119 replies to this topic

[RG Notch]

Vrbas, on 25 June 2013 - 11:10 AM, said:

The point I was trying to make was that of a "lesser of two evils"... since balance really isn't in PGI's playbook lately. After a major change, one weapon or group of weapons emerges on top and becomes the new meta, OP, pew pew. The hint of realism in my posts stems from my hopeless dreaming that there will be a balance of weapons in the near future. However, since I dream in colors, I have to bring myself down to reality sometimes.

**EDIT** That reality being there won't be a balance, so you better choose a side now.

So for the final time, I was right from the beginning and you just keep trying to spin your way out of it. You've chosen your side so just be proud of it and stop trying to appear like you care about balance. Not one thing you have posted after the first one I responded to says anything different. So I was right from the start and all you've done is try to back pedal poorly.

[JayVrb]

RG Notch, on 25 June 2013 - 11:46 AM, said:

So for the final time, I was right from the beginning and you just keep trying to spin your way out of it. You've chosen your side so just be proud of it and stop trying to appear like you care about balance. Not one thing you have posted after the first one I responded to says anything different. So I was right from the start and all you've done is try to back pedal poorly.

Lol, the banter back and forth between you and I isn't going anywhere, nor is it contributing constructively to the point of this thread. Especially since all you appear to care about is being right and trying to fish that out of me.

For the record, I would love to see balance. I believe re-introducing SRM's damage would help move the game in that direction. I'm not really sure what you're trying to weed out of me other than "Yeah, I would much rather live in an SRM heavy world than a PPC heavy world if it boiled down to it" (which it very well may based on their previous balancing tactics)... but that doesn't represent my desire for this game

[Kaldor]

Roland, on 25 June 2013 - 11:23 AM, said:

I think you remember incorrectly.

As soon as it was conclusively proven that SRM's were in fact doing upwards of 7 times their listed damage per missile, depending on the target, it was pretty obvious that they were going to be nerfed.

I'm curious as to how many people actually realize that SRM's were totally broken before. They're never going to be that strong again, because they were way stronger than they were ever meant to be, due to bugs with splash damage.

You had splatcats who were firing a volley of 36 missiles, all of which were doing between 5 and 15 damage to the target... you were doing, in some cases, multiple HUNDREDS of points of damage, in a single volley.

Didn't you ever shoot at a target with a splatcat, and just have the mech totally vaporize? Didn't that seem strange to you?

I accepted the fact the nerf was coming man, but I never complained about the metagame, and neither did my unit. I ran the hell out of my StreakCat and SplatCat their day, lol. They could have just left the damage as is and reduced the splash and went from there. No, they balanced with a chainsaw instead of a scalpel.

Stoicblitzer, on 25 June 2013 - 11:27 AM, said:

they forgot srm damage while they were developing project phoenix. now that the money grabbing is done, they can refocus on the gameplay...maybe..

LOL
But I hate to say it, $80 is actually a pretty decent deal.
(pleasekillmenowisworeidnevergivethemanymoremoney)

[BlackBeltJones]

Why fight each other? This is the problem:
https://twitter.com/...853501478621184

Edited by BlackBeltJones, 25 June 2013 - 12:32 PM.

[Kunae]

BlackBeltJones, on 25 June 2013 - 12:32 PM, said:

Why fight each other? This is the problem:
https://twitter.com/...853501478621184

In a nutshell, yep.

[Diablobo]

Yes, I agree with the OP. Ever since the nerf due to splash damage, they have left SRMs behind. I remember we caused a stink about the LRMs getting fixed, but apparently the SRMs got no love.

We supposedly fixed splash damage remember? The missile nerf was a temporary fix to account for splash. Now that splash is fixed, it's time to buff SRMs again to undo the splash nerf.

Edit:
As a side note, I haven't used anything but streaks since the SRM nerf.

Edited by Diablobo, 25 June 2013 - 12:37 PM.

[Aggressor666]

I honestly think the lack of SRM dmg is the main reason I hate the Quickdraw so much ...I've got 2x srm6 and an srm4 with 3 tonnes ammo on mine and I rarely break 300 dmg and thats WITH 4 med lasers

[Xie Belvoule]

BlackBeltJones, on 25 June 2013 - 12:32 PM, said:

Why fight each other? This is the problem:
https://twitter.com/...853501478621184

Yeah, I can see the problem clearly now.

[RG Notch]

Vrbas, on 25 June 2013 - 11:59 AM, said:

Lol, the banter back and forth between you and I isn't going anywhere, nor is it contributing constructively to the point of this thread. Especially since all you appear to care about is being right and trying to fish that out of me.

For the record, I would love to see balance. I believe re-introducing SRM's damage would help move the game in that direction. I'm not really sure what you're trying to weed out of me other than "Yeah, I would much rather live in an SRM heavy world than a PPC heavy world if it boiled down to it" (which it very well may based on their previous balancing tactics)... but that doesn't represent my desire for this game

Except you said just that.... I lied and said it was the final time, but then you lied about what you want so it's all good. Saying it would be freeing, the truth will set you free. I know it won't look as cool on the forums if you say what you really mean without hiding behind "balance" concerns. Anyways, you already said it. And I'm not only interested in being right, I have been right since the first post, I'm interested in getting people to embrace their bias rather than hide for forum correctness.
Being honest on where your bias lays is far better than pretending that you want balance. Much like the people who want public Elo I just want public bias displayed so people know where the "balance" talk is coming from. I guess it's more important to appear objective rather than be truthful.

[JayVrb]

RG Notch, on 25 June 2013 - 12:49 PM, said:

Except you said just that.... I lied and said it was the final time, but then you lied about what you want so it's all good. Saying it would be freeing, the truth will set you free. I know it won't look as cool on the forums if you say what you really mean without hiding behind "balance" concerns. Anyways, you already said it. And I'm not only interested in being right, I have been right since the first post, I'm interested in getting people to embrace their bias rather than hide for forum correctness.
Being honest on where your bias lays is far better than pretending that you want balance. Much like the people who want public Elo I just want public bias displayed so people know where the "balance" talk is coming from. I guess it's more important to appear objective rather than be truthful.

Tell me what you think I want. And I'll tell you why you're wrong. Or who knows, maybe why you're right. I don't see any other way to tango.... and I love to dance

[jakucha]

No, people are just impatient.

[Mr 144]

OK Madmaxx...a little edumacation for yer mistaken claims...

The SRM nerf did not happen because of the A1 SplatCat. The nerf in fact had nothing to do with SRMs at all. The nerf occured for 2 reasons. The 'new' flight paths released in the patch greatly increased CT tracking for Streaks and LRMs. This is point 1 that has no bearing on SRMs at all...got that?

Second, it was discovered via training ground testing that splash damage could magnify damage exponentially due to the CT tracking path. If CT tracking was not such an issue, the splash damage would not have been magnified to as great an extent. Here's the things most choose to forget...

1: This was before it was unvirsely discovered and agreed upon (incuding by the devs later) that testing grounds had extreme issues with incorrect damage magnification. This is not to say splash damage was not an issue of sorts, but the specific damage numbers used for 'balancing' had little to do with actual in game numbers. Smart people knew this at the time, as damage tracking of SRMs did NOT show large missile damage numbers in actual games.

2: The splash damage issue only affected a small number of chassis. Anything you can put PCgamer skin on was not largely affected. The splash damage issue was a direct result of a change to the type of modeling used on newer mechs. This was (and still is) an issue with bones once they switched to more complex modeling. Being chassis specific was also confirmed by the devs, but people choose to ignore this fact and blame atlas's being cored on splash, not bad piloting.

Are ya still with me? Notice how Streaks and LRMs were given gimped base damage to acount for CT tracking primarily...and situational splash damage? SRMs never benifited directly from tracking issues....and splash was incorrectly calculated based on flawed testing grounds (the same off-line mode used by the devs when they reported the raw numbers)...and finally because large splash damage was very chassis specific....

Now, assuming you're ignoring all of these facts...the A1 you're so frightened of...
Has since recieved a torso twist nerf....this was a huge factor in bads QQing...
Was countered EASILY by an HBK-4SP...yes, a medium mech that could go faster, has equal to better range of motion...and when properly piloted can take an ear in one split alpha (4xML 1st, immediately followed by the SRMs to crit the launchers out).

Fear of 2.5 damage SRMs are completely unfounded when based off facts.
Fear of the SplatCat is a genuine L2P (better) issue.

Any time you wanna talk facts, let me know...because all I'm seeing is irrational fear of a specific chassis variant based off incorect information and ancedotal fear-mongering.

[Xie Belvoule]

Mr 144, on 25 June 2013 - 12:58 PM, said:

OK Madmaxx...a little edumacation for yer mistaken claims...

The SRM nerf did not happen because of the A1 SplatCat. The nerf in fact had nothing to do with SRMs at all. The nerf occured for 2 reasons. The 'new' flight paths released in the patch greatly increased CT tracking for Streaks and LRMs. This is point 1 that has no bearing on SRMs at all...got that?

Second, it was discovered via training ground testing that splash damage could magnify damage exponentially due to the CT tracking path. If CT tracking was not such an issue, the splash damage would not have been magnified to as great an extent. Here's the things most choose to forget...

1: This was before it was unvirsely discovered and agreed upon (incuding by the devs later) that testing grounds had extreme issues with incorrect damage magnification. This is not to say splash damage was not an issue of sorts, but the specific damage numbers used for 'balancing' had little to do with actual in game numbers. Smart people knew this at the time, as damage tracking of SRMs did NOT show large missile damage numbers in actual games.

2: The splash damage issue only affected a small number of chassis. Anything you can put PCgamer skin on was not largely affected. The splash damage issue was a direct result of a change to the type of modeling used on newer mechs. This was (and still is) an issue with bones once they switched to more complex modeling. Being chassis specific was also confirmed by the devs, but people choose to ignore this fact and blame atlas's being cored on splash, not bad piloting.

Are ya still with me? Notice how Streaks and LRMs were given gimped base damage to acount for CT tracking primarily...and situational splash damage? SRMs never benifited directly from tracking issues....and splash was incorrectly calculated based on flawed testing grounds (the same off-line mode used by the devs when they reported the raw numbers)...and finally because large splash damage was very chassis specific....

Now, assuming you're ignoring all of these facts...the A1 you're so frightened of...
Has since recieved a torso twist nerf....this was a huge factor in bads QQing...
Was countered EASILY by an HBK-4SP...yes, a medium mech that could go faster, has equal to better range of motion...and when properly piloted can take an ear in one split alpha (4xML 1st, immediately followed by the SRMs to crit the launchers out).

Fear of 2.5 damage SRMs are completely unfounded when based off facts.
Fear of the SplatCat is a genuine L2P (better) issue.

Any time you wanna talk facts, let me know...because all I'm seeing is irrational fear of a specific chassis variant based off incorect information and ancedotal fear-mongering.

This man knows what he is ******* talking about.

[jakucha]

BlackBeltJones, on 25 June 2013 - 12:32 PM, said:

Why fight each other? This is the problem:
https://twitter.com/...853501478621184

So you're saying the game was in the best state to date closer to, for example, closed beta? Because it surely was not. Most weapons register decently now; the game technically is in the best state to date.

[Deathlike]

There is no "SRM problem".

I've never seen PGI use SRMs, thus, invalidating any proper contextual usage and also "working as intended™" as usual.

Edited by Deathlike, 25 June 2013 - 02:05 PM.

[Dartangan]

Bumping this because those SRM's really need a damage buff back to where they were. 1.5 simply doesn't make them worth bringing, but it does make me smile when I see them on my enemies.

[Mr 144]

Deathlike, on 25 June 2013 - 02:04 PM, said:

There is no "SRM problem".

I've never seen PGI use SRMs, thus, invalidating any proper contextual usage and also "working as intended™" as usual.

which honestly confuses the heck outa me. Seeing the builds they usually run in, now would be the perfect time I'd expect them to be used by devs

[Deathlike]

Mr 144, on 25 June 2013 - 02:07 PM, said:

which honestly confuses the heck outa me. Seeing the builds they usually run in, now would be the perfect time I'd expect them to be used by devs

You know what, I could be wrong... I remember seeing Garth in a Cent and despite it being a win, he was atrocious. It might've been a Cent-A or Cent-AL.

I remember seeing Devs in vids using Meds (I forget if it was pulse or not) and UAC5s... It was simply dreadful.

[General Taskeen]

Well Devs can play their own game and have fun too, whether they are good or not. Game still needs a lot of balance work though, it justs takes forever with their smaller team.

[xenoglyph]

Sephlock, on 25 June 2013 - 04:59 AM, said:

How'd that work out ?

After we spammed the crap out of the forums a dedicated forum post was created by a mod and a few dozen threads were merged. The post racked up the page views until PGI finally decided that they should spend the 5 minutes addressing beginning to address the problem.

That's about as good as it gets around here, lol

Edited by xenoglyph, 25 June 2013 - 08:07 PM.