

I'll Do Some Game Balancing For Pgi
#1
Posted 13 March 2013 - 09:33 AM
Buff the AMS range up to 300 and that's all it takes to make AMS viable, a range increase on AMS not only makes it innately more effective against LRMs, max range streaks and possibly max range srms, it would help with team play, an increased range gives a lot more oppotunities for other friendly AMS to help out and take out a large salvo focused on one mech, this increases potential for teamplay and eliminates the frustration of being annihilated by massive amounts of LRM, light mechs would now have a reason to take AMS, now they can support their team and largely reduce the effectiveness of one or two streak launchers.
ECM should serve it's disruption role on light mechs, I do believe the low signal disruption when under 180m should be completely retained, at longer ranges however, ECM mechs should be targetable and can be locked on to, but they would completely deny info gathering and nullify artemis, narc, and any sensor range enhancements, this way ECM is still very useful, but no longer provides immunity against missiles.
SRM 6 need to generates more heat.
Streaks are not op to begin with, they're the only effective counter to lights, against larger slower mechs regular SRMs are much better. With buffed AMS streaks would also be weaker due to their slower travelling speed compared to regular SRMs.
and Voila, game is now balanced.
#2
Posted 13 March 2013 - 09:37 AM
BAP to enable streak lockon to ECM mechs. ECM is not supposed to negate streak lock.
Bang! Instant balance and goodbye 3L light class dominance.
-k
#3
Posted 13 March 2013 - 09:37 AM
Divide all current weapon damage/heat by the number of times it fires in ten seconds. Then take armor back to standard values and heat to standard values. Voila your weapons and armor are balanced and you dont need to double anything.
#4
Posted 13 March 2013 - 09:41 AM
#5
Posted 13 March 2013 - 09:43 AM
mike29tw, on 13 March 2013 - 09:41 AM, said:
haha yeah right, I am a brain trust not a financial backer.
Hey its Beta we are aloud to offer input right? Or is it?
Edited by Viper69, 13 March 2013 - 09:44 AM.
#6
Posted 13 March 2013 - 09:46 AM
Kdogg788, on 13 March 2013 - 09:37 AM, said:
BAP to enable streak lockon to ECM mechs. ECM is not supposed to negate streak lock.
Bang! Instant balance and goodbye 3L light class dominance.
-k
So the solution to the somewhat broken ECM is to encourage use of the very broken SSRMs?
Viper69, on 13 March 2013 - 09:37 AM, said:
Divide all current weapon damage/heat by the number of times it fires in ten seconds. Then take armor back to standard values and heat to standard values. Voila your weapons and armor are balanced and you dont need to double anything.
Er, no. They're at TT-values-over-ten-second-period. TT =/= balance.
The reason armour needed double had nothing to do with weapon stat variation, and everything to do with being able to aim.
Edited by Gaan Cathal, 13 March 2013 - 09:47 AM.
#7
Posted 13 March 2013 - 09:47 AM
Quote
Most of your changes have literally no effect on the games balance issues. Like, seriously zero. They fundamentally wouldn't impact play even in a theoretical sense.
Edited by Shumabot, 13 March 2013 - 09:49 AM.
#8
Posted 13 March 2013 - 09:48 AM
Viper69, on 13 March 2013 - 09:43 AM, said:
haha yeah right, I am a brain trust not a financial backer.
Hey its Beta we are aloud to offer input right? Or is it?
You are free to offer your input, but sometime I think PGI only listen to whatever they want to listen on the forum.
#9
Posted 13 March 2013 - 09:50 AM
Gaan Cathal, on 13 March 2013 - 09:46 AM, said:
The reason armour needed double had nothing to do with weapon stat variation, and everything to do with being able to aim.
Yes but our weapons aren't firing every ten seconds. They are doing TT values every time they fire which their cyclic rate in the game is faster than once every ten seconds.
Your armor comment is correct because we are all equipped with advanced targeting computers (not the readout but the TT targeting computers that let you choose a location to hit). So fine keep the armor doubled, but the weapons can be reduced in damage and heat per the formula.
It is just a suggestion is all.
#10
Posted 13 March 2013 - 09:51 AM
Kdogg788, on 13 March 2013 - 09:37 AM, said:
BAP to enable streak lockon to ECM mechs. ECM is not supposed to negate streak lock.
Bang! Instant balance and goodbye 3L light class dominance.
-k
Even better solution, remove engine restrictions, watch lights being able to completely avoid streak range instead.
Edited by hammerreborn, 13 March 2013 - 09:51 AM.
#11
Posted 13 March 2013 - 09:51 AM
mike29tw, on 13 March 2013 - 09:48 AM, said:
You are free to offer your input, but sometime I think PGI only listen to whatever they want to listen on the forum.
Yeah because half or more so that is on the forum is bitching and moaning. Very little is constructive and if it is is quickly pounced upon by trolls and or overtaken by bitching threads.
#12
Posted 13 March 2013 - 09:53 AM
#13
Posted 13 March 2013 - 10:01 AM
Shumabot, on 13 March 2013 - 09:47 AM, said:
Most of your changes have literally no effect on the games balance issues. Like, seriously zero. They fundamentally wouldn't impact play even in a theoretical sense.
AMS can already take out a single streak missile at 200m range, buffing that range will make it destroy both the missiles from one launcher.
I'm not sure whether AMS has an effect on SRMs or not, which is why i only said it was possible, but ultimately AMS is intended to counter LRMs, and to be a hard counter at that.
significant buffs would make AMS too strong and render LRMs useless, a range increase would make AMS a lot more useful when stacked up.
#14
Posted 13 March 2013 - 10:05 AM
Gaan Cathal, on 13 March 2013 - 09:46 AM, said:
So the solution to the somewhat broken ECM is to encourage use of the very broken SSRMs?
Er, no. They're at TT-values-over-ten-second-period. TT =/= balance.
The reason armour needed double had nothing to do with weapon stat variation, and everything to do with being able to aim.
Really, nothing? Tripling the damage output in 10 seconds doesn't affect how much armour you need to last an acceptable amount of time?
Without double armour, the first Dual Gauss to the head would be a kill-shot you couldn't do anything about. So that is a reason to double armour, absolutely.
But if you make that Gauss deal 2.5 the damage it deals in 10 seconds, that will also significantly affect how long it takes for a mech to be destroyed.
The TT values over a ten second period are definitely were balanced than the M:WO stats, especially at the beginning. We're getting much closer to it,b ut it started ridiciliously bad.
Think about:
Level 2 Tech with BT:
2 Gauss Rifles: 30 Damage, 30 tons, 2 Heat, needs about 1 double heat sink and 6 tons of ammo. 37 tons.
3 PPCs: 30 Damage, 21 tons, 30 Heat, needs about 15 double heat sinks: 36 tons
So about even.
In MW:O
2 Gauss Rifles: 7 DPS, 30 tons, .45 heat/sec, need about 2 double heat sinks and 10 tons of ammo: 42 tons
2 PPCs (when heat was still 10): 6.66 DPS, 14 tons, 6.66 heat/sec, need about 33 (true, not ROUND(SQRT(2))) double heat sinks for a total of 47 tons.
Less DPS but still more heat. And DPS is just half the story, of course - alpha/burst damage of the Gauss is better, 30 per salvo instead of 20, and over 10 seconds.
I am not sure how they could miss such an integral part of the balancing int he table top. And table top balancing wasn'T even good, and yet they managed to do make it worse, not better.
#15
Posted 13 March 2013 - 10:05 AM
Quote
AMS does 2 damage. At 200m, it does 0 damage. So the effective range is actually less than 200m. An increase in Range, say out to 300m, as noted int he OP, would be beneficial but would have a heavy drawback. At the current range, a steady barrage of AMS against a steady stream of LRM's allows for only 33s of AMS fire per ton.
If the AMS maximum range was increase by 50%, or out to 300m, then the time in seconds allotted per ton of ammo, would decrease drastically. A player would have to carry almost 2+ tons per launcher at 300m (due to current lrm arc characteristics) to get the same results as the current 1 ton. The best idea, is to have more players on your side carry AMS and 1 ton of ammo, stay fairly close together, never a bad idea anyways, and watch as the LRM's die off in droves.
How you manage to accomplish that feat is beyond the scope of this topic.

Edited by MaddMaxx, 13 March 2013 - 10:11 AM.
#16
Posted 13 March 2013 - 10:17 AM
MeatyMutawings, on 13 March 2013 - 10:01 AM, said:
AMS can already take out a single streak missile at 200m range, buffing that range will make it destroy both the missiles from one launcher.
I'm not sure whether AMS has an effect on SRMs or not, which is why i only said it was possible, but ultimately AMS is intended to counter LRMs, and to be a hard counter at that.
significant buffs would make AMS too strong and render LRMs useless, a range increase would make AMS a lot more useful when stacked up.
Ams theoretically can, but it doesn't because the travel time is too short. You can have 2 streaks orbit you 4-5 times and neither will be shot down.
AMS has absolutely no effect on SRMs. It doesn't activate before they travel almost their full distance and won't do nearly enough damage to shoot any down.
#17
Posted 13 March 2013 - 10:47 AM
Quote
Except that when Streak SRM 6's arrive, and they will arrive, they will be the only SRM 6's used. Not only can they do the SRM 6's job against heavier mechs, they can also destroy light mechs because they have 100% chance to hit and will be exactly 3 times as much of a pain as SSRM2's are right now.
Edited by Byk, 13 March 2013 - 10:48 AM.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users