67 replies to this topic

[JackAttack5]

So I've just noticed that AC2s have a heat penalty. It wasn't mentioned in the patch notes, and I've never heard a developer mention the idea ever previously.

Here's proof on smurfy. http://mwo.smurfy-ne...eapon_ballistic

You can try it out in game, I have, and it's very noticeable.

Firstly, why? AC2 boats aren't at all overpowered. It's pretty unanimously agreed that even within Jager builds, those with PPCs and Gauss are better than 4AC2 builds at ranged support. The build is still good, and fun, but not at all overpowered and in need of a nerf.

Secondly, why were we not told? Is this something a programmer snuck in without telling whoever puts the patch notes together?

Thirdly, it seems to be broken. Firing three AC2s together does not trigger the penalty, and rightly so. Firing three on a macro so that they each fire individually (ie. How chain fire should work but doesn't) triggers the penalty and causes huge heat spikes. If this is working as intended it's a strange intention from the developers. It seems a common opinion that basic macros are cheating. Bear in mind firing the three on a macro still fires them at an overall lower or equal rate of fire as alpha firing all three together, but spreads the damage across the target more. I do not see how it is cheating, or how it deserves a nerf.

Fourth, it's unavoidable for 4AC2 Jagers even without a macro. A 4PPC Stalker can fire two PPCs, wait 0.5 seconds and fire the other two. It dodges the heat penalty, and has an equal rate of fire overall to what it would have if it fired all four at the same time. 4AC2s however are impossible to fire at the same rate without hitting the penalty, even when divided into pairs, due to the short 0.5 second reload time.

Basically yet another nail in the coffin of sustained DPS builds. High alpha dominance forever.

Edited by JackAttack5, 16 July 2013 - 12:15 PM.

[Aranzor]

I'd be careful on citing smurfy atm Jack, as to test it I was messing around with a build and it said I was using multiple AMS on a single AMS mech and incurring a heat penalty that way.

[Zoticus77]

If the heat penatly is being triggered with a build with 3xAC2 I would log a bug report. Even with a macro staggering their fire out to 167ms their should be no way to fire the 1st AC2 again under 500ms (0.5s) and triggering the heat penalty.

Were you testing with *only* 3xAC2 on the mech? Is there any chance you had a 4th AC2 and it was accidentally triggered by the macro? I'm not saying this is the case, but if you log a bug report its probably useful to explicitly show it on a mech with only 3 x AC2 present to help isolate the source and rule out as many distractions as possible.

If you like the "dakka", you could have 4 AC2 set to fire each AC2 167ms apart, but this reduces your DPS to 66% of the old 4xAC2.

Given those numbers I suspect the goal of this change is to allow the opposing player to have at minimum 167ms (0.26s) between screen-shake inducing impacts to fire a counter-shot. I haven't tried it in game, but I suspect it goes from "totally blind" to "disruptive strobe effect". Or at least it gives the blinded mech a couple of extra seconds to twist and find cover.

It does look like the 4xAC2 was lumped in with the "undesirable" boats. I'll refrain from commenting on if I'm in favour of that or not.

Edited by Zoticus77, 16 July 2013 - 12:33 PM.

[Tennex]

now you can't even fire them at normal rate without occuring heat. Because at 0.5 seconds + fire rate efficiency, you fire faster than heat penalty is reset.

Edited by Tennex, 16 July 2013 - 12:38 PM.

[JackAttack5]

Tennex, on 16 July 2013 - 12:34 PM, said:

now you can't even fire them at normal rate without occuring heat. Because at 0.5 seconds + fire rate efficiency, you fire faster than heat penalty is reset.

I hadn't even considered this. So AC2 builds now get infinitely worse when with the fast fire upgrade.

Zoticus77, on 16 July 2013 - 12:27 PM, said:

Were you testing with *only* 3xAC2 on the mech?

Yep. 3AC2 victor. I think for now I'll just avoid the macro and alpha fire them all, and stay away from fast fire. And I will be submitting a bug report. If anyone with a 3-4AC2 capable mech could record the same so it could get some attention I'd be grateful. If this isn't changed I'll be getting a refund on Pheonix. I only got the Shadowhawk for a 3AC2 build which will not be awful.

Aranzor, on 16 July 2013 - 12:27 PM, said:

I'd be careful on citing smurfy atm Jack, as to test it I was messing around with a build and it said I was using multiple AMS on a single AMS mech and incurring a heat penalty that way.

I noticed this in game before being shown smurfy, it's definitely there.

Edited by JackAttack5, 16 July 2013 - 12:46 PM.

[Trev Firestorm]

If this is true... Someone needs to be slapped, in the face, repeatedly, until they cry and beg for forgiveness... Then keep slapping till they fix it.

[Lord Perversor]

Yes it is and it's downright annoying, specially considering that the Jager comes with 2x ac5 and 2x ac2, while downgrading from ac5 to ac2 should be a viable option (despite the already struggling heat issues)

Edited by Lord Perversor, 16 July 2013 - 01:05 PM.

[Bernard Matthaios]

I love my dakka, I only bought the jäger for the 4xAC2. This is just ridiculous!

[Ph30nix]

sounds to me like a Dev was tired or getting smacked in the face by AC/2's

[JackAttack5]

Here's some evidence. Starting with 675 ammo I fired. At 91% heat I take a screenshot. The ammo left shows how much ammo it took to be fired to reach that heat.

With no macro it's 135 rounds. http://i.imgur.com/j4MWlWy.jpg

With a macro it's 45 rounds. One third as many shots to the same heat, at a lower fire rate. http://i.imgur.com/7IHP0KO.jpg

[Padic]

Trev Firestorm, on 16 July 2013 - 01:01 PM, said:

If this is true... Someone needs to be slapped, in the face, repeatedly, until they cry and beg for forgiveness... Then keep slapping till they fix it.

That's gross. Grow up, dude.

[Odanan]

JackAttack5, on 16 July 2013 - 02:16 PM, said:

Here's some evidence. Starting with 675 ammo I fired. At 91% heat I take a screenshot. The ammo left shows how much ammo it took to be fired to reach that heat.

With no macro it's 135 rounds. http://i.imgur.com/j4MWlWy.jpg

With a macro it's 45 rounds. One third as many shots to the same heat, at a lower fire rate. http://i.imgur.com/7IHP0KO.jpg

That's outrageous.


Specially if you think the AC/2 generates as much heat as the Gauss Rifle in TT.

[Hans Von Lohman]

Just watched NGNG on Twitch TV and they chat group guys say the extra heat bug is from the Elite Skill called Fast Fire.

In other words testing it in test ground won't work as you don't have any skills applied when you run in there.

[JackAttack5]

Hans Von Lohman, on 16 July 2013 - 03:09 PM, said:

Just watched NGNG on Twitch TV and they chat group guys say the extra heat bug is from the Elite Skill called Fast Fire.

In other words testing it in test ground won't work as you don't have any skills applied when you run in there.

I've tried it in game, the numbers work out the same. But when making those example images I wanted to be precise, and didn't want to sit at spawn firing off AC2s into a wall and being a waste of a team slot.

When the heat penalty reads ''This weapon has a heat penalty scale of 1 if you fire 4 or more of the same type at once (Alpha)'' and yet it's applied when you are firing three (not four) in chain fire (not at once/alpha) AND without fast fire something is very clearly broken. Remember NGNG are very unlikely to say anything remotely negative about MWO or PGI, even when it's pointing out a blatant bug.

[aniviron]

JackAttack5, on 16 July 2013 - 12:07 PM, said:

So I've just noticed that AC2s have a heat penalty. It wasn't mentioned in the patch notes, and I've never heard a developer mention the idea ever previously.

Here's proof on smurfy. http://mwo.smurfy-ne...eapon_ballistic

You can try it out in game, I have, and it's very noticeable.

Firstly, why? AC2 boats aren't at all overpowered. It's pretty unanimously agreed that even within Jager builds, those with PPCs and Gauss are better than 4AC2 builds at ranged support. The build is still good, and fun, but not at all overpowered and in need of a nerf.

Secondly, why were we not told? Is this something a programmer snuck in without telling whoever puts the patch notes together?

Thirdly, it seems to be broken. Firing three AC2s together does not trigger the penalty, and rightly so. Firing three on a macro so that they each fire individually (ie. How chain fire should work but doesn't) triggers the penalty and causes huge heat spikes. If this is working as intended it's a strange intention from the developers. It seems a common opinion that basic macros are cheating. Bear in mind firing the three on a macro still fires them at an overall lower or equal rate of fire as alpha firing all three together, but spreads the damage across the target more. I do not see how it is cheating, or how it deserves a nerf.

Fourth, it's unavoidable for 4AC2 Jagers even without a macro. A 4PPC Stalker can fire two PPCs, wait 0.5 seconds and fire the other two. It dodges the heat penalty, and has an equal rate of fire overall to what it would have if it fired all four at the same time. 4AC2s however are impossible to fire at the same rate without hitting the penalty, even when divided into pairs, due to the short 0.5 second reload time.

Basically yet another nail in the coffin of sustained DPS builds. High alpha dominance forever.

Are you surprised? Did you really think that the medium laser, all srms, and lrm15 needed the nerfstick too? Does it make any kind of sense to cap llas at 2?

[Tennex]

Hans Von Lohman, on 16 July 2013 - 03:09 PM, said:

Just watched NGNG on Twitch TV and they chat group guys say the extra heat bug is from the Elite Skill called Fast Fire.

In other words testing it in test ground won't work as you don't have any skills applied when you run in there.

the video i shot was done in testing grounds. it still had the issue


so the problem must not be related to any skills.

Edited by Tennex, 16 July 2013 - 04:04 PM.

[AntharPrime]

So, they ninja nerfed the AC2 macro.

[JackAttack5]

aniviron, on 16 July 2013 - 03:58 PM, said:

Are you surprised? Did you really think that the medium laser, all srms, and lrm15 needed the nerfstick too? Does it make any kind of sense to cap llas at 2?

I agree that most of the limits are completely arbitrary. The SRM6 and PPC limits I can understand their reasoning for, but there are less finicky and more effective ways of what they are trying to achieve. My point with this thread is simply that those other limits were stated in advance, and now work reliably. The AC2 limit was snuck in and seems to only hit under certain conditions, like with the fast fire upgrade or a macro.

[Felicitatem Parco]

The Smurfy data is currently harvested directly off the XML files, which does not reflect actual gameplay.

For instance: there is no Single Gauss penalty, even though smurfy reports one. Please be wary about data that is harvested directly from XML files since there are factors outside the itemstats.xml that determine which values are used in-game and which values are ignored by the engine.

Please test in-game.

[Hans Von Lohman]

AntharPrime, on 16 July 2013 - 04:07 PM, said:

So, they ninja nerfed the AC2 macro.

No, it sounds like a bug. The AC-2 rate of fire is below the 0.5 seconds time gap needed to avoid "boating" heat penalties, and the Fast FIre perk makes that even shorter.

I think this is NOT working as intended and anybody who has it should report it as a bug.

Welcome to beta-testing before launch. I'm not that worried, though. I just wish we didn't have bugs, but I'm a realist and know we will see bugs and mistakes.

Edited by Hans Von Lohman, 16 July 2013 - 05:29 PM.