81 replies to this topic

[Redshift2k5]

What To Expect: October 7th Patch

Been a long time since I've done one of these, PGI's renewal in communication has given me some content to work with but it has also put some key information in a few different locations. Some of these things are pretty much set in stone (IE Clan mech release schedule) while other things are listed with an estimated arrival date.

Since some of this information comes from multiple forum posts in multiple forum sectons, I've set up a quick one-top-shop for upcoming content announced for tomorrow's patch!

Puma/Adder for C-bills - http://mwomercs.com/...lease-schedule/
I guess we'll see some of these. Not as heavily desired as many other clan mechs (no Pumageddon)

Mad Cat/Timberwolf for MC - http://mwomercs.com/...lease-schedule/
Expect to see a lot of fresh Timberwolves on the filed now that people can buy just one, with one month to go until we see the widely popular Omnimech for C-bills!


Fall Damage Adjustment - ETA: Oct 7- http://mwomercs.com/...tober-road-map/

Quote

Currently Medium, Heavy, and Assault class 'Mechs all take falling damage at 35 m/s, with Light class 'Mechs starting at 38 m/s. ...we will be slightly increasing Medium class 'Mechs to 39 m/s and increasing Lights to 46 m/s.

Clan Side Torso Destruction Penalty - ETA: Oct 7 - http://mwomercs.com/...tober-road-map/

Quote

...we have decided to not make movement a part of the penalty but to save that for some future implementation on the effects of heat on your 'Mechs functionality. A Clan engine has a total of 10 critical engine slots and the destruction of a Side Torso in a clan ‘Mech means the loss of two of those slots, or 20%. With this in mind, we have decided to implement a rule that the destruction of a side torso in a Clan 'Mech will result in a loss of 20% of the engines internal heat sink capacity.

Game Mode Vote Adjustment - ETA Oct 7 - http://mwomercs.com/...-match-quality/ http://mwomercs.com/...stem-explained/
Changing game mode selection from a hard choice to a vote-based soft choice, to better put teams vs teams of equal Elo aggregate even if they have selected different modes. Your choice of game mode is a vote that is subject to a dice roll- no game mode is ever removed but your vote affects the probability of a particular mode.

Quote

The way the window will function after the change is that each box selected counts as a vote. Therefore the match maker will be able to put together the best game possible based on the players skill level then at that point will take a tally of all the votes, with the highest vote count determining what game mode you play. A tie will result in a random selection of the game modes tied.

A change like this should at the very least increase the frequency of competitive matches by a modest degree. At least we would like the opportunity to see just how much it helps with our live population numbers.

And an update on this feature from Russ:

Russ Bullock, on 06 October 2014 - 09:00 AM, said:

Oh and we should have the new game mode voting system in place - hoping that helps with group queue noticeably.

Missing Weapon Modules - Oct 7
Confirmation from Russ for new weapon modules being added, many weapons are not equally represented in the Weapon Range or Cooldown modules and it's slated to be fixed

Russ Bullock, on 06 October 2014 - 09:19 AM, said:

Yes good catch these are present as well.

Russ Bullock, on 06 October 2014 - 09:20 AM, said:

There are 25 modules being added - my understanding is that it was just the AC2 anc clan AC2's that were not getting the cool down modules - the rest should be present.

New UI Elements for Rewards - Oct 7

Russ Bullock, on 06 October 2014 - 09:19 AM, said:

Also even though the new Rewards table I have mentioned is not in the build yet, the new way for displaying the rewards in the HUD is. You can set it back to classic in the settings.

Trial Mech Separation UI - ETA Oct 7 - http://i.imgur.com/3L0D8HN.png

From Russ's twitter, UI elements to put the Trial mechs on Trial tab only to 'hide' trial mechs. Seems fairly tentative in that tweet.

Store UI Improvements - Oct 7

Russ Bullock, on 06 October 2014 - 10:53 AM, said:

There is also a nice improvement pass on the Store in the UI

---

Actually turned out to be a bit less than I though when I started writing the post. the 21st of October has a much longer list already so this is kind of a warm-up! (MC Warhawk, C-bill Stormcrow, reward Atlas S, reward Cent AH, and a bunch of tentatives from the October update)

Will poke around on twitter and forum comments for any more content or confirmations or known incoming fixes.

Thanks so much Russ for giving us even more confirmations for tomorrow's patch! Looks like a patch to be proud of.

Edited by Redshift2k5, 06 October 2014 - 02:44 PM.

[stjobe]

Hey, I've missed these threads! Good job on bringing them back

[Russ Bullock]

Fairly accurate, Oct 21st will be larger.

[Joseph Mallan]

Is it still OK if I say we can expect much crying with the Patch tomorrow?

[Bishop Steiner]

Russ Bullock, on 06 October 2014 - 08:57 AM, said:

Fairly accurate, Oct 21st will be larger.

Intriguing.

Of course, even if it had nothing else....I got October 21 marked on the calendar because: CN9-AH baby!!!!



whoooooooooooohoooooo!ç

My "White Knight" steed awaits! I will plague the Haters, naysayers, Black Knights and all comers from my trusty mount!

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 06 October 2014 - 09:01 AM.

[Russ Bullock]

Joseph Mallan, on 06 October 2014 - 08:58 AM, said:

Is it still OK if I say we can expect much crying with the Patch tomorrow?

I doubt it - the clan side torso destruction I think is a fairly minimum penalty.

Oh and we should have the new game mode voting system in place - hoping that helps with group queue noticeably.

[GorlockTheDestroyer]

Thank You

Now with PGI actually doing stuff and communicating, to have all this in once place is awesome. Keep it up.

Mr Bullock

Edited by UncleTouchy, 06 October 2014 - 09:03 AM.

[stjobe]

Russ Bullock, on 06 October 2014 - 09:00 AM, said:

the clan side torso destruction I think is a fairly minimum penalty.

Hence the crying - from the IS side.

It's not really much of a penalty; you cut out all the important things and reduced it to a mere 20% less capacity and dissipation.

It's weak.

[Dark Jackal]

Will there be game client based short survey for folks that do not participate on the forum?

[Bishop Steiner]

Russ Bullock, on 06 October 2014 - 09:00 AM, said:

I doubt it - the clan side torso destruction I think is a fairly minimum penalty.

Oh and we should have the new game mode voting system in place - hoping that helps with group queue noticeably.

Well, they shouldn't have much reason to cry and QQ....but...gamers. Have we ever needed reasons?

Regardless, I'm looking forward to it. As long as you guys keep this level of communication and transparency, and hit the goal projection for launching CW, I'm a happy camper.

Be even happier when I get my Urbanmech, but this will tide me over till then.

[RetroActive]

Ahh I missed these threads. Thanks for bringing them back, Redshift!

[Bishop Steiner]

stjobe, on 06 October 2014 - 09:04 AM, said:

Hence the crying - from the IS side.

It's not really much of a penalty; you cut out all the important things and reduced it to a mere 20% less capacity and dissipation.

It's weak.

Considering most of my Medium, Heavy and Assault Clan Mechs are running into massive heat issues even with half their guns gone (because shocker, a huge number of DHS usually are gone to, when you lose a side), even that "weak" nerf, will really hurt anything not relying mostly on gauss or medium ballistics.

Also, I for one would rather them start small, then increase as needed, then the wild bi-polar nerf/buff yo-yo we were operating under. Remember the Victor? Or Jjs?

Dark Jackal, on 06 October 2014 - 09:05 AM, said:

Will there be game client based short survey for folks that do not participate on the forum?

Of mixed minds about this.

I mean...really, if you care enough to have an opinion, you should care enough to get on the forums. But at the same time, I know that even if people SHOULD, it's not happening.

But at the same time, most of those who don't get on the forums, also are not usually terribly educated on the big picture, so I am afraid the polls would be hit hard by that lack of knowledge.

Tough place to be, IMO.

[El Bandito]

What about the missing modules? Are we getting the UAC5 module or CLB2X module?

Edited by El Bandito, 06 October 2014 - 09:15 AM.

[stjobe]

Bishop Steiner, on 06 October 2014 - 09:10 AM, said:

Considering most of my Medium, Heavy and Assault Clan Mechs are running into massive heat issues even with half their guns gone (because shocker, a huge number of DHS usually are gone to, when you lose a side), even that "weak" nerf, will really hurt anything not relying mostly on gauss or medium ballistics.

Also, I for one would rather them start small, then increase as needed, then the wild bi-polar nerf/buff yo-yo we were operating under. Remember the Victor? Or Jjs?

Fair enough. I still think it's weak to not have it affect movement, but you're right about the "wild bi-polar nerf/buff yo-yo".

[Ultimax]

stjobe, on 06 October 2014 - 09:04 AM, said:

Hence the crying - from the IS side.

It's not really much of a penalty; you cut out all the important things and reduced it to a mere 20% less capacity and dissipation.

It's weak.

When they lose their STs they also lose a pile of heatsinks, on top of that I'm pretty sure you are losing true 2.0 DHS as part of that -20%.


It's a target with reduced cooling, reduced weapons, that can no longer safely spread damage to it's other ST on mechs that rarely are designed with arms that absorb ST damage - anyone who still wants to cry about this needs to find their big boy pants.

Edited by Ultimatum X, 06 October 2014 - 09:15 AM.

[Mcgral18]

stjobe, on 06 October 2014 - 09:04 AM, said:

Hence the crying - from the IS side.

It's not really much of a penalty; you cut out all the important things and reduced it to a mere 20% less capacity and dissipation.

It's weak.

If my MPL wasn't generating 150% heat, I might agree.

But it is...170% for the SPL of all things. Wub just isn't worth it.

[GrogX]

Bishop Steiner, on 06 October 2014 - 09:10 AM, said:

But at the same time, most of those who don't get on the forums, also are not usually terribly educated on the big picture, so I am afraid the polls would be hit hard by that lack of knowledge.

Tough place to be, IMO.

False. Hi Bishop!

[Bishop Steiner]

El Bandito, on 06 October 2014 - 09:14 AM, said:

What about the missing modules? Are we getting the UAC5 module or CLB2X module?

once elited, won't that drop the cooldown rate down to GH level again?

[Joseph Mallan]

Russ Bullock, on 06 October 2014 - 09:00 AM, said:

I doubt it - the clan side torso destruction I think is a fairly minimum penalty.

Oh and we should have the new game mode voting system in place - hoping that helps with group queue noticeably.

You underestimate the whine of your community Russ!

[Russ Bullock]

El Bandito, on 06 October 2014 - 09:14 AM, said:

What about the missing modules? Are we getting the UAC5 module or CLB2X module?

Yes good catch these are present as well.

Also even though the new Rewards table I have mentioned is not in the build yet, the new way for displaying the rewards in the HUD is. You can set it back to classic in the settings.