588 replies to this topic

[Koniks]

Nikolai Lubkiewicz, on 30 July 2014 - 01:33 AM, said:

Sometimes my job is going to include offering ideas which aren't always the most popular so that we may both help the community brace for impact while also finding ways to cushion it.

Many people have mentioned the cost of Modules as a concern...

Those extra slots will soon enough be filled with all sorts of other goodies...

Finally, the last factor to mention is the importance of taking baby steps in dealing with balance so as to not revisit such fun occasions as LRMmaggedon™. Starting with just a handful of modules makes it more accessible and easier to review the overall effect of each one.

1) As a customer, I don't want to see the Community Manager's name on the post explaining design decisions already made and ones to follow. That's not the right messenger for the message. That's less about the Community Manager's sanity and more about the community's.

2) I assume you're addressing the cost of weapon modules. That's fair, even if they're overpriced compared to their utility. But it does nothing to address that have invalidated millions of CBills already spent on modules spent based on how the old system works. Which is a problem because

3) we have been provided no details on when those "other goodies" will arrive or how they will function. And given how the new mech module slots are allocated, is a poor replacement.

4) Fine, take baby steps--even if Paul's post on the Gauss/PPC nerfs looks nothing like it. But those baby steps deserve full criticism when we aren't provided any information about what the end state looks like.

[The Amazing Atomic Spaniel]

Ultimatum X, on 30 July 2014 - 09:27 AM, said:

1) This module slot change should have then been packaged with that "bigger diversity" of modules. At least then, there might seem to be some sense to the current changes outside of "stuff got nerfed".

2) These module slot changes, as they are on the live servers, are not successful in your goal of "motivating players to play certain roles".

Here's why:

> Most consumables are poorly designed. The only ones being used are Artillery Strike, Air Strike, UAV and Coolshot. Mostly, it's just Artillery and Air strike with a sprinkle of UAVs.

> How does everyone using the exact same consumables in any way promote "roles"? It does not.







A bigger number of modules does not necessarily equate to more choice, unless you think choosing between

"bag full of cash"
"bag full of banana peels"
"bag full of confetti"

....constitutes a real "choice".

That's what we have right now.

We have some consumables and some mech modules that are good.

Then we have many that are outright bad.

And lastly we have Weapon Modules which are just completely awful both in performance gains and cost.






This sounds like you have convinced yourself, but not by actually looking at how the game is played. It sounds great, but really there is little substance in the above quote.

Please provide a few examples of how you feel you achieved this stated goal.

There was actually more customization the more mech module slots we had, as opposed to less.

Here's why (targeting players who used mech modules, as opposed to consumables):

> Players gravitated towards several critical modules that were universally useful.
> Then with any remaining slots, they would use the remaining few situational modules that would suit their build
> Few to no players used weapon modules because they are terrible value.





I think the goal is admirable, and as a grizzled veteran of countless MMOs I'm accustomed to nerfs, buffs and massive system changes.

I have no issue with any of that.


The issue is, I do not feel your current changes have even come close to the goal you've set out.

As one poster has jokingly posted, here is the new module slot load out for pretty much everyone:

Weapon 1) Empty, or AMS a
Weapon 2) Emtpy, or AMS b or Machine gun

Consumable 1) Artillery Strike
Consumable 2) Air Strike or UAV

Mech Mod 1) Seismic Sensor
Mech Mod 2) (High) Radar Dep or (Moderate) Advanced Zoom or (LRM Specific) Adv Targeting Decay


While it was a joke, it was extremely apt. This is the likely loadout of many, many players regardless of their mech weight class.




Here's what I would suggest:

1) Consumable mods require an entire overhaul so that Air/Arty strike aren't the borderline defacto choices of anything that isn't a light mech that might slot UAV in place of one of those.

2) Weapon modules need an overhaul. They have both low beneifts with a drawback, and are also too expensive for said benefits.

3) Revamp your concept for modules according to roles.

A: Go through all of the mechs. Identify the roles you see these mechs performing, use the KISS principle. Be sure to actually label the mechs, in-game, for players to see the role you intended for that mech.

B: Then identify which module types suit those specific roles. Including Weapon, Consumable & Mech Modules.

C: Then give each mech a specified number of UNIVERSAL mech module slots. here they can slot any mech module.

Then give each mech a specified number of ROLE SPECIFIC module slots, here they can slot any mech, consumable or weapon module slot that falls under the specified role umbrella as identified in B.

This. This is good.

Seriously PGI, sack the numpty who came up with the new module system and employ this guy as a contractor.

[L Y N X]

Where is the ERLL weapon Module?

[Flyby215]

Thanks for the explanation as to the line of thinking behind the module slot change! It makes a really big difference to me to know "why" certain things are happening or changes being made.

With the changes, I would suggest monitoring the arty/air strike usage... since everyone and their dog can pack one now, but overall I haven't noticed any signifant change. I suspect everyone will always be carrying two consumables (why not?) but whether or not to actually use them becomes more and more situational perhaps, especially with the automatic re-load the consumables can becomes very quickly very expensive.

[Ragnar Bashmek]

No point in repeating what has already been said about the horribly stupid module system changes, but I do have a suggestion and a comment.

PGI...man-up and admit you made a grossly ignorant f'ing change to the module system and roll it back out while you try find a useful way to evolve it..

I personally have spent my last $ on MWO until this bozo module system is fixed in one way or another.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

I hope the direction that development will be going in, will be allowing players to mount different weapons and equipment to modify the available slots for Proficiencies (don't feel like Modules send the right idea, but open to better labeling!).

Here is an image below that shows how the screen could look in the Mechlab.



So this way the Mech Tree Efficiencies can still be unlocked on the other page (along with current modules in that separate tab), but would need to be mounted on a mech in the Mechlab to get the benefits.

So the categories I was considering would add a bit in the Mechlab Module tab. And I think it should also be renamed (currently leaning towards 'Proficiencies').

So we could have:
'Mech -
Agility
Anchor Turn
Arm Reflex
Twist Speed
Twist X

Enhancement
Hill Climb
Improved Gyro
Kinetic Burst
Shock Absorbance
Speed Retention

Performance
Cool Run
Hard Break
Heat Containment
Quick Ignition
Speed Tweak

Sensor
Radar Deprivation
Seismic Sensor
Sensor Range

Support
Capture Accelerator
Strike Accuracies
UAV Upgrade

Target
Target Info Gathering
Target Decay
360 Target Retention

Vision
Advanced Zoom
Night Vision
Thermal Vision

Items under Consumables shouldn't change much. But I would consider a name change for Weapons to Equipment and add a drop down list, that has categories as Ballistic, Energy, Missile, Misc.

So not detailing more in this post, but this is the general idea I had in light of the recent changes to modules (so the idea will be getting more tweaking! as time permits).

Edited by Praetor Knight, 30 July 2014 - 12:27 PM.

[Skyfaller]

Aside from the obvious reason you are changing the system (to add more real-cash-making items as priority over the quality of the product)....


...how about making the modules and consumables:


1- Separate from each other. Modules are internal components which consume module slots. Consumables should be items which consume a slot in specific parts of the mech.

Note: Some modules SHOULD consume regular mech slots rather than module slots due to their specific nature. Things like consumables (see below) and mech-part specific enchancers (aka improved gyro should not be module slot but rather take up one slot in the CT, jump shock absorber and hill climb and other speed-boosting module should occupy a slot in the legs,etc,etc).

2- Make certain mechs give a bonus in performance to certain modules and equipment.

For example, scout mechs would get a minor bonus speed from engines, minor bonus in jumpjet performance (like, 25% strong initial jet boost), bonus to sensor range and ecm modules (~10%?) and bonus to scout-related equipment (minor range boost to TAG, minor duration boost to NARC).

These bonuses would not apply to all scout mechs but rather depend on individual scout mech. The spiders for example would get the jumpjet bonus, sensor range and TAG bonuses. Ravens get ecm, narc and engine bonuses.

This, applied to each mech on an individual basis will make each mech class and each chassis type have its own unique benefits.

The consumables requiring a slot would help limit their use plus remove them from the module slot system. For example any consumable that is deployable *UAV's) should be only be able to be equipped on the left or right torso section only. Artillery and Air strikes would be slotted in the head or central torso (which would make it inconvenient for some mech chassis..thus some mechs make better fire support callers than others).

[Toothless]

The new module system is bad, and you should feel bad.

[JediPanther]

My 3l and jenner k are mad as hell. They lost two "mech mods" which were set up to make them the ultimate scouts with their sensor range,sesmic sensor, target id, and adv zoom; thankfully pgi has let us keep beagle active probe. Their role is now done by any and every mech with the press of a single button to launch a uav. My best scout now is runing a locust through or behind the enemy and lauching the uav.

My lrm boats don't mind however. If fact it just makes my A1 better with all those uavs going up.

[HammerMaster]

Niko. We love you for taking ownership of this for the "TEAM". Though, I feel that they are putting you out there on this one. In all my reading and minor forum posting, I have not seen so much ire from all fronts for this module debacle. People hate LRMs, People Love LRMs. People hate PPC/AC5 Meta. People Love PPC/AC5 meta. A solid majority on this module thing has expressed this disklike of module change. To the point where you locked a thread out maybe 3 or 4 posts in. If there were more modules in the pipe, it should have been rolled out with those modules available. The Strike situation was out of control before this change. I feel now it enforces it. The weapon modules are nigh useless at the moment in my eyes.

[The Bad Charlie]

There is great potential in the module system. The quirks system is looking very well so far... (The Awesomes got love?!?!?)

I agree with most here, that you should take a step back, and rethink the system to come up with something else that promotes "Roles". And, i think it just doesn't cut it anymore, saying that we have to wait and see how great this design choice is gonna be in... 2(?) months or whatever...

The game is not in beta anymore, and any changes and balancing decisions have to keep the game as Fun and as Balanced as possible, at any given time.

I understand the Employees have to eat and a job is a job, but someone calling the shots up there has to realize that if the company listened to their designers more (i still believe you're not the ones serving us this), instead of milking some IP fans and some MWO fans, this could be the next WoT.

[Cest7]

Who thought removing something in thats been in game since inception would be a good idea?

Did you not LEARN from the arm lock toggle fiasco?

Taking away things that players already have and use just pisses off your player base. How would you like it if I sold you a car and then 2 years later took a wheel off it and changed all the dials to ft/s.


This change is bad, horrible thought out and generally just HURTS the game. Do you REALLY want more arty/airspam? I'm going to go play something else.

Edit- This seems like a "**** we missed our first 3 goals, quick tack something on that makes it look like we have role warfare"

FAIL

Edited by Cest7, 30 July 2014 - 01:11 PM.

[Sandslice]

Thanks for this thread, Niko.

As in the Patch Notes feedback thread, I think the system has potential - but needs a couple things addressed in order to make it better.

1. The JR7-K. Its (former) third module slot distinguished it from the JR7-D; now that these two Jenners have the same module-load, the -K is strictly inferior and needs a buff. 2/2/2 (as Oxide) or 3/2/1 (if weapon modules become worthwhile) would work nicely.

2. The weapon modules: +range for +heat is bad, because it's a minor situational benefit with a constant drawback - and the benefit is not substantial enough to justify 3 million cbills.

The suggestion I have is to change the Range modules to +6% (IS) and +1,5% (Clan) and no increased heat. At +30%, the IS Large Laser greens from 585 (cf: 600 for unbuffed Clan Large Pulse,) and the ERLL from 877 (cf: 890 for unbuffed Clan ERLL.) Once we have a range of modules, these will be balanced by opportunity cost as well as the same actual costs.

There are some ideas:
-Speed modules: Extra projectile speed or faster burn-time for extra heat.
-Recycle modules: Speed up your recycle on a weapon.
-UAC Unjammer: Reduces chance and duration of UAC jams.
-AC/2 Armour Piercing: Gives the AC/2 extra damage vs. armour.
-Metallic Slugs: Lower range for ACs, but extra impulse.
-Crit Seeker: +5% chance of crit when using MGs, Flamers, or LBX.
-PPC Capacitor: My version causes your PPCs to be forced to charge like Gauss, and deal +20% damage.
-Gauss Charge-holder: Gives you a longer "window" in which to fire your charged Gauss before the charge drops.

3. We need more types of consumables to give Artillery a real opportunity cost. Some ideas:
-ECM pods: Cover an area in ECM temporarily.
-Hot spots: Throw down a heat generator that adds heat to 'Mechs in a 150 meter radius.
-Ghost target: Generates a fake image that looks real to sensors and vision modes, and dissipates when shot or caught in an enemy ECM bubble.
-Remote sensor: Lay a Seismic Sensor in a spot for 2 minutes; you receive the information from it.
-Minefield: Activates after 6 seconds and covers a 15-meter radius; is consumed and deals leg damage when stepped on. It's wasted if it's stepped on early (so that you can't just throw it under a Dire Wolf's legs for profit.)

[HammerMaster]

This helps IMMENSELY.

My concern still lies in weapons modules also.

[Kraven Kor]

shad0w4life, on 30 July 2014 - 08:44 AM, said:

Relying on modules....

/Facepalm

Not relying on them. Half my matches I launch without one due to being too lazy / forgetful to move them from the previous mech.

Just that I'm not going to let them take away what we had to force us to use crappy consumables and weapon mods.

@#$% that.

[Livewyr]

Aside from the Let them eat cake feel- "Take heart citizens! The Royal Court has heard your pleas!" It is an improvement.

(Though definitely a nerf for the clans, who did have artillery as well, because Artillery strike is arguably better than Airstrike... unless you want to make airstrike do more damage for being in a thin line rather than group saturation...)

[IronChance]

Making it only one per mech will help make the game feel less like WWI Trench warfare, but I still believe mechs should only be able to equip arty/air if they have a command console equipped OR the arty/air buff module. That'll reduce the arty/air amounts on any given battlefield to below "spam" levels and also encourage more of this "role warfare" of which you speak.

[Cest7]

Nikolai Lubkiewicz, on 30 July 2014 - 01:28 PM, said:

Greetings MechWarriors,

The Dev Team has heard out your concerns regarding the over-use of Artillery and Air Strikes. With your feedback in mind the following changes are to be implemented within the next 2 patches.

Some have indicated that it is silly for Clans to have access to artillery in the first place, given their philosophical beliefs regarding that weapon system.
With that in mind, Clans will only be able to use Air Strikes.

To balance the Inner Sphere: MechWarriors will have the option to use both Air Strikes and Artillery, but will only be able to field one or the other on each Mech.

Please let us know what you think and update us on how this change will affect your overall impression of the module changes.

About damn time...

[Xoxim SC]

Nikolai Lubkiewicz, on 30 July 2014 - 01:28 PM, said:

Greetings MechWarriors,

The Dev Team has heard out your concerns regarding the over-use of Artillery and Air Strikes. With your feedback in mind the following changes are to be implemented within the next 2 patches.

Some have indicated that it is silly for Clans to have access to artillery in the first place, given their philosophical beliefs regarding that weapon system.
With that in mind, Clans will only be able to use Air Strikes.

To balance the Inner Sphere: MechWarriors will have the option to use both Air Strikes and Artillery, but will only be able to field one or the other on each Mech.

Please let us know what you think and update us on how this change will affect your overall impression of the module changes.

While I like the idea of limiting what can be brought to the battlefield, it would also be nice to have some sort of global cool down (2 min cool down before another strike can be used) added to help reduce the overall spam. Outside of that, it's a fantastic idea.

Edited by Todd Lightbringer, 30 July 2014 - 01:45 PM.

[SpiralFace]

Nikolai Lubkiewicz, on 30 July 2014 - 01:28 PM, said:

Greetings MechWarriors,

The Dev Team has heard out your concerns regarding the over-use of Artillery and Air Strikes. With your feedback in mind the following changes are to be implemented within the next 2 patches.

Some have indicated that it is silly for Clans to have access to artillery in the first place, given their philosophical beliefs regarding that weapon system.
With that in mind, Clans will only be able to use Air Strikes.

To balance the Inner Sphere: MechWarriors will have the option to use both Air Strikes and Artillery, but will only be able to field one or the other on each Mech.

Please let us know what you think and update us on how this change will affect your overall impression of the module changes.

Thanks for the development Niko.

Although a correction for those that think the clans don't use artillery:

They don't like utilizing vehicular artillery piece (although they do have some.) But they are more then happy to tote around artillery on their mechs. Which can be an argument for letting them keep it as far as fiction goes.

But if its a game balance decision, I don't think many people would mind anyways.

But the notion that the Clans don't use artillery is as false as the idea that they don't use conventional infantry.

Its there, its just not "highly regarded" compared to their elite mech forces.