there's more to it than just the mechanical action of pressing keys.  If you want to dumb it down to that, I can say that moving a mouse on a pad and pressing the LMB is just as easy.

 

Let me finish by saying this:  I see a lot of people giving examples of "oh my, this won't work and that won't work and this'll be worse and that'll be worse...".  Keep in mind, a universal air dodge is not going to make the game magically be fought in the air, negating everything on the ground forever.  This isn't all or nothing.


Edited by RedVan, 04 April 2015 - 01:25 PM.


#27
DerMax

DerMax

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 908 posts

@Jeff Very well said. I will think on your points tomorrow.

 

 

 

This is the Hawken we already have. There's hardly any reason to run something besides SMC/AR Assault, Flak Brawler, or Berserker in almost every circumstance. Incin is a notable exception, but it's still outclassed by the above mechs in a lot of situations without an organized team. At higher levels, players would likely still tend to stay on the ground due to reliance on orbs. 

 

This is true, but making air-dodging universal would tilt the meta to this side even further. And please keep in mind that the orblording will be fixed sooner or later.

 

@RedVan Some good points there. I guess the original post was written from a perspective of a non-ACer (me), so I missed some points. I disagree with the last sentence of your conclusion, though :P

 

I highly doubt making air dodge universal would change that.


Edited by DerMax, 04 April 2015 - 01:37 PM.

  • JeffMagnum and hoghead like this

#28
AsianJoyKiller

AsianJoyKiller

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 343 posts

This is almost entirely subjective...


  • IareDave and DerMax like this

#29
DerMax

DerMax

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 908 posts

This is almost entirely subjective...

Yep. My bad xD

 

Though, I hope that with all the feedback this thread will become home for a more objective view, which is something I was aiming for from the beginning.


Edited by DerMax, 04 April 2015 - 01:34 PM.

  • ticklemyiguana likes this

#30
AsianJoyKiller

AsianJoyKiller

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 343 posts

Yep. My bad xD

 

Though, I hope that with all the feedback this thread will become more objective, which is something I was aiming for from the beginning.

Okay. I'm glad your realize this. It's just that hitting air targets with projectiles is nothing more than a not particularly hard to aquire skill.


  • Nept and RedVan like this

#31
shosca

shosca

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 86 posts

@Jeff Very well said. I will think on your points tomorrow.

 

...SMC/AR Assault, Flak Brawler, or Berserker in almost every circumstance...

 

This is true, but making air-dodging universal would tilt the meta to this side even further. And please keep in mind that the orblording will be fixed sooner or later.

 

Is the reason for people playing mostly sustain assault or zerker or etc.. to counter the air compressor or is it that these combos are way more versatile than all other combos, perhaps even too versatile? Unfortunately we don't have analytics and numbers to measure how well weapons/mechs are doing against each other, but my gut feeling says that the combo is too versatile.

 

Also sorry about the objective/subjective thing, your text mostly contained your opinions about negative aspects of global ac and missed the positive aspects completely.


Edited by shosca, 04 April 2015 - 02:03 PM.

  • DerMax and LoC_TR like this

#32
IareDave

IareDave

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 359 posts

It's not a prerequisite to a discussion that a question be raised and answered immediately by the person asking it; you can ask something and wait for an answer. Answering questions is part of a discussion.

 

 

Understandable. However, I find it easier to respond to people through text when they layer out their opinions on the matter directly instead of putting forth their ideas into questions that are completely detached from the experience of others. For example: 

 

1.  Is the advantage gained by being in the air balanced against the skill requirement to hit someone in the air?     I don't find being in the air particularly advantageous when compared to other popular builds (ie. orblord). I also don't find it hard to hit tagets in the air. 

 

2.  Is the amount of skill require to hold spacebar and dodge in the air equal to the amount of skill required to hit someone in the air with a projectile (non hit-scan) weapon:    Once again, you layer out your questions as if these are universally agreed statements when in fact, it is only your perspective. You are comparing the skill level needed by both players, one in the air,and one on the ground, and completely ignoring very key facts. Air dodge consumes fuel, air dodge prevents you from using orbs, and currently, air dodge requires 3 internal slots that could be used for something else. Air dodge also limits your forward and backward movement. What does that mean? You can't chase, and you can't flee - two things in particular that help differentiate scoring the top in a DM and settling for something lesser. More so, air speed is signifcantly slower than boost speed, and you are more visible to the enemy players than you would be had to stayed on the ground. 


Edited by IareDave, 04 April 2015 - 02:04 PM.

  • Crminimal and comic_sans like this

#33
AsianJoyKiller

AsianJoyKiller

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 343 posts

Is the reason for people playing mostly sustain assault or zerker or etc.. to counter the air compressor or is it that these combos are way more versatile than all other combos, perhaps even too versatile? Unfortunately we don't have analytics and numbers to measure how well weapons/mechs are doing against each other, but my gut feeling says that the combo is too versatile.

With the exception of the Flak Brawler, those combos have always been very versatile. The harass of A and B classes with mid-ranged sustain weapons has always been a very useful thing to have, especially on an organized team. In the past, they've just been overshadowed because of the relative power of burst weapons.



#34
IareDave

IareDave

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 359 posts

Says Merl who happens to main the Assault. (Liked by Dave who happens to main the Assault.)

I have 10k kills on zerker, scout, and infil respectively while only 4k on my assault.

 

I think you and I have veeery different meanings on 'maining'. 


Edited by IareDave, 04 April 2015 - 02:09 PM.

  • DerMax likes this

#35
Sylhiri

Sylhiri

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 403 posts

I have 10k kills on zerker, scout, and infil respectively while only 4k on my assault.

 

That better be Heat or EOC infil or... *shakes fist*


  • EM1O likes this

#36
EM1O

EM1O

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 764 posts

add univ AC. then, to make it really interesting, universal TK. yes, you shoot your teammate, he loses HP.

before popping the lid on a barrel of snakes, i imagine cap'njosh has more important existing/inplace tidbits to tidy up in this game.

and AR on Infil is an Easy Out, but not as fun as EOC. 'course, bad as i am, fun does not necessarily equal scoring. and as much BOOMfun HEAT is, i am just atrocious with it. so.........

SMC Vanguard. all the fun of AR Infil with none of the guilt  :)


#:  chown -R us ./base

nRJ1C9n.png

"...oh great Itzamna, you shall know Us by the trail of Dead."


#37
Merl61

Merl61

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 930 posts

Says Merl who happens to main the Assault. (Liked by Dave who happens to main the Assault.)


I don't main assault. I don't run ac on it. I main scout. I don't run ac on that either. If you can't hit airborne targets with a gl, you need to get better.

jWZL3Hm.jpg

Thanks to Badtings for this awesome banner!


#38
hoghead

hoghead

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 348 posts

.


Edited by hoghead, 20 June 2015 - 04:57 PM.

  • Crminimal and OmniStone like this

#39
JackVandal

JackVandal

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 501 posts

i personally like the ac where it is at, though its true its harder to hit with projectile weapons, it has some potential harsh costs. i don't think it should be universal, thats a little like saying orb lord internals should be universal, i think if something is so powerful it needs to be universal then it might need tweaking. <-(opinion) i think the AC is in a good spot, its useful in some builds depending on how you play, but in others, you could benefit more from other internals.


  • LoC_TR likes this

"but the dead horse has been beaten so many times it's practically a pulpy mess in the barn by now."

-M1lkshake


#40
moosa17

moosa17

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 50 posts

@IareDave, you're suggesting that airborne maneuvers aren't anything special by comparing it directly to orblording. Considering orblording is largely agreed upon as too strong, that's a weak argument. 

Also GL's are not what we need to be discussing. They have a large blast radius and can be manually detonated. The weakest weapons by far vs. airborne targets are going to be the EOC's. That's the baseline we need to be considering. 


Edited by moosa17, 04 April 2015 - 07:49 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users