1084 replies to this topic

[Nulnoil]

Lol, pgi worries about cat-a1 with 36srm in alpha? Ok enjoy new cat-a1 with 30srm in alpha+artemis: CPLT-A1. Heat penalty is not right solution.

Edited by Daumantas Galland, 11 July 2013 - 05:13 PM.

[hammerreborn]

FupDup, on 11 July 2013 - 05:04 PM, said:

I never noticed, then. Do keep in mind though that you're knighting for people that don't care about your preferred play style/weight class (lights). In fact, they're probably going to keep their current pattern of doing nothing or making it worse.


Just something to ponder.


The alpha cap is just a poorly conceived band aid. It doesn't fix the underlying issues and is also easily avoided to boot (macros, 2 ERPPC + 1 Gauss, 2 Gauss + 1 ERPPC, etc.).

2 ERPPC Guass is still 10 points less than current. And 2 guass are walking bombs. Hell, any mech with guass is a bomb waiting to happen.

It's not a final solution, and I don't think they even think it is, but its a start.

Edited by hammerreborn, 11 July 2013 - 05:15 PM.

[Nebelfeuer]

If we get the SRM buff you might want to consider changing the heatpenaltyfree number of srm6 launchers to 2 to be roughly in line with the other weapons.

Edited by Nebelfeuer, 11 July 2013 - 05:16 PM.

[Statius]

Fitzbattleaxe, on 11 July 2013 - 05:04 PM, said:

Now that we have a test server, why not just try lowering heat caps and increasing dissipation? That way instead of some arbitrary, difficult to understand mechanic, you get the exact same mechanic you already have, just with slightly different numbers. Seems to me it would be trivial to implement and test, so where's the harm?

Just so. This more natural and intuitive. While we are at it, why not add other effects of high heating (easier to target, easier missile tracking, even pilot blackouts (put those blurs to work!)).

[Sharp Spikes]

Fitzbattleaxe, on 11 July 2013 - 05:04 PM, said:

Now that we have a test server, why not just try lowering heat caps and increasing dissipation? That way instead of some arbitrary, difficult to understand mechanic, you get the exact same mechanic you already have, just with slightly different numbers. Seems to me it would be trivial to implement and test, so where's the harm?

Well, maybe some game developer's ego would be harmed?

[shellashock]

Just a thought. Won't changing 4 er ppcs to 2 er ppcs and 2 ppcs lower total damage a bit? I mean, the two weapons have different ranges and the majority of ppc complaints I have heard are about having so much damage hitting them from a long distance away. If people then have to get in closer to have the same damage levels, then A) They are easier to hit and B )They will lose some if not all of that guaranteed extra cool down time because of their closer range. This means they will likely spend more time in overheating mode.

Also, lets not forget that Paul reported that there would be a very aggressive patch soon weapons balancing wise. I would not be surprised if there would be (er)ppc heat increases in that patch. For all we know, that could be on the 16th as well.

Finally, we do not know if PGI is able to cram in testing for putting ppcs and er ppcs in the same group or not before the 16th. We might get a surprise on the 16th where they announce that they tested the code for putting erppcs with ppcs, found it to be safe, and included it in the patch. As usual, I will reserve judgement until this feature is live. Please reply to my initial question if possible.

[Lindonius]

Looks like the thought police removed my gravestone post! Here it is again.....

Edited by Lindonius, 11 July 2013 - 05:30 PM.

[OneEyed Jack]

Well, I suppose the good news is that I no longer have to be bothered by that nagging itch to spend money on this game. Thank goodness this came out before the July 25th cut-off for the extra premium time on the Project Phoenix package. I would have been seriously annoyed to have to make the decision to gamble on the $80 package or pass up the bonus. Not to mention that DS I've been eyeballing, or the Tartan pattern I very nearly purchased MC for, for my HGNs.

I don't boat enough for the penalties to have much direct impact on me or the mechs I play. But that doesn't make them any less stupid. It's a poorly thought out, nonsensical, un-intuitive system. It doesn't even effect alphas directly, just alphas with the same weapon.

Combine an un-intuitive heat penalty system, that has no direct correlation to heat generated in the first place, with overheat damage starting at 100% and mechs that come stock with single heat sinks and numbers of the same weapon in excess of the "max alpha" number, and what do you get? Newbs killing themselves faster and more often than the enemy. I don't see many sticking around long enough to be bothered to learn the complex chart of how many of each weapon they can fire and what the different penalties are for each weapon over that number for every weapon in the game...... all while trying to learn the basic controls.

But the real problem for me isn't the heat penalties. It's the sense of the direction of the game that such a change foretells. The insistence on pursuing a line that every player with a brain knows is a bad idea, along with the refusal to even acknowledge the actual issues will quickly turn this game into a pure parody of the one I started playing last fall. I'm not going to fly into a rage and un-install. I spent money, and the changes won't have a large, immediate impact on me, so I'll keep dinking around for awhile. But there won't be any more support from me.

SRMs:
I fail to see how anyone can suppose that 2.0 damage would be a problem. I doubt even 2.5 would be an issue. People seem to have forgotten that they were 2.5 before, and yet only became an issue in large numbers.... but that was with the busted-*** splash damage. Without that broken damage code, and with the idiotic alpha limits imposed, the supposed 3-shotting of Assaults will be no such thing.

[hammerreborn]

Lindonius, on 11 July 2013 - 05:30 PM, said:

Looks like the thought police removed my gravestone post! Here it is again.....

Oh look this picture again. It can join the spider, locust (most likely), flea (most likely), centurions that aren't the A, Ravens not the 3L, awesomes, dragons, and trebuchets.

[BROWN ADDER]

You mean to say we may be seeing a new weapon type on the battlefield soon? ...the SRM...

WOOT

[Lloathe]

Awesome. Not the best option they could of taken, but it will work with some tweaking. I would of rather seen homeless bill's targeting computer suggestion implemented. Owell, beggars can't be choosers. This will fix the pinpoint alpha problem if they add a few more things to it.

Problem: 2x PPC + gauss or 2x Guass + PPC. Both of these setups need to be axed as well. Gauss rifles have massive energy requirements just like PPC's. Having the mech gain excess heat from firing all those weapons together isn't a huge stretch of the imagination. Regardless, that combo has to be axed, one way or the other.

Overall, awesome job PGI. My faith in you is slowly being restored. Don't listen to the whiners with thousands of posts. They don't actually play the game anyway. This solution will work with some tweaking.

and finally.... YES! SRMS ARE COMING BACK BABY! All you nonbrawlers are going to be in a world of hurt!

[Lindonius]

OneEyed Jack, on 11 July 2013 - 05:33 PM, said:

But the real problem for me isn't the heat penalties. It's the sense of the direction of the game that such a change foretells. The insistence on pursuing a line that every player with a brain knows is a bad idea, along with the refusal to even acknowledge the actual issues will quickly turn this game into a pure parody of the one I started playing last fall.

And herein lies the crux of the issue.

And given their previous track record what do you think the chances are that it will all work properly come patch day? I bet there will be loads of heat issues and bugs with loadouts that aren't supposed to come under the heat penalty system. You know it's gonna happen.

[Krivvan]

I would like to point out that the PPC got to where it was because hit detection changes and its buff occurred at the same time.

[Lindonius]

hammerreborn, on 11 July 2013 - 05:43 PM, said:

Oh look this picture again.

Yeah I posted it again because they deleted the other one.

[Angel of Annihilation]

Yeah up the damage. SRMs should be as good a choice as choseing a PPC and with the scatter they aren't really going to be more damaging than a PPC overall.

On the heat scale, I think it is a good move....EXCEPT for reducing the Overheat barrier to 100% prior to taking damage.

Your heat scale is so borked up with with Double Heat Sinks only doing 1.4x disappation the even on a low heat build (2LL, 2ML, 2 Streaks with 16 DHS) it is impossible NOT to occasionally go at least slightly into overheat. 120% give you a bit of wiggle room with that, having damage occur the very second you reach overheat is a bit much.

Edited by Viktor Drake, 11 July 2013 - 05:56 PM.

[TexAce]

Still this is a very flaky attempt to solve the high alphas.

you should have gone with adressing convergence instead

[Lagster]

I sense a Stalker-5M-pocalypse happening in 3... 2...

90 damage alpha anyone?

[Marj]

Brawling weapons are supposed to be BETTER than sniping weapons when in brawling range. Buff SRM's to AT LEAST 2.5 damage. That or implement hard point limits so mechs can't kill each other in 3 shots with PPC's.

[Zordicron]

I voted NO.

Fix hit detection. Hit detection will affect EVERYTHING. I am very pleased to see my persistant whining in every thread I read and posted in has at least had a small part in getting the dev team to look for the root cause of their balance issues.

At the least, igve it a month. If you guys havent figured out how to fix the detection by then, revisit the idea of SRM dmg buff. A month is a long time to look for bugs, hopefully it can be found by then. PLus then there is some time to allow players to adjust to this heat scale change.

I work in injection molding. When troubleshooting issues in this field, you first determine the root cause of the issue. In this case, it is hit detection. You then take steps to correct it. now, if it is something that can not be immediatly corrected, but production is required anyway, you begin to look at other things to mitigate or circumvent the issue temporarily though you never ignore the root cause. What you dont do, is change a whole bunch of things at once. You make a change or two, and observe the effects. Changing a whole bunch of stuff at once just creates an unpredictable unstable process.

I feel this applies here. We have a root cause being worked on, but immediate production requirements. I would highly recomend NOT changing a whole slug of stuff right off. If the heat change is coming, do that FIRST, then wait a week or two and see. if the root cause is not solved in this timeframe, make additional change(s) and then observe again. It would be a different story is the root cause in this case did not exist. If all weapons were doing what they were supposed to be doing, a larger swing at balance changes could be done because there would be sound data. This is not the case, and so caution should be used in applying these changes. Too many will create an unstable and unpredictable mess.

Thats my 2 cents. Too bad my applied logic trouble shooting guide used on a daily basis by myself and the people I have trained for years will be completely swallowed by the gaping hole of the illogical gaming masses that scream louder then I do.

[Lindonius]

What's gonna happen when new players spend REAL MONEY on this champion mech?

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...ab#i=85&l=stock

It's STOCK LOADOUT will melt them quicker than an ice cube in hell and they will have no idea why. Unless you add health and safety banners on the log-in screen explaining how they can't use the mech with the default weapons that you supplied them with because it will make the mech EXPLODE!