267 replies to this topic

[Sybreed]

Chavette, on 19 May 2013 - 10:20 AM, said:

They will be nerfing JJ, it seems like side by side to the "alpha cure" they want to come up with.... if you ask me, they should atleast wait to see how one pans out before touching the other... and the second touch should be the one including RNG (the JJs).

Join the discussion here.

so,alpha is all about JJ now? A quad PPC or 5 LL stalker has no jetpacks if I recall and are still a problem in the game.

[Noesis]

@OP

How do you know that the applicability of multiplier effects to heat build up won't only apply to certain weapon types, especially when you were given hints by Paul this might be the intentional process?

Are you really that convinced of your own arguments and thoughts when the concept of boating is known as a valid technique and also that some Mechs are identifiably configured for such that the PGI Dev team wont allow some sensible boating to remain in the game?

How do you know for instance that they might only apply these effects (yet to be revealed as to how they will work) and scale them appropriately to curb more problematic high alpha use like PPC and ERPPCs whilst other weapons remain relatively unaffected by the change (as per hinted commentary from Paul)?

Why aren't you potentially twigging from Paul's original comment and subsequent attempts to try and confirm to you without giving specifics that they are considering the design in some detail?

Interesting that Paul asks the community not to fly off the handle with extreme assumptions about this change and you then consider it is ok to ring an alarm bell without any concrete evidence as to the working mechanics of the change and expect everyone to just accept your "theory".

But interesting that even when Paul then seems to offer some reassurances to your post, you have the ignorance to simply dismiss it.

The idea behind assumptions is that you question them, you don't hold them to be truth. More so you don't simply ignore those that might actually know what the reality is.

Edited by Noesis, 19 May 2013 - 11:16 AM.

[jeffsw6]

Pinselborste, on 19 May 2013 - 05:23 AM, said:

and than the awesome will be unplayable again.

The Awesome is still unplayable, even with PPCs. It is a trash mech because its missile hard-points are under-powered given the current state of SRM/LRM/SSRM; and because its hit-boxes are too wide for its armor and speed. That's not going to change unless they decide to improve its armor or shrink the hit-boxes, or buff missiles, because Stalkers will always have basically superior hard-points to Awesomes and nearly as much maneuverability, with hit-boxes that make it tougher to concentrate your fire on the CT for a quick kill.

Every time you see an enemy Awesome on the battlefield, just remember, you'd be scared if it was a Stalker.

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 19 May 2013 - 07:51 AM, said:

I think there is a lot of over-reaction around here. PGI is well aware that 4 PPC boats and dual AC/20 boats are the problem, not 4 Small laser boats.

Fate 6, on 19 May 2013 - 08:08 AM, said:

The only problem I see here is that I don't think PGI actually does realize what is overpowered and what isn't. Call this a hunch, but if they think ECM is balanced I'm not so sure if they know what else is "balanced".

Orzorn, on 19 May 2013 - 08:36 AM, said:

And yet the proposed system would still be a detriment to 4 small laser boats.

PGI may be aware of the issue, but the proposed system does not go parallel with that awareness. One can be mindful of the issues and still come up with a flawed solution. Keep that in mind.

Remember that PGI has commented that overall damage is too high, alphas are too strong, etc. and now they have outlined a system for penalizing boating several of the same weapon. He didn't say several PPCs, he said same weapon, which indicates it will apply to anything boated. It might be dependent on rate-of-fire, too; which could make it have a dramatic affect on high RoF ballistic weapons like the AC/2 and UAC5. We don't know, because he refused to provide any details.

What he did do is deliberately invite discussion on this issue, and then add attention to it by posting on this thread. I don't think that is by accident -- I think they want the feedback, and we ought to give it to them.

Noesis, on 19 May 2013 - 10:57 AM, said:

How do you know that the applicability of multiplier effects to heat build up won't only apply to certain weapon types, especially when you were given hints by Paul this might be the intentional process?

Are you really that convinced of your own arguments and thoughts when the concept of boating is known as a valid technique and also that some Mechs are identifiably configured for such that the PGI Dev team wont allow some sensible boating to remain in the game?

We have seen them make one huge balance mistake after another. Yes, I don't think they understand how it will really affect game-play. I think that's why he released just enough information on their idea to generate interest (and indeed, predictable outrage.)

They might have a system for retaining "sensible boating," or they may not. We don't know. He certainly did not describe a system that would preserve the 9xML Hunchback, and he could have mentioned this at any time.

[Jabilo]

Well Jeff I am with you on this one but for different reasons.

If you have a system where weapons generate different amounts of heat dependent upon when you fire them (i.e. in proximity to one another), then you essentially throw all internal logic out of the window.

It is a system which is totally artificial. Not to mention the fact that it could be complicated to maintain.

Everyone is up in arms because they feel it should apply to some weapons (PPCs) but not others (medium lasers).

So to keep these people happy you create exceptions.

Suddenly you have a system which is not only arbitrary, but is implemented differently for different weapons.

Every time a weapon needs its base stats tweaking, suddenly you need to also consider how it will be affected by the "boating law" and whether its particular boating status also needs to be tweaked.

Worst of all, it is basically saying "we can not balance weapons in this game".

Instead of looking at heat mechanics, hardpoints, convergence and all of the other ideas that people have raised we get a sticking plaster, rock paper scissors new rule just like the farce that is ECM / BAP.

Edited by Jabilo, 19 May 2013 - 02:10 PM.

[Ralgas]

jeffsw6, on 19 May 2013 - 01:25 PM, said:

They might have a system for retaining "sensible boating," or they may not. We don't know. He certainly did not describe a system that would preserve the 9xML Hunchback, and he could have mentioned this at any time.

And thats just it, it could be made sensible and not "foolish or stupid". After sleeping on it this is how i could see it working (and possibly on all alpha's to prevent the mixed "i'll just take wep a+wep b+wep c and alpha those together)

add 10% to alpha fired small weps ( anything that drops less than 9 dmg)
add 25% to the rest

make the timer on activating the penalty chain fire delay (prevents circumventing the system via weapon group macros)

the smaller mechs only lose out 1-2 heat on 4 lasers or less (assuming they haven't loaded up ppc's). The bigger suckers have to think about it. Even the ac/40's which don't have a lot of space/weight for heatsinks are hit. Encourages using chainfire, allows for high pinpoint dmg but at a large penalty

Edited by Ralgas, 19 May 2013 - 02:23 PM.

[keith]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 19 May 2013 - 07:51 AM, said:

I think there is a lot of over-reaction around here. PGI is well aware that 4 PPC boats and dual AC/20 boats are the problem, not 4 Small laser boats.

Everyone needs to take a chill pill and be patient for now.

how can dual ac20/ 4 ppc be a problem? if it was TT that would be equal to 1 ac20 and 2 ppc, because of pgi doubling armor. pretty sure both of those wep used in TT are pretty balanced.

[Gaan Cathal]

keith, on 19 May 2013 - 02:56 PM, said:

how can dual ac20/ 4 ppc be a problem? if it was TT that would be equal to 1 ac20 and 2 ppc, because of pgi doubling armor. pretty sure both of those wep used in TT are pretty balanced.

Because there was a good reason they doubled armour.

[IceSerpent]

Gaan Cathal, on 19 May 2013 - 03:04 PM, said:

Because there was a good reason they doubled armour.

Actually, there wasn't - it was a huge mistake on their part. If by "good reason" you are referring to mechs getting destroyed too quickly, there are much better ways to achieve that goal without screwing up everything else in the process. I.e. they could properly scale RoF to make weapons fire more often, then halve damage per shot and double ammo per ton values (this is just off top of my head).

[Damocles69]

this thread is new and exciteing...

[Mazzyplz]

no awesome is not unplayable right now, it's pretty good.

i haven't been to keen on commenting on this but i think this new "system" should affect boated weapons 4x and up.

that's 4 ppc, 5 ppc, 6 ppc.
4 LL, 5 LL, 6 LL.
4 LPL
4 Medlas, 5 medlas.

it shouldn't affect 3 or less. that way we can keep the awesome as an ok playable mech while dealing with hexa ppc.

[Lootee]

Mazzyplz, on 19 May 2013 - 03:48 PM, said:

4 Medlas, 5 medlas.

Poor trial Jenners and Catapult C1 and HBK get the shaft again. Not only will they have single HS, they get the boat penalty in their stock config too.

[Stone Profit]

They couldnt possibly use different numbers for different weapons...Oh wait, someone couldnt wait to jump down the devs throat in an insulting manner so he qqs before the info is even out, not to mention misquoting the dev... CLASSY!

Edited by Stone Profit, 19 May 2013 - 04:05 PM.

[Asmudius Heng]

PanchoTortilla, on 19 May 2013 - 04:01 PM, said:

Poor trial Jenners and Catapult C1 and HBK get the shaft again. Not only will they have single HS, they get the boat penalty in their stock config too.

I think the idea is to encourage less group firing so that damage become more spread as the heat increase would be only when the weapons are all fired together.

For PPCs this seems fair enough, for medlas and the like it might seem overkill, but then gain, why should they be exempt if that sort of boating is also overly effective?

I dont know the devs plans I will wait and see, but the issue is the large boost in killing efficiency for boating a weapon with the same mechanics so they strike all the same points - i think people are ragin because medlas and SRMs are actually underpowered now so it seems like a double nerf if it were to happen across the board.

[Kiiyor]

Fate 6, on 19 May 2013 - 08:26 AM, said:

Ok, ok, I have to bring this Paul quote back just to make a point.

1st he defends himself against something that is clearly not even directed towards him. If he had read the thread he would understand that, so he clearly didn't fully read the thread.

Not directed towards him...... well, except for the part where his name is mentioned in the title of the thread, of course.

[moneyBURNER]

Isn't the original solution proposed long ago the best -- changing the heat scale -- to deal with the boating of high-heat large weapons? Keep the mechanics simple. Lower heat capacity, increase heat dissipation, and introduce some penalties for running at high heat and going far past the shutdown threshold. Then tweak individual weapon stats.

The rate of convergence can also be slowed, and a HUD element could be added to indicate the convergence range or readiness for the target range.

Alpha-strikes of boated large weapons should still be effective in a sniper role, but much more limited in sustained open combat. Different playstyles should all be viable to put more emphasis on tactics.

Balance problematic long-range weapons (gauss) logically to fit the intended role: increase the cooldown.

Skilled dual-gauss snipers are supposed to be scary.

Personally, I would've liked to see the damage from autocannons split up between multiple projectiles per shot, like a rapid-fire pulse laser, to help disperse pinpoint damage and give those guns a better feel, while boosting the gauss rifle as the premier pinpoint weapon.

[cyberFluke]

keith, on 19 May 2013 - 02:56 PM, said:

how can dual ac20/ 4 ppc be a problem? if it was TT that would be equal to 1 ac20 and 2 ppc, because of pgi doubling armor. pretty sure both of those wep used in TT are pretty balanced.

Because in TT you can't reliably target the enemy CT every time for quicker kills than the entire game's fundamental design is built for? The solution to the problem is the already existing heat mechanic, but it needs reworking (less capacity, more dissipation). The root problem is the pinpoint damage that the whole compartmentalised design of mechs in BT/MW is designed to handle. Someone pointed out all previous MW games had similar aim to what we have here, the counter to which is the intended main focus of previous MW games was Single Player, NOT multiplayer. The CPU opponents in SP don't mind getting ruthlessly ripped up to make you enjoy yourself, the real guys in MP, however, mind immensely. This is why in the MP version (ie TT) you can't easily target single mech locations.

Edited by cyberFluke, 19 May 2013 - 04:57 PM.

[trollocaustic]

Quote

Skilled dual-gauss snipers are supposed to be scary.

So the simplest least mechanically-complicated, least heat-generating gun in the game takes skill?

[oldradagast]

Punishing people for using a bunch of the same weapon doesn't make much sense to me.

Mechs are, by design, set up with hardpoints to encourage using similar weapons. It just makes sense. Nobody is going to stick an SRM 6, an SRM 4, and an LRM 10 in the missile slots on their DDC. What would that accomplish? You end up with a mishmash of weapons with different performance, cycle times, etc.

It's even silly when one considers that this is a game played with keyboard and mouse, so the number of weapon groups matter. It may be fine in Table Top to create an odd mech with 6 different weapons, but that's not practical in a real-time shooter game. People need to aim to hit the target, take into account the flight pattern, recycle time of the weapons, etc. They aren't just rolling dice to simulate aiming.

Trying to force people to take a whole pile of different weapons really fixes nothing since it'll just penalize nearly every build in the game, yet the PPC sniper will still be able to kill you quickly since both you and he are suffering the penalties from using multiples of the same weapon at the same time. It's just that his weapons have much greater range, better convergence, and his mech can boat more of them.

[AC]

This is another bandaid to fix a problem. Why can't PGI look for root cause to issues. The root cause of PPC boats is the slot system. Any system that lets me swap a small laser for a PPC is a poor system that will lead to imbalance. It was obvious in other MechWarrior titles, so I was completely blown away that PGI stayed with this system.

FIX THE ROOT CAUSE.... and please stop the bandaids. Bandaids create their own issues. (note: ECM to fix streak boats)

Edited by AC, 19 May 2013 - 05:06 PM.

[moneyBURNER]

trollocaustic, on 19 May 2013 - 04:54 PM, said:

So the simplest least mechanically-complicated, least heat-generating gun in the game takes skill?

It takes skill when it's properly balanced for its intended role at longer ranges, as would any properly balanced weapon. If not as much skill in dealing damage and managing heat, then more generally such as positioning and maximizing the support role.