306 replies to this topic

[Shakespeare]

Oh look, a player repeatedly swinging his e-peen around because he isn't being crushed using a mediocre weapon! I'm so thrilled to watch clip after clip in a reprise of 'yeah huh' "nuh UH"!


Further proof that threads trying to catch the attention of a dev by putting @ (PGI team member) like an entitled, self-important ninny are just not worth participating in. I shoulda known better.
Unsubscribed.

[ApolloKaras]

LethalRose, on 05 July 2013 - 03:34 PM, said:

I uploaded another video on tourmaline.



It's pretty clear I'm not convincing anyone so I'm leaving this discussion.

You've given me something to try this evening

[Deathlike]

Zyrusticae, on 05 July 2013 - 01:12 PM, said:

Fun fact: Even with a beam duration of 0 (instantaneous), they would still be inferior to PPCs in every conceivable way except damage.

That would the quickest wub wub ever.

[Aim64C]

The fact is that the PPC is -supposed- to be the Energy 'equivalent' of a Gauss rifle. It's supposed to be something of a feat to properly field the weapon on a chassis. It's the crème-of-the-crop when it comes to energy weapons.

It's supposed to be bad-***, but it's also supposed to be a pain in the *** to work into a build. Much like the Gauss Rifle is for ballistics.

It's not supposed to be something you drop into the place of every medium and large laser you field.

Which is really where the balance of lasers and pulse lasers comes in. They are supposed to be your staple weapons - your 'bread and butter.' They are your Ford Focus and Toyota Corolla of the MechWarrior world of weapons. They get the job done. The PPC is something like a McLaren MP4-12C Spider ... they aren't supposed to be in every garage (nor are they supposed to get competitive fuel economy to a Focus or Corolla).

Just like how the Gauss Rifle is supposed to be a very heavy investment on the ballistic side of things - a huge component that weighs as much as its maximum damage output and requires prohibitively heavy ammunition.

The Large Pulse Laser could be given some love - probably an adjustment to heat is in order (it's not an ER, for crying out loud) - but I think the main adjustment needs to take place with the PPC. It's severely unbalanced by comparison to every other weapon in the game. There is almost no reason to turn down a PPC if you have the capacity to bring one along. Most ballistics are out-performed in practice by the PPC. If you have the option to take a PPC or the option to include a ballistic weapon... which one do you take?

In almost every realistic scenario - the PPC is vastly superior. Choosing another build is, frankly, gimping yourself out of principle. You can make other weapon systems work, true - but in most cases you'd have been just as well (and usually better) served by a PPC where you could take one.

[WolvesX]

Deathlike, on 05 July 2013 - 04:50 PM, said:

That would the quickest wub wub ever.

Paul why you hate wub weapons?

[PanzerMagier]

Victor Morson, on 04 July 2013 - 10:57 AM, said:

Not to plug my own thread, but.. Flashback 2012: We Told You So. We Really Did.

3rd issue down in the OP has us way back in 2012 begging PGI not to screw over the LPL. If they had to fix the bug, that's fine, but just make heat comparable to what it was.

Rather than rant the same thing I did last year, I'll just quote myself:






That's what I was saying way back when it happened. Again, everyone in the thread was saying AMEN.

But clearly, their long time league players are a stupid minority that should be ignored because we can't possibly see what's going to happen to the game (for everyone, no matter the ELO) based on our understanding of both this game, and legacy issues.

3PV and the dumbest alpha strike nerfs ever suggested, here we come! Yeeee-haw.

EDIT: Oh man, you mean the second nerf.. I had forgotten it even took another nerf, because it was already horrendous after this 2012 change.

And people wonder why I don't have faith in our direction or "upcoming aggressive changes" or that Paul being "aware of the situation" means he understands the situation.

They literally nerf'ed a weapon that they nerf'ed out of existence a year prior!

Hay genius, so you think since large lasers generate more heat than ppc's it's fine?
Instead of buffing EVERY OTHER WEAPON. we just need to nerf one or 2.

But I guess you'd rather enjoy a one shot warrior online.

[WolvesX]

:: THE reason, I NEED it ::

[MustrumRidcully]

WolvesX, on 06 July 2013 - 09:32 AM, said:

:: THE reason, I NEED it ::

The answer is 42.

Wait, what was the question again?

[Deathlike]

WolvesX, on 06 July 2013 - 04:33 AM, said:

Paul why you hate wub weapons?

I wub wub you Paul. Please fix LPL ASAP.

[WolvesX]

I think the POLL is quite clear here.

[jozkhan]

I just had a game with someone on my team using a Large Pulse Laser

That's the first game in over a week I have seen someone using this weapon

[WolvesX]

jozkhan, on 06 July 2013 - 05:00 PM, said:

I just had a game with someone on my team using a Large Pulse Laser

That's the first game in over a week I have seen someone using this weapon

He qwned the entire enemy team for sure.

[jozkhan]

well he fired it off repeatedly in the spawn point and marched off solo into upper city so clearly a pro

[Kattspya]

jeffsw6, on 05 July 2013 - 10:42 AM, said:

There is zero useful data coming from any armament, period, except for PPC. Why? Because no other weapon can compete with the PPC. PGI Paul can tweak LPL all he likes and it won't matter because until the PPC is not completely dominant, the fact is, anyone equipping and using LPLs is a bad player, most of the player-population won't equip LPLs, and thus, any data from the use of LPLs can't be used to draw conclusions that have any value at all.

I am nitpicking and I hope you are overstating you argument for effect. I agree with your general point but:

Of course this depends of the granularity of the telemetry but you must know that you get more than zero useful data from other weapons. You will always get a relative ranking of weapons. You could also see how useful weapons are differing on range, engagement time and so on. For instance that medium lasers are superior to PPCs below n range and so on. It isn't much but it isn't nothing and it gives pointers on how to proced. But so would using your eyes and ears when playing (in higher elo brackets).

The people claiming that devs want data on the "normalized" LPL are beyond silly. Only new, idiotic and players clowning around would equip them which would tell you fornicate all about their balance. "LPL's are never used currently so lets nerf them further to get better data" is insane. It shows such profound ignorance it could be genius. But the game is what it is so it isn't, sadly. That is why I agree with WolvesX and would really like to know the resoning.

[WolvesX]

Very aggressive post man, but thats the point.

[jeffsw6]

Kattspya, on 07 July 2013 - 05:00 AM, said:

Of course this depends of the granularity of the telemetry but you must know that you get more than zero useful data from other weapons. You will always get a relative ranking of weapons. You could also see how useful weapons are differing on range, engagement time and so on. For instance that medium lasers are superior to PPCs below n range and so on. It isn't much but it isn't nothing and it gives pointers on how to proced. But so would using your eyes and ears when playing (in higher elo brackets).

You really don't get that data when one weapon is so over-powered, that others are not worth using.

Why? Because the majority of "elite" players aren't using non-PPC weapons enough to contribute to the data collection of those other weapons. If the only people you have equipping AC/5s are the cockpit-licking helmet patrol, you aren't going to know if that weapon is relatively strong or weak, compared to Large Laser.

Yet AC/5 recently received an RoF increase. It should be a little better than it was before. Does anyone care? Not really. I have a mech with 2xPPC, 1xLL, 1xUAC5, 1xAC5, all mounted on arms. It's good in a brawl but you can't ever get into a brawl before losing most of your armor, because of PPCs and, to a lesser extent, LRMs that always manage to hit CT. So why should I play that mech and produce data on those armaments?

When only bad players are using non-PPC weapons, the data is all wrong, and conclusions will likely be wrong, for all other armaments.

[jakucha]

Kattspya, on 07 July 2013 - 05:00 AM, said:

The people claiming that devs want data on the "normalized" LPL are beyond silly. Only new, idiotic and players clowning around would equip them which would tell you fornicate all about their balance. "LPL's are never used currently so lets nerf them further to get better data" is insane. It shows such profound ignorance it could be genius. But the game is what it is so it isn't, sadly. That is why I agree with WolvesX and would really like to know the resoning.

I have a pure pugging win loss ratio of 2.13 and K/D ratio of 3.03 with 72 games played in a JM6-A which has had 1 AC/20 and 2 LPL most of the times I've used it, and that's with the current PPC spam meta. It's just for fun build, but they're likely getting stats from decent players as well, not just new people using it.

[Kattspya]

jeffsw6, on 07 July 2013 - 07:39 AM, said:

You really don't get that data when one weapon is so over-powered, that others are not worth using.

Why? Because the majority of "elite" players aren't using non-PPC weapons enough to contribute to the data collection of those other weapons. If the only people you have equipping AC/5s are the cockpit-licking helmet patrol, you aren't going to know if that weapon is relatively strong or weak, compared to Large Laser.

Yet AC/5 recently received an RoF increase. It should be a little better than it was before. Does anyone care? Not really. I have a mech with 2xPPC, 1xLL, 1xUAC5, 1xAC5, all mounted on arms. It's good in a brawl but you can't ever get into a brawl before losing most of your armor, because of PPCs and, to a lesser extent, LRMs that always manage to hit CT. So why should I play that mech and produce data on those armaments?

When only bad players are using non-PPC weapons, the data is all wrong, and conclusions will likely be wrong, for all other armaments.

I think you need to read my post again. I'm agreeing with you on the whole but little and poor data is not the same as no data.

jakucha, on 07 July 2013 - 08:21 AM, said:

I have a pure pugging win loss ratio of 2.13 and K/D ratio of 3.03 with 72 games played in a JM6-A which has had 1 AC/20 and 2 LPL most of the times I've used it, and that's with the current PPC spam meta. It's just for fun build, but they're likely getting stats from decent players as well, not just new people using it.

Does pure pugging mean solo or with one or more friends?

When you get stomped solo are you always one of the two or three players that did about all the damage? Does this happen relatively often?

What is your average XP/CB per match?

[WolvesX]

Kattspya, on 07 July 2013 - 10:19 AM, said:

What is your average XP/CB per match?

Premium / no Premium.

[jakucha]

Kattspya, on 07 July 2013 - 10:19 AM, said:

Does pure pugging mean solo or with one or more friends?

When you get stomped solo are you always one of the two or three players that did about all the damage? Does this happen relatively often?

What is your average XP/CB per match?

By pure pugging I mean I've never played a group game with that mech. I tend to be in the top 3 damage dealers much of the time, but not every time. Even when a domino effect death happens to my team I can pick off an injured mech or two while the whole team is swarming me. An AC/20 and 2 LPLs up close is quite a bit of damage, though also quite a bit of heat.

My overall XP per match is 557.25 right now, around average probably since I don't use cheese builds and don't play in premades. Oh, and no premium.

Edited by jakucha, 08 July 2013 - 02:07 AM.