1084 replies to this topic

[BillyM]

So, 4ppc macroStalkers, coming-right-up... Pow-pow, 40dmg....
2ppc1gauss still doing pinpoint instant 35dmg with no drawback.

+1heat on both ppc's and reduce speed back to pre-buff RIGHT NOW, regardless of this change.

*sigh*

That said, do we think SRM damage needs to be buffed to 2.0? DO YOU READ YOUR BETA COMMUNITY FORUMS?! OF FRIGGIN COURSE WE WANT THEM BUFFED?!?! WE WANTED THEM BUFFED MONTHS AGO!

-billyM

Edited by BillyM, 11 July 2013 - 01:45 PM.

[Khobai]

This sets a very bad precedent for the game. I implore PGI to reverse implementation of this. Nobody wants the heat system to be even more strict than it already is. Battletech has a very lax heat system and is balanced by the fact weapons hit random locations. Convergence is what needs to be fixed. Nothing else. Screwing with the heat system will fix nothing, players will just game the system, and the old problems with convergence will seep through.

Quote

The problem is CONVERGENCE.
The problem is CONVERGENCE.
The problem is CONVERGENCE.
The problem is CONVERGENCE.
The problem is CONVERGENCE.
The problem is CONVERGENCE.
The problem is CONVERGENCE.
The problem is CONVERGENCE.

Quote

Don't worry, if that doesn't work, PGI already has the solution. They just need to put PPC and Gauss in the same alpha-group, too. And maybe raise the penalty some more.

If you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

ahahaha its funny because its true.

Edited by Khobai, 11 July 2013 - 01:49 PM.

[MrTarget]

631 votes to bring back the SRM cat. Remember who decided to bring it back when people QQ.

Edited by MrTarget, 11 July 2013 - 01:47 PM.

[MustrumRidcully]

Deathlike, on 11 July 2013 - 12:07 PM, said:

lol @ 2 TAG. Simply OP!

Symmetry must be observed. [/OCD]

[IceSerpent]

Quote

What about SRMs?!?! Buff them to 2.5!!!

Nuh uh. 2.5 SRM damage causes the same effect as the previous LRM-aggedon. While funny to test, the 6-SRM6 Catapult will decimate any Assault class Mech in 3 volleys. The third volley doesn’t even have to be a full volley, 2 volleys following up with a medium laser will probably kill most builds in the game. So what am I going to do about this? Well let me explain an issue…

This doesn't add up. Let's take a Stalker for example - 108 max. armor on CT = 54 internal structure, let's say 93/15 armor distribution between front and back. In order to kill it from the front you need to inflict 54+93=147 pts of damage. The biggest SRM alpha you can get is 36 missile salvo on Cat A1, at 2.5 per missile it does 90 pts of damage spread across at least 3 locations on the target. In order to kill that STK in roughly 2 alphas + 1 ML shot, each of those salvos has to do 70 pts of damage to the CT, that's about 78% of the total damage. This is not how SRMs work on the live servers with the current trajectory. So, in Paul's test either trajectory is different (much more tight) or damage is not calculated right, or there's a lot of extra splash damage coming from somewhere.

[Noober]

Thanks for the communication.

Will be interesting to see if heat scaling works, I think the underlying issue though, may be one of single location alpha damage, irrespective of heat.

+1 for an SRM buff *until* hit detection is sorted.

Two suggestions:

1) Buff SSRMs when bone targeting is modified.

2) Make Large Laser Max alpha 3: I certainly don't consider a 3LLAS Quickdraw, Phract, or Pult to be a "boat"

[C12AZyED]

2.0 is a reasonable value for the SRMs to have, my brother and I who've been playing the game since August last year arrived at this quite some time ago. Streak-SRMs should stay at 1.5 or be nerfed to 1.1 to punish the fact that they are auto lock on, skilless weapons with guaranteed damage.

[Deathlike]

IceSerpent, on 11 July 2013 - 01:50 PM, said:

This doesn't add up. Let's take a Stalker for example - 108 max. armor on CT = 54 internal structure, let's say 93/15 armor distribution between front and back. In order to kill it from the front you need to inflict 54+93=147 pts of damage. The biggest SRM alpha you can get is 36 missile salvo on Cat A1, at 2.5 per missile it does 90 pts of damage spread across at least 3 locations on the target. In order to kill that STK in roughly 2 alphas + 1 ML shot, each of those salvos has to do 70 pts of damage to the CT, that's about 78% of the total damage. This is not how SRMs work on the live servers with the current trajectory. So, in Paul's test either trajectory is different (much more tight) or damage is not calculated right, or there's a lot of extra splash damage coming from somewhere.

In those days, splash damage was obscene until the major missile nerf that must not be mentioned... that in part was the beginning of the end of balance...

[TOGSolid]

Deathlike, on 11 July 2013 - 01:38 PM, said:

3 PPC + 1 Gauss awaits your presence on patch day.

Yup. PPC + Gauss will be the new meta king just like anyone with half a brain predicted when this heat scale issue was talked about the first time.

The problem is, always was, and always will be convergence. It has been the bane of Mechwarrior Multiplayer since the start and unfortunately it looks like no one is learning that lesson.

Edited by TOGSolid, 11 July 2013 - 01:55 PM.

[Tsula]

All I can say is this of the people who vote yes to fix SRM damage to 2.0 . Do not post thousands apon thousands of threads later saying SRM are OP or broken, nerf them and what not. I'd rather see the hit detection fixed then see where SRM rank. So we will switch from high alpha to high SRM again. You've been warned. I voted no

[armyof1]

tsula, on 11 July 2013 - 01:53 PM, said:

All I can say is this of the people who vote yes to fix SRM damage to 2.0 . Do not post thousands apon thousands of threads later saying SRM are OP or broken, nerf them and what not. I'd rather see the hit detection fixed then see where SRM rank. So we will switch from high alpha to high SRM again. You've been warned. I voted no

It would take a few minutes to lower damage in case they finally get hit detection fixed. You make it sound like it would be difficult to change it back when in reality they just change the value on a variable and get that put in the patch and that's all. But since they currently hasn't been able to improve hit detection with SRMs the only reasonable thing to do is increase the damage so at least they can be useful for now.

Edited by armyof1, 11 July 2013 - 02:05 PM.

[Nebelfeuer]

Heatscale looks much better then your first draw though I am puzzeld by 6 ML istead of 4 and if AC20 can build up enough heat to have consequenses- let´s see how it turns out.
Would like to see more specific info on how it is supposed to work in detail though.

Generally I´d prefer a convergens solution - nonetheless an aproach that could work out for most weapons. So: thumbs up.

Edited by Nebelfeuer, 11 July 2013 - 01:58 PM.

[MustrumRidcully]

Prosperity Park, on 11 July 2013 - 12:23 PM, said:

Yeah, the Heat System Penalties will not "stop" splattering or anything like that. I always ran my SplatCat as 4SRM6 + 2SRM4 anyways to save some weight and heat.

In fact, this heat system is not intended to be the sole means by which to curb PPC+Gauss Sniping, either. More changes are inbound. It's folly to get up and say "This System Won't Stop the Meta!" because the heat penalty system, alone, is not intended to stop PPC+Gauss sniping. That's like complaining that "The Airbag failed to save me from a fuel explosion."

So you mean there will in the end be an overnerf as multiple changes change everything?

There is a single, clear problem to me in MW:O.

Boating is awesome for one primary reason - group fire + convergence. You press the trigger, and instantly, a boatload of damage arrives at the precise location you aimed. Even if you're a bad shot and manage to not hit CT like every god-fearing Mechwarrior (without the hybris to believe he can reliably hit the head), you just softened up a locaiton on the enemy signfiicantly and further shots can disarm or cripple the enemy mech very quickly.

The moment you don't have convergence, your weapons will lack this precision.
The moment you don't have group fire, you will have to aim every shot manually, which will make it much more likely you spread your damage.

That is the real problem to address first.

Group Fire, Balance, Convergence. Pick any two.

If it turns out the PPC is not hot enough after that, and still a favorite, then you don't need a generic heat penalty system, you just need every PPC to produce more heat.

If it turns out people still boat heavily, then there are other reasons:
- Different projectile speed. That makes handling lead times more difficult, as you need to predict lead times for different weapons. Standardize projectile speeds so there are more weapon to combine.
- Different recycle times. This makes timing a problem. Standardize recycle times so you can combine more weapons in a weapon rotation.
- Or the weapon is just too good, and using 4 too good weapons is always better than using 3 good weapons and 1 too good weapon.
- Or it's AMS and ECM that forces people to boat Missiles. If you really want bring missiles,bring them big, and specialize. Equipping Tag for a single LRM5 is a waste of time. But if youd on't bring TAG, you wasted 2 tons on an LRM5 that won't work anyway because of ECM. Or because of AMS,which just intercepts all it. Bring masses of missiles, or don't bother. THis can be fixed, too.

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 11 July 2013 - 02:01 PM.

[Tsula]

TOGSolid, on 11 July 2013 - 01:53 PM, said:

Yup. PPC + Gauss will be the new meta king just like anyone with half a brain predicted when this heat scale issue was talked about the first time.

The problem is, always was, and always will be convergence. It has been the bane of Mechwarrior Multiplayer since the start and unfortunately it looks like no one is learning that lesson.

25 points is manageable the 45 with 3 ppc gauss

[Rashhaverak]

I'm not sure that I understand the anguish being displayed over the idea that people can build a sniper mech with one gauss and two PPCs. Is it unreasonable to be able to build and run a sniper of any kind? My personal experience is that the four+ direct fire weapon builds are the ones that are unreasonable. I don't think that running a 2PPC/gauss combo is broken. In fact, I think that the proposed changes may be good in that they allow a seemingly better chance to have balanced long range mechs, and short range mech loadouts with heat management being a material part of the game instead of an afterthought.

Nothing wrong with allowing a 35 point alpha strike.

[Elyam]

Looking forward to testing the changes. I'm glad they are trying this method, though ultimately MWO would be better served using one of the good proposals for action-based aiming reticle deviation or slippery response plus normal Battletech heat rules application.

[MustrumRidcully]

Mister Blastman, on 11 July 2013 - 12:53 PM, said:

PGI... HAVE YOU NOT HEARD OF THE TERM... UNPAID OVERTIME?!?!?!!?!?!?!

(You are Salaried, right?)

http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__2547485



Paul said that. This needs to be in the 16th... not the 30th. GET TO WORK.

Really, you want then to do unpaid overtime?
Do you think they will get better at this job with sleep deprivation and mental exhaustion?

Or are you just trying to punish them?

On a more serious note:
As a dev I say that there is just a point where extra time put in isn't worth it. Your mind needs a pause from real life and work, or you just stare at code without really getting what it's doing anymore. You make mistakes and errors. Stuff like that is what LRM apocalypses are made of.

[Stoicblitzer]

Rashhaverak, on 11 July 2013 - 01:57 PM, said:

I'm not sure that I understand the anguish being displayed over the idea that people can build a sniper mech with one gauss and two PPCs. Is it unreasonable to be able to build and run a sniper of any kind? My personal experience is that the four+ direct fire weapon builds are the ones that are unreasonable. I don't think that running a 2PPC/gauss combo is broken. In fact, I think that the proposed changes may be good in that they allow a seemingly better chance to have balanced long range mechs, and short range mech loadouts with heat management being a material part of the game instead of an afterthought.

Nothing wrong with allowing a 35 point alpha strike.

hmm good points. i think once SRMs are buffed in august, we may see the return of medium brawlers. too bad it will take them a month to change a variable.

[Bishop Steiner]

2 SRM6 hitting at close range should hurt like an AC20. Period.

Even at danger close, SRMs spread. So damage will almost NEVER be to one location. They are laughable beyond 200 meters because the spread is so extreme, even with Artemis (150 meters or less is the true "sweet spot" ). So unlike ballistics, you are not still able to get effective damage out to it's "optimal" range, let alone extended ranges. And AC20 still lets me nail people at 800 meters, and hit HARD at 500.

They also have high ammo consumption, and prety high heat. Especially with the Boat Penalties going into play.

All this more than counteracts their high POTENTIAL damage to tonnage. They certainly are no worse than packing in 3 Medium Lasers for that tonnage. (Which require no ammo, are hit scan, don't spread and can reach out to 540 meters)

2.0 Dmg for SRMs is fine, 1.5 for SSRMs (people think they want higher... until the Clans come, packing 4 SSRM6 on a MadCat B. Might as well acknowledge THAT from the word GO)

[Jern]

I appreciate that your putting it to a community vote, but I am sorry this looks simply like a ridiculous stall tactic. You guys could not possibly think that the community is happy that SRMs are nearly useless and that they have far greater spread, less range, and do barely any more damage than a LRM? I have no doubt that you can see how few experienced pilots use SRM systems we still use SSRMs because we want to stick something in the missile slots, though many have even started going LRM5 over even SSRMs. You guys made a weapon system nearly useless and left it that way for months now. Please stop stalling, admit you over nerfed it and bump the damage up to 2.0 (not sure ANYONE asked for it to go back to 2.5 so why that was in the patch notes is just another ploy? and reduce the spread while your at it).

This change is fairly simple all you need to do is change one number ... I really do not accept or understand why we need to wait another patch cycle for it.

Thanks,

Edited by Jern, 11 July 2013 - 02:05 PM.