7 replies to this topic

[Rumrunner2]

suggested changes:

ECM:
enemy ECM mech close to my own mech should no longer jam my targetlock to any other enemy mech

BeagleActiveProbe:
should be not completely useless in range of an enemy ECM, should give the normal boosts to targetlock and sensorrange. This would be bring this device back in the game

because of this 2 changes its getting a bit easier to get targetlocks, some tweaks to weapons:
-cooldown Streaks from 3,5sec. to 4,0 sec. to decrease dps of Streakboats a bit
-cooldown SRM4 from 3,75sec. to 4,0 sec. and SRM6 from 4,0 to 4,5sec to decrease dps of SRM boats a bit
-AMS needs a slight buff vs. LRM and a BIG buff vs. SRM and SSRM to be more usefull

DHS:
engines internal DHS have value 2,0, so whats the problem to give external DHS a higher value than 1,4? The buff would affect only the external DHS. 2,0 for ALL DHS in a Mech with 15 DHS
would bring the 5 external DHS a buff of 0,6 (1,4 to 2,0). Overall buff is 0,6 *5=3,0, its about 2 additional DHS to 1,4. 15 DHS to 2,0 would work like 17 DHS in actual settings, this is surely not a gamebreaker.
And, its possible to go the way step by step: testing1,6-if fine-testing1,8-if fine finally 2,0

armor:
I know armor was doubled last year, but in the meantime we got DHS, Endo, Ferro and many weapons got buffed. I think armor could take a buff by 25% to compensate this, so normal armor 40points per ton, Ferro 45 ppoints.

[blinkin]

Rumrunner2, on 25 February 2013 - 01:21 AM, said:

suggested changes:

ECM:
enemy ECM mech close to my own mech should no longer jam my targetlock to any other enemy mech

i think ECM needs some work, but this idea feels very wrong. i am not entirely sure at this point why i don't like this idea. it may be the combination of this with your other listed ideas.

BeagleActiveProbe:
should be not completely useless in range of an enemy ECM, should give the normal boosts to targetlock and sensorrange. This would be bring this device back in the game

because of this 2 changes its getting a bit easier to get targetlocks, some tweaks to weapons:
-cooldown Streaks from 3,5sec. to 4,0 sec. to decrease dps of Streakboats a bit
-cooldown SRM4 from 3,75sec. to 4,0 sec. and SRM6 from 4,0 to 4,5sec to decrease dps of SRM boats a bit
-AMS needs a slight buff vs. LRM and a BIG buff vs. SRM and SSRM to be more usefull

streaks need a major overhaul. simply increasing their cooldown doesn't solve the problem, it just sweeps it under the rug.

SRM get no advantages from BAP. SRM are dumbfire weapons. the only system that benefits SRM is artemis. the only bonus that is given is a more focused cone of fire. i think SRM boats need more risk associated with them not just a simple nerfing.

totally agree with buffing AMS. the system is far too weak. i think AMS should be able to reliably stop an LRM5 entirely, and 2 should be able to stop a single LRM10 reliably.

DHS:
engines internal DHS have value 2,0, so whats the problem to give external DHS a higher value than 1,4? The buff would affect only the external DHS. 2,0 for ALL DHS in a Mech with 15 DHS
would bring the 5 external DHS a buff of 0,6 (1,4 to 2,0). Overall buff is 0,6 *5=3,0, its about 2 additional DHS to 1,4. 15 DHS to 2,0 would work like 17 DHS in actual settings, this is surely not a gamebreaker.
And, its possible to go the way step by step: testing1,6-if fine-testing1,8-if fine finally 2,0

all of this testing was done back in closed beta. we started out with DHS 2.0. then we went to 1.7 or 1.8 (can't remember exactly which). we then went to 1.4 (pure). finally we settled on 1.4 with engine 2.0.

it is actually a gamebreaker. for most of the testing DHS was on every mech and anything not running energy weapons generally lost.

armor:
I know armor was doubled last year, but in the meantime we got DHS, Endo, Ferro and many weapons got buffed. I think armor could take a buff by 25% to compensate this, so normal armor 40points per ton, Ferro 45 ppoints.

as far as i am concerned the issue rarely has anything to do with armor per ton, and has way more to do with the max armor amounts. that said i am not a fan of any increase. i would prefer armor be decreased across the board to make this game much more like a simulator.

[Rumrunner2]

We never had all DHS 2.0.
First bugged setting was internal HS stayed 1,0 (not converted to DHS because of bug), only external DHS got 2.0.
For my feeling, even it was not wanted this way, it was a better solution than actual setting because atm Light mechs (80% of there DHS are in engine with value 2.0) benefit much more from DHS than Assault Mechs with only about 50% of there DHS have 2.0.

And who "tested" anything? PGI said they tested.....like they "tested" ECM, like they "tested" MM3 and ELO....bla bla.
I believe they work more by try and error than by concepts and testing. Watch the numbers. My proposal would bring about 5% better heatdissapation for Lightmechs, about 10% for Mediums and 15% for Heaveys and Assault. All Mechclasses would have same advantage from DHS, thats the way it should be, not much, not less.

concerning armor:
of course max armor of a all sections on the Mech should be increased by 25% too. At the end we have 25% more protection with same weight. And thats only the compensation of the increased firepower we got in last months.
Decreasing armor and protection? U must be joking. AC20 cats, SRM6 boats and PPC boats would oneshoot nearly everything!!

[Guarditan]

I agree with you on most of your terms. The BeagleActiveProbe needs a buff. I never considered to use it. Especially because it's also countered by ecm.

AMS really needs a buff. I think you are right a slight buff against lrm and bigger against srm. Perhaps after this there is no need für a nerf of srm. Overall the srms need a nerf.

A point where i disagree are the DHS. Perhaps they need a small buff but not from 1.4 to 2.0. If you buff them in this way nobody would have any heatproblems anymore and heatmanagement is one important aspect of mechwarrior

A little armorbuff could also be very nice atm but it could also be a nerf of overpowered weapons. At the moment i think there is an imbalance in favor of the weapons especially ac20, gauss...

Ecm needs clearly a nerf. No discussion on that topic.

[blinkin]

Rumrunner2, on 25 February 2013 - 02:59 AM, said:

We never had all DHS 2.0.
First bugged setting was internal HS stayed 1,0 (not converted to DHS because of bug), only external DHS got 2.0.
For my feeling, even it was not wanted this way, it was a better solution than actual setting because atm Light mechs (80% of there DHS are in engine with value 2.0) benefit much more from DHS than Assault Mechs with only about 50% of there DHS have 2.0.

And who "tested" anything? PGI said they tested.....like they "tested" ECM, like they "tested" MM3 and ELO....bla bla.
I believe they work more by try and error than by concepts and testing. Watch the numbers. My proposal would bring about 5% better heatdissapation for Lightmechs, about 10% for Mediums and 15% for Heaveys and Assault. All Mechclasses would have same advantage from DHS, thats the way it should be, not much, not less.

concerning armor:
of course max armor of a all sections on the Mech should be increased by 25% too. At the end we have 25% more protection with same weight. And thats only the compensation of the increased firepower we got in last months.
Decreasing armor and protection? U must be joking. AC20 cats, SRM6 boats and PPC boats would oneshoot nearly everything!!

the issue with larger mechs and DHS comes down to available crit space in most cases. in my atlas i can always find the extra tonnage for a heatsink, but critspace can even become an issue with single heatsinks. unless they make external DHS 3.0 they will remain difficult to use for assaults in most cases.

and as far as the armor is concerned i would like the game to be more deadly. light mechs would be more important and there would be fewer complaints about many of the boats because most mechs would be able to kill quickly. i don't entirely agree with their decision to double all HP.

[Rumrunner2]

A more deadly setting would end in a very defensive play because each single mistake is ur last, no chance to retreat or something. Pobably a Missile/Sniperwar. Every brawler would be dead until in range of his weapons.

Are u guys using smurfys mechlab? The cooling efficiency is much more sencefull than in the game.
50% in smurfy means ur Mech can dissapate 50% of the heat of nonstop used weapons. After overheated, ur dps is limited by ur HS to 50%.

Here is my ERPPC-Streak hybrid Stalker. Even only 4 ERPPC (u know, some guys running 5 or 6...), coolingeff. is only 18%.
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...47bb2a4479022ae
Alphadamage and dps is not really good for an Assult...
They real cooldown needed for the weapons is about 5times of there reloadtime.

External DHS from 1.4 to 2.0. would change cooling to about 22%, u call this "nobody have heatproblems" ?
Waiting 4times longer for next volley than reloadtime of the weapons? We would have still heatploblems, but only a slighly bit less.
M8, pls dont repeat what the devs say, check numbers by ur own.

[blinkin]

Rumrunner2, on 25 February 2013 - 03:54 AM, said:

External DHS from 1.4 to 2.0. would change cooling to about 22%, u call this "nobody have heatproblems" ?
Waiting 4times longer for next volley than reloadtime of the weapons? We would have still heatploblems, but only a slighly bit less.
M8, pls dont repeat what the devs say, check numbers by ur own.

never said there were no heat problems. what i said was it heavily weighted the game in favor of energy weapons.

[Kmieciu]

In my opinion External DHS should dissipate 2 points of heat every 10 seconds, but offer only 1 point of extra heat cap.
That way we would have more diversity: SHS = more burst damage, DHS = more DPS. So SHS for "one shot wonders" like 6xPPC Stalker and DHS for chain firing 3xPPC Awesome.