25 replies to this topic

[ObsidianSpectre]

So here we are again. LRMs are a bit too much, and PGI has said as much. This is right after LRMs were useless jokes. Which came after LRMs were horribly overpowered. Which came after LRMs were useless jokes...this actually goes back a ways. LRMs aren't the only thing that have gone through this cycle, either.

What really hurts is that PGI doesn't seem to be learning the lessons here. In response to whichever the current problem is, they dump a bunch of changes into the game all at once to fix it, and wind up completely overcompensating for it.

PGI has mentioned that they plan to adjust both the flight paths and the splash damage to fix this latest balance debacle. They're going to deploy both at once, probably soon, to fix things. To me, this indicates that they still haven't learned.

For the love of god PGI, pick one, put that in, and see how it goes. Save the other one until you're certain that it's actually needed after the first. Let's not go back to horribly underpowered LRMs, let's start trying to target 'just right'.

It's good that you guys are trying to fix balance issues, but I and I believe most of the community would greatly prefer smaller more frequent tweaks to the current pattern of infrequent gigantic changes - I'm sorry to say, but history is that those gigantic changes never quite work out.

So please, PGI, just make one of your planned changes (my recommendation is for splash damage), and then see how that works out before piling any more changes on.

[One Medic Army]

Their balance changes are combinations of multiple different things.
One change didn't make it in time to be included in the patch.
One change got slightly overdone, descent angle is very finicky.
Two changes are about right.

[GODzillaGSPB]

[zhajin]

really if they had half way decent qa things like this should be easy to identify before release. some bugs can be hard to spot, missiles dropping out of the sky really is not one of them. that being said with out a half way decent qa, the baby steps are probably the way to go.

this also relates to the "beta" development mentality on what is an active (i dare say released) game. they are half in half out and losing more people every patch because of it.

[Soy]

I heard they have some guys on the other side of the planet doing QA and dont have/cant afford a real team and that the game is really developed in chunks which explains the time between patches where we're all like 'wtf' and that some in-house hated this patch but they pushed it anyways this is a decent run on sentence.

Edited by Soy, 22 May 2013 - 11:11 AM.

[General Taskeen]

Soy, on 22 May 2013 - 11:10 AM, said:

I heard they have some guys on the other side of the planet doing QA and dont have/cant afford a real team and that the game is really developed in chunks which explains the time between patches where we're all like 'wtf' and that some in-house hated this patch but they pushed it anyways this is a decent run on sentence.

You have inside sources?

[Soy]

Regarding whether or not that sentence was a run-on? Or, the actual stuff I said. Cuz I dunno what I said I think I was possessed. Yeah, that's the ticket...

[armyof1]

I found a pic posted on twitter of PGI QA staff which I found interesting

[BlackWidow]

[Victor Morson]

I would vastly prefer getting more frequent, smaller tweaks.

LRMs should have gotten 3 patches for speed, damage, and arc over the last three weeks, not one mega-patch of doom.

armyof1, on 22 May 2013 - 11:30 AM, said:

I found a pic posted on twitter of PGI QA staff which I found interesting

Having worked with QA before this is both not entirely unfair and also very unfair. By that I mean a lot of testers are exactly as described but there's usually some really good one involved.

The fact is they pushed this latest patch admitting that things are broken in it. This means that likely QA caught the problem and then it got stamped "DNF" and pushed out the door. I very much doubt this is the first time it's happened.

Do you really think QA missed all the HUD bugs before? No, PGI just couldn't figure out how to fix them so instead of rolling things back until they were fixed, shoved i tout the door anyway.

QA probably has their face firmly in their palm every time a QA hate thread comes up.

Edited by Victor Morson, 22 May 2013 - 11:40 AM.

[zhajin]

one thing to keep in mind is that QA is not just the "testers". I do not want to imply this is the "qa teams" fault. its a process and a mentality that all developers and management have to get behind, or it will fail. the best testers in the world can not, nor should not, fix anything on their own.

Edited by zhajin, 22 May 2013 - 11:44 AM.

[Corvus Antaka]

GODzillaGSPB, on 22 May 2013 - 11:00 AM, said:

Well if that guy doesnt fly, then the OTHER guy flies when the community flies off the handle because the patch was delayed for 24 hours and then it becomes "WHY WAS THE PATCH DELAYED"

[ObsidianSpectre]

One Medic Army, on 22 May 2013 - 11:00 AM, said:

Their balance changes are combinations of multiple different things.

Which is my point. Balancing things by introducing a combination of numerous different changes is extremely difficult to pull it off. PGI hasn't successfully done it yet. Which isn't much of a criticism; few companies can. That's why most companies tend towards smaller, more incremental tweaks.

Whenever they prepare these batch changes to a single part of the game, they need to ask themselves "can this be broken up and released in smaller increments?" because it may turn out that they don't need all the changes, and they're shooting right past their target by dropping so many things at once.

I think the LRMs actually aren't too terribly balanced right now, they've definitely been done much worse, and I'm afraid that they're going to make them worthless joke weapons again.

Edited by ObsidianSpectre, 22 May 2013 - 12:09 PM.

[Vercinaigh]

Ya'know....L2P, no offense to anyone but my group literally walked through a lrm team setup on all hills of upper alpine and -sat- on their base. We played for 4 straight hours last night, never lost a SINGLE mech to lrms, they may be bugged, sure, whatever, but they're not that strong, still can be utterly hard countered. Fast brawlers shut them down all night, and prolly again tonight.

Am I saying they are right, no, are they strong, for unorganized groups yes, against good teams, nope. And that has -always- been LRM's issue, they prey on the dumb and unorganized and fail miserably against the competent teams, nothing has changed. If everyone L2P everyone would cry LRM's are horribad again, ridiculous.

[Soy]

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

Ya'know....L2P, no offense to anyone but my group literally walked through a lrm team setup on all hills of upper alpine and -sat- on their base. We played for 4 straight hours last night, never lost a SINGLE mech to lrms, they may be bugged, sure, whatever, but they're not that strong, still can be utterly hard countered. Fast brawlers shut them down all night, and prolly again tonight.

Am I saying they are right, no, are they strong, for unorganized groups yes, against good teams, nope. And that has -always- been LRM's issue, they prey on the dumb and unorganized and fail miserably against the competent teams, nothing has changed. If everyone L2P everyone would cry LRM's are horribad again, ridiculous.

Fail. Whos your group anyways, never seen you.

[Vercinaigh]

Soy, on 22 May 2013 - 12:06 PM, said:

Fail. Whos your group anyways, never seen you.

Maybe if you got good and played instead of being a forumwarrior, you might've. Play every night, 4 hours a day, as a team, current win rate is about 95%, so please, keep talking. Sorry if this all seems aggressive but kinda tiring to hear the same rabble over and over again. Who are -you- with, for the same matter.

Edited by Vercinaigh, 22 May 2013 - 12:18 PM.

[ObsidianSpectre]

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

Ya'know....L2P, no offense to anyone but my group literally walked through a lrm team setup on all hills of upper alpine and -sat- on their base.

You realize that you're responding in a thread asking PGI not to over-nerf LRMs, right?

Edited by ObsidianSpectre, 22 May 2013 - 12:16 PM.

[Vercinaigh]

ObsidianSpectre, on 22 May 2013 - 12:16 PM, said:

You realize that you're responding in a thread asking PGI not to over-nerf LRMs, right?

With people bitching about lrms at the same time, yes. It's all over the forums, any discussion right now leads to the same result anyways, so what difference does it make what the original topic is about, exactly? Not like any rational discussion ever happens here, just rash blabbering. Come to think of it....not sure why i bothered posting....nothing rational will change...just keep playing and winning, carry on!

[topgun505]

Colonel. If the game is in a state of halfway decent state of balance at the time a major patch is due to release, I don't think you would hear a single complaint from the community if the patch was delayed 24 hours ... As long as a dev explained the reason for a hold up. NOBOBY wants to play a broken game for 2 weeks when the problem could have been averted by just waiting 24 hours.

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 22 May 2013 - 11:44 AM, said:

Well if that guy doesnt fly, then the OTHER guy flies when the community flies off the handle because the patch was delayed for 24 hours and then it becomes "WHY WAS THE PATCH DELAYED"

[ObsidianSpectre]

Vercinaigh, on 22 May 2013 - 12:20 PM, said:

With people bitching about lrms at the same time, yes. It's all over the forums, any discussion right now leads to the same result anyways, so what difference does it make what the original topic is about, exactly? Not like any rational discussion ever happens here, just rash blabbering. Come to think of it....not sure why i bothered posting....nothing rational will change...just keep playing and winning, carry on!

Yes, that is the case. It really wasn't my intention for this to turn into another thread collecting unconstructive insults about PGI's QA. Mistakes were made, and my interest is solely in preventing them from happening again.