507 replies to this topic

[merz]

Pyrrho, on 22 May 2013 - 12:58 PM, said:

Those chalkboards are misleading. You keep drawing arcs as the flight path, but my observations of missiles in game is that their trajectory looks more like the top of a trapezoid. They go up sharply, they level off, they dive sharply.

pyrrho, what is shown in the images and intended is not what we have in the game right now, hence why PGI has mentioned a hotfix coming in the next couple of days..

[Adrian Steel]

deforce, on 21 May 2013 - 03:27 PM, said:

quote "One other thing (and this was sorta mentioned in Ask the Devs 38), is that we missed the patch window by a day and were not able to get a splash damage reduction into the build for this patch. The splash damage is pushing a lot of damage to CT at the moment."

So this one sentence is the most disturbing of all. You knew the splash damage was too high, but because you missed a deadline that pushed the changes out anyway?!?!?!

Splash damage for LRMs (and possibly streaks) has been broken for several patches now. They've known this for a good two months at the least.

[Adrian Steel]

Gerwig, on 21 May 2013 - 04:16 PM, said:

This is beta right? (agreed the missiles are ridiculous) but aren't we supposed to be the test subjects?

Yes. We all want the game to get good, so don't forget to buy more MC while you're testing it for PGI.

[ATF MART]

Should rename to LRM ONLINE, fits better. or CATAPULT ONLINE, catapults everywhere!

[arghmace]

After another evening of battles, I still do not see how LRM's are now too good. I'd say the balance is now pretty close to perfect. I agree that the arc could use some fixing, but just a little, not too much. There's no point in LRM's if they cannot be fired over obstacles, after all. The splash mechanic in general should be removed. But if these things are done, then the LRM's need more damage and better quidance to even it out instead of nerfing them to oblivion again.

[pseudocoder]

keith, on 21 May 2013 - 03:49 PM, said:

sigh. pgi losing all faith u know how to test stuff. if u were 1 day from fixing splash, WAIT A DAY instead of waiting 2 weeks.

ove bababoke, on 21 May 2013 - 03:52 PM, said:

You kidding me, right? If you have no time for make it right, why did you bring us just a half of this? This 2 weeks we have to play LRMwarrior online... again. Really hope for hotfix.

shabowie, on 21 May 2013 - 03:54 PM, said:

So it sounds like this was pushed out knowing full well it was broken.

Shumabot, on 21 May 2013 - 04:01 PM, said:

Continued confirmation of no gameplay testing of these patches. [...]

Homeless Bill, on 21 May 2013 - 04:01 PM, said:

I get it - making and balancing games is hard. But this really is a joke.

It's a beta. That means you can expect balance design decisions are made in design meetings, implemented, tested for TECHNICAL soundness (i.e., are they working as designed?), and released. If you don't like being a guinea pig then wait for final release of the game. I'm sure PGI will go to a much, much slower, more deliberate patch schedule at that time.

As far as delaying the patch since fix A's balance is dependent on fix B and fix B isn't ready yet, that would cause way more problems than it solves. Let's just push patch day to Wednesday when we feel like it, how does that sound? How about Friday? Might as well, go to next week now, right? Nope. You can't delay the entire team and screw up everyone's scheduling because a feature didn't make it.

We get "what's done", in a patch, released on a regular basis, as soon as humanly possible after it's done. Sure, sometimes changes aren't perfect, but the community demands features and fixes to game mechanics, and they want them ALL yesterday. So you're going to get a little instability.

Shumabot, on 21 May 2013 - 04:23 PM, said:

It stopped being a beta when they started advertising weekly sales on facebook without advertising it as a beta. That word has no meaning.

It's still a beta. It has a meaning, it means the game is not done and they INTEND to break it to test limits before the game is released.

deforce, on 21 May 2013 - 03:47 PM, said:

have you ever played a game where they "released" it and it was this broken. then for the next 8 months to a year release a patch to fix something and in that patch they break 2 new things. So every patch is literally just fixing what they broke in the previous patch.

It's a beta. Also, what's your point?

Edit: TLDR; It's a beta.

Edited by pseudocoder, 22 May 2013 - 01:26 PM.

[Karenai]

Ensaine, on 22 May 2013 - 10:43 AM, said:

This video from one of my latest matches .......

And this is my ingame reaction to all those LRM.

[pseudocoder]

Vila deVere, on 22 May 2013 - 12:29 PM, said:

Only to a certain extent. We're spending real money know. There ought to be a level of QA performed before it gets to us, the paying customers. I'm FINE with an incomplete game in open beta. A broken one? Not so much.

Who said the game will never be broken?

[Seelenlos]

Twisted Power, on 22 May 2013 - 10:34 AM, said:

As it should be.

Aha,

It is then called counter-Strike in Mechs, has then not much to do with BT or MW.

If that stays this way, i will also change game, cause for me is must be canon oriented.

That's what makes it interesting for me, the dog-fighting and not the missile-sniping.

If that's not for founders then hell, i can still change game, I am not a founder

[arghmace]

The game is now less broken than ever before. Seems that LRM's have balanced sniping and pop tarting quite good and scouts once again have something to do, since spotting for missiles is a worthy job as is hunting missile boats. Main issue I have with this patch is that SRM's got nerfed bad, they are now truly useless. Oh and seismic sensor is too good. LRM's could use some fixing but generally their usefulness is now where it should be.

[I Chaya]

Everyone at PGI should walk away. YOU suck. Not only do you bork a patch but you go ahead and issue the patch anyway. Anyone with any degree of ethics would not have done this. You owe me premium time.

[pseudocoder]

LaserAngel, on 22 May 2013 - 11:24 AM, said:

They should have delayed the patch if they missed getting the final implementation in just a day late to include it in the patch build.

If anything they might have pulled some or all of the LRM changes if they felt it was going to be a problem. Delaying regularly scheduled patches is a bad idea.

[arghmace]

I Chaya, on 22 May 2013 - 01:35 PM, said:

Everyone at PGI should walk away. YOU suck. Not only do you bork a patch but you go ahead and issue the patch anyway. Anyone with any degree of ethics would not have done this. You owe me premium time.

No. It's obviously you that sucks if you cannot battle against current LRM's. As a reference our 4 man group played today with 4 lights equipped with lasers and streaks. We won 100% of our battles. Then we started using LRM mechs. I believe we won about 60%. Looks to me that light mechs are more OP than LRM's. I don't even use AMS in my mechs and still do not die to LRM's any more than I die against PPC's or any other weapons. At least I can evade the missiles which is something that cannot be said for regular weapons. If I see a PPC coming, it's already too late. I die. But when I see missiles coming, I can evade them. Or shoot them down with AMS. There's no such thing as Anti PPC system, you know...

[Hobietime]

Eh... It isn't so bad.

The only real issue is the spotter bug. Besides that I feel LRMs are about right. The only time the spotter bug was really apparent was when a four man had a ECM Raven targeting me inside one of the canyons and his 3 friends made it rain from 3 canyons over.

Edited by Hobietime, 22 May 2013 - 01:45 PM.

[I Chaya]

arghmace, on 22 May 2013 - 01:41 PM, said:

No. It's obviously you that sucks if you cannot battle against current LRM's. As a reference our 4 man group played today with 4 lights equipped with lasers and streaks. We won 100% of our battles. Then we started using LRM mechs. I believe we won about 60%. Looks to me that light mechs are more OP than LRM's. I don't even use AMS in my mechs and still do not die to LRM's any more than I die against PPC's or any other weapons. At least I can evade the missiles which is something that cannot be said for regular weapons.

Okay, great you have lights that can run around and find cover to evade. Can you make case for the Atlas facing a full LRM lance? Try it. Doubt it. Just because you can do it in a light doesn't mean you can do it (or withstand it) in an assault .


My point is not that I can/cannot win against LRMs. My point is that the update was instituted with the complete foreknowledge there was a error introduced. Any quality QM would have pulled the plug on said "patch" (I use the term extremely loosely). PGI does updates just so they can say they do updates on a regular basis; NOT that they do quality updates.

Again, PGI owes me premium time.

[Nebelfeuer]

Dude42, on 22 May 2013 - 12:05 PM, said:

You just invalidated your entire statement.

Come on Dude take your time and think it through. I´m sure you will come up with better argumentation eventually.

[I Chaya]

pseudocoder, on 22 May 2013 - 01:38 PM, said:

If anything they might have pulled some or all of the LRM changes if they felt it was going to be a problem. Delaying regularly scheduled patches is a bad idea.

Not true. If you delay a regularly scheduled patch by a day or two every so often and end up with a quality patch, you get a rep for knowing quality and caring for your customer base. Issuing a patch because "we always patch on Tuesdays" and then implementing a "Hotfix" later on shows a lack of quality control or care.

No, delaying regularly scheduled patches is NOT a bad idea. Issuing BAD patches on a regular basis IS a bad idea; especially when you know full well it is borked to begin with.

[Homeless Bill]

pseudocoder, on 22 May 2013 - 01:25 PM, said:

TLDR; It's a beta.

I'll be the first person to say that this game doesn't even meet most publishers' definitions of "Beta." To me, we're looking at late pre-Alpha to Alpha right now. IGP wanted money, they made PGI go open Beta, and here we are. They don't owe me anything, I don't feel entitled, and I'm not expecting a finished product.

What I do expect is that they learn from their past mistakes. But they keep making the same mistake over and over and over: do nothing for months, dump a pile of balance changes all into one patch, and see what happens. This is the third time they've ****** LRMs up in a big way now.

PGI gets a lot more **** than they should. They're a small developer, I'm amazed with what they've accomplished so far, and I support most of the things they do (even most of the unpopular ones). But this is different. I realize they don't think their balancing strategy is stupid, but I do, this is a feedback thread, and here's my opinion: PGI's balancing strategy is terrible; they'd be better off with gradual, weekly or bi-weekly changes.

Edited by Homeless Bill, 22 May 2013 - 02:03 PM.

[Adrian Steel]

aniviron, on 21 May 2013 - 06:20 PM, said:

Needs more than just a trajectory change.

Don't worry guys, it's beta. We're supposed to test it for them!

[mawno]

Game is broken right now because of LRMs. AMS is useless, cover is useless.
Guess ill take a break untill the next patch is released.

Game is broken right now because of LRMs. AMS is useless, cover is useless.
Guess ill take a break untill the next patch is released.