1084 replies to this topic

[panzereich]

SRM guidance systems are meant to be wonky therefore making them a close range missile with double the damage of LRM. The problem is they seem to splash all over or miss fast smaller mechs, whilst hitting CT of larger slower mechs. Light mechs armed with buffed SRMs are going to cause even more OP problems if damage is buffed more.

BTW I enjoyed killing Paul last night with an LRM equipped Trebuchet. Was extremely satisfying and his response to my YAY was 'Player_Panzereich = Deleted' then ';)' Thanks for making my day Paul .

[Wildice]

Welcome to "Pay 2 Win"
HEAVY METAL 300STD 17DHS 2JJ 2xERPPC 1xGaus+4t
MISERY300STD 17DHS 2xERPPC 1xGaus+4t
DRAGON SLAYER 350XL 17DHS 2JJ 2xERPPC 1xGaus+3t
FIREBRAND 300XL 12DHS 2xERPPC 1xGaus+4t

Welcome to "Alpha Warriors Online"

[Reptilizer]

Sounds all fine to me!
Actually quite similar to what our local homeless one suggested.

Now double the armor once more, add more shots per ton of ammo for 12vs12 and we are there!

[Victor Morson]

I officially give up. I can't believe you guys are going on with the with this heat system. Literally everyone has told you it's stupid. Everyone has told you why it's stupid. At great lengths, it gets brought up every time an example of "stupid PGI decision making" comes up.

I've officially come to the conclusion you don't care about any audience except apparently whoever you have involved in balancing the game. Not the casuals, not the hardcore.. there's no way you could get that kind of overwhelming feedback then go "Naw it's cool" and announce it anyway.

I had honestly expected that you would cancel it based on every logical argument thrown at it, because it's one of the dumbest systems ever. Yes, dumbest, because it literally is an unworkable system that creates tons of problems without solving any of them.

I honestly thought that Russ Reedit interview was a troll. How shocked and disappointed I am that it was not.

I'm going to go through them, slowly, once more - at least the main points. There were tons of good points I'm probably not beginning to touch on, but seriously:

It doesn't impact meta weapons: As stated by everyone, if 3 PPCs is a problem, people go 2 PPC 1 Gauss; if Medium Lasers are a problem they mix in Large. This does nothing for pinpoint alphas.

It's stupidly overcomplicated: Simply put, there's no advantage to be gained from ghost heat but a whole lot of confusion, even from veteran players. Even if the UI clearly indicated it, this adds a really terrible dynamic to mechlab.

It hurts the people that need help most: You're seriously reducing the number that can be fired on small guns (Such as SRMs)? My God. You are smashing one of the last semi-viable brawling options left that were already in need of help. And seriously, the heat to the Streak is insane - why even have the weapon if you're going to blast it out of existence like this? ALL OF THIS WITHOUT HURTING ALPHAs.

--

Between this and the fact they keep insisting how much we'll love 3PV despite overwhelming resistance, I am beginning to believe the reason they do not listen to us is because they really don't care if anyone is even playing MW:O. They can't be. They wouldn't be tacking into the wind like this otherwise - because nobody's enjoying the gun balance, or at least for long, and nothing they are doing is requested or wanted.

Seriously, this goes beyond not taking suggestion. This whole alpha nerf system was dismantled by the community, even people who hate alpha strikes (I happen to like alpha strikes), because the way it works if fundamentally flawed. There is literally no threshold number you can set to improve it, because it's just plain broken!

There is simply unacceptable. I may well opt out of PP, something I was definitely getting and I am curious if anyone else feels the same. This isn't about JUST the alpha system - it certainly is about that as well - but more a desire to send a clear message that if they are going to continue pulling literal "screw yous" to the community like this, we actually aren't going to take it anymore. This is getting insane. Literally everyone thinks something is a bad idea and calmly explains why then you honestly announce it and expect people to be happy? Like I said, insane!

That thunder booming in the distance Paul? That's the screams of everyone fed up with the death grip the balance team has on an otherwise excellent game, and our frustration that they are choking the life out of it as slowly and painfully as possible.

EDIT: Also, you're nerfing Large Lasers? Really? The weapon that got overwhelmingly voted as a the perfect baseline? Did MechWarrior traumatize someone as a child that now has a chance to kill the whole franchise and is doing their best to take it?

[Demos]

I'm totally for a upping of SRM damage. When HSR is introduced, damage should be checked, but in the meanwhile give us the SRM back.

The change to 100% for heat damage sounds good, too. At least in theory. I'm eager to view the results in the game.

Heat penalties. Not so sure. The LL is treated too harshly, IMHO you should be able to fire three without penalty. Heavy Metal users (or some Victors) with 3 LL will be driven to switch to two ERPPCs. great, becasue there are too few on the maps already... Oh wait.
Will SRM be finally grouped like PPC and ERPPC. Or will we see Splat Cats with e.g. 2 SRM6 and 4 SRM4 which can fire their whole 28 tubes without penalty?
Maybe just a salvo penalty of e.g. 16-18 tubes should be introduced, regardless of SRM2/-4/-6 lauchers
Similar to LRM, maybe 30 missiles without penalty?

[Gryphorim]

+1 for this being the wrong way to balance high alpha. PPC/Gauss only looks more appealing now. Perhaps look at the convergence of multiple high impact weapons. Also, I used to advocate for no size limiting for weapons, finding weapon type restrictive enough. I have reversed my stance, and now feel even heavy/light hardpoints promotes variety and balance more than what we are seeing.

[Egomane]

As someone who refused to run high Alpha/Pinpoint builds, I welcome the change. Maybe will will now see some mechs with a little more thought put into it then: "How many Gauss and PPCs can I cram into it?"

[Tekadept]

Egomane, on 12 July 2013 - 01:31 AM, said:

As someone who refused to run high Alpha/Pinpoint builds, I welcome the change. Maybe will will now see some mechs with a little more thought put into it then: "How many Gauss and PPCs can I cram into it?"

Nope wont make a lick of difference, it will still be 2 ppc 1 gauss, no heat penalty. DUnno how they do it, i tried a 3 ppc build the other day for the first time ever, got bored shitless. Bzzzap hit, Bzzzap hit, Bzzzap Dead. rinse and repeat 3 odd kill average a match. BOoooooring.. Quickly stripped that mech back to something sensible.

Edited by Tekadept, 12 July 2013 - 01:39 AM.

[Lefteye Falconeer]

The heat penalty is a good idea in my opinion because it pushes players to make more creative builds than just boats. I like that. I also like that it affects the concept of 'alpha strike'. That is supposed to be a rare thing, not your usual/normal way of firing your arsenal. I think having to alpha less also fosters players to play more with their heads and less with their triggers. I like that too.

About SRM, I don't get Paul's issue. If 1.5 is too little damage and 2 is too much, what about 1.8? If he's confident 2 is too much, what's the problem in giving it a bump, a smaller one, and see how it goes? This "all or nothing" approach is weird, no matter the voting.

Edited by Lefteye, 12 July 2013 - 01:47 AM.

[Aim64C]

ACfromDC, on 11 July 2013 - 10:19 PM, said:

I’m amazed at all the chicken littles out there. Do you even read the Dev post or just like to make things up? Two things from Paul’s Post that people seem to miss…


1. There are some tweaks that need to be done but those will come with subsequent patches.

2. This is very experimental and is being addressed aggressively as I mentioned in my previous weapons update. The first set of numbers are for the immediate effect on the current meta-game but more weapons and balancing will occur with each patch you see on our path to Launch.

Yes. I did read that.

It's going into the patch on the 16th. That means they have been working rather diligently on it since it was brought up as being 'on the table.' You've seen the rate at which they work. That means it's not 'experimental.' It's already being worked into their patching schedule and it's probably been worked into the game in such a way that removing it will break the living hell out of it when they remove it some time next year after people stop spending money on the game.

Actually - PGI will probably just pull the plug on the whole works by that point.

Quote

I’m sure most of your “What about X” will be addressed in some form in later patches. My two cents are try it first then talk. I think it is a “good” way to stop high alpha (no matter the size of your mech or the weapon combos you try to use). Just because your mech comes stock with those weapons doesn’t mean that you should be allowed to fire them all at once without a penalty. I also believe it will help stop the high alphas of clanner mechs too. If an Inner Sphere PPC is at 2, what will clanners be 1?

[redacted]

If you honestly believe this is going to fix "high alphas" - there's nothing else to be said.

Quote

I think it will help create a move, aim, shoot, dodge, re-aim, shoot that people want from when we only had SHS and you had to think about what weapons to group together and aim. There is a reason why we have 6 weapon groups.

I also believe that it will make the games longer without people just getting instant killed which is good for everyone. And with the lower alpha’s I think people will start to move on to some other mechs that they want to play, instead of thinking they have to take an assault to survive until hopefully some sort of tonnage limit is implemented.

The thing is that this really doesn't change the superior mechanics that made the alphas attractive in the first place. So what if the 4 PPC stalker stagger-fires. He can still dump 40 points of damage onto you in less than a second without taking a heat penalty. Point-click, and you're being hit in the chest.

It gives -some- mechs a little better odds of not insta-dying, but only very little. I rarely "alpha" weapons outside of autocannons, because they can be more effective link-fired (and a number of higher performing players have theirs grouped to facilitate staggered intervals of fire).

Further - it doesn't eliminate the alpha in the first place. You can still alpha for great effect, and unless heat spikes to over double - even the 6PPC stalker can plausibly alpha without taking damage.

It really doesn't even change the gameplay that they used, before (especially jump-jetting highlanders).

Nothing changes. The AC40 jaeger drops a 20 and picks up a gauss for a 5 point alpha drop (but he can tag you at 800 meters for good effect, now, if he wants to).

It simply doesn't work. Oh - and we can have a 30 point alpha on medium lasers, (35 is too much, though) but the most we get out of large lasers is an 18 point alpha before heat starts strangling us?

It's just so convoluted and ridiculous with the reasoning for including weapons, excluding weapons, and their various 'max weapon' ratings just being downright silly.

ACfromDC, on 11 July 2013 - 11:50 PM, said:

Your right cause everyone who plays those mechs can only be effective if they min/max to boat the most weapons with the highest alpha and greatest heat eff. Oh no you mean I will have to think and I will have to control my heat and rate of fire no matter what mech/weapon load out I take.

Why in the hell do the normal heat values not keep these weapons in check?

Heat was originally developed as a concept to KEEP RATES OF FIRE UNDER CONTROL and to BALANCE ammunition-less weapons against those that did use ammunition. Because PGI took the heat system away from dissipation and toward a higher heat cap, mechs now have the ability to initiate very high damage alphas consecutively from energy weapons, often destroying or severely crippling the target, before needing to dissipate heat (at which point, there is a reduced need to fire weapons - so controlling heat is not a factor).

Further - one of the most problematic weapons in MechWarrior balancing history (the PPC) has not seen any kind of reasonable treatment. There has been no revision of its 'projectile' and damage behavior. It's an energy high velocity autocannon. That's how it's behaved for decades, and that's how it behaves, here - yet it's been the bane of weapon balance, even when MechWarrior 4 went to exceptional lengths to restrict the physical ability of mechs to mount this weapon in great number. Even though lasers behaved as hit-scan weapons applying instant damage, they still had problems balancing the PPC.

Heat, size, and weight don't balance the weapon in a real time environment. That means mechanics need to be looked at. Making it something other than an energy autocannon might be a start

Victor Morson, on 12 July 2013 - 01:06 AM, said:

I officially give up. I can't believe you guys are going on with the with this heat system. Literally everyone has told you it's stupid. Everyone has told you why it's stupid. At great lengths, it gets brought up every time an example of "stupid PGI decision making" comes up.

Victor; we've disagreed in the past - but I don't think I could have said it better, myself.

Even the convergence ideas I think would work out horribly in practice are better than this. They at least make sense and force people to re-think how they play the game (rather than simply min-max their build against their preferred play styles).

Edited by Egomane, 12 July 2013 - 09:23 AM.
unconstructive

[Victor Morson]

Oh and one more thing getting overshadowed by the stupid heat system..

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…

There are a million ways to prevent a 6 SRM6 Catapult from working properly, but doing this just means smaller quantities of SRMs - like 3 on a Cent - won't be worthwhile in the process. You're screwing over weapons because you've given 'mechs an ability to over boat, which is just adding ammunition to the slot-limit argument.

SRMs really are going to likely need 2.5 to work, or somewhere close to it, in anything less THAN a boat like that. If you allow a 'mech to take a crazy combo, then balance the weapon around that combo, it will only ever get used IN a combination like that. That is why it is a terrible idea. If you had hardpoint levels you could make the A1 carry mostly SRM4s or something to compensate.

If your "internal testers" ever talked to anyone on the outside they might see that. It's also why what you are seeing in your internal tests don't reflect reality. The likely viability of a 6 SRM6 Splatcat - esp. with the ludicrous heat changes - is likely to be next to nill, nullifying it's "high risk, high reward" damage. Just because your internal testers don't have the experience to exploit the things weaknesses doesn't mean that this situation is very likely in even moderately skilled pug games as it is more likely to shutdown every shot than kill you. Besides, there are plenty of builds that kill - and will continue to kill - in 3 alphas that don't even involve PPCs, anyway.

Egomane, on 12 July 2013 - 01:31 AM, said:

As someone who refused to run high Alpha/Pinpoint builds, I welcome the change. Maybe will will now see some mechs with a little more thought put into it then: "How many Gauss and PPCs can I cram into it?"

Nope, you are going to precisely see how many Gauss and PPCs we can cram into it and still be heat effective.

Given 3 PPCs is supposed to be a "notable heat difference" (if it's anything like how airstrikes are "highly damaging" I'm guessing not much) and it's not bad until 4, 3 PPC + 1 Gauss will continue to rule.

Previously we had to fear twin AC/20 boats, Large Laser boats, Ultra boats.. builds all on the cusp of being viable with just a slight buff. But not anymore. They are now leagues inferior.

Thannnnnnnks Paul.

Edited by Victor Morson, 12 July 2013 - 02:00 AM.

[Kmieciu]

armyof1, on 11 July 2013 - 02:15 PM, said:

I'm sorry but we're still talking 2.0 damage with no splash for a really short range weapon that always spreads damage. Your fears are just so terribly unfounded it's almost silly. SRMs at 2.0 won't even have half the damage potential they used to (due to splash used to damage multiple parts) before the March nerf, and back then people only had problems mainly with the SRMCat which is getting heat penalties worked in already. With every new map being bigger and long range fighting being clearly superior, you're worried about just making things at least a bit more even between long range and short range weaponry?

Before the splash nerf it took one SRM6 salvo to destroy a stock Commando. You need 16+16 = 32 damage to the center torso to destroy it. And the SRM6 was supposed to inflict 6*2.5 = 15 damage. The splash damage bug was that huge.
Because of the reduction of the explosion radius (4.5m ->0.05m), now it's another way around: the smaller the mech, the less damage it receives.

Edited by Kmieciu, 12 July 2013 - 02:13 AM.

[Zaptruder]

It's better than the current state of affairs, but a suboptimal solution to the problem of massive pin point damage.

This will just make Gauss and 2 PPC combo that much more powerful.

Or just push anyone with half a brain onto the sensible 2PPC 2ERPPC combo.

If 0% is what it currently is, and 100% is fully solved, this heat scale solution should get us around... 15% of the way there.

[warner2]

Poor change, detailed in length by others more intelligent and articulate than me, repeatedly, as to why.

"Fix your game Paul!". I believe this is a quote from an actual PGI developer whilst playing on the 8 man queue.

[Revorn]

I Think this is an intresting Way to Balance. Iam sure its not the last Step to it, but its a Step in the rigth Direction. imho.

For Mechs, who should be able to Boat better, PGI can build in some Quirks, like for the Awesome, maybe one who let him Alpha 3 PPC´s wihtout penalty.

As an Player of Medium Mechs, i realy like the Idea of not getting so often one hitted by 6 PPC Stalkers. Sure there are some Points who are worth to disscuss futher, but as a start, it looks good to me.

Good Work PGI, go on.

[Victor Morson]

The reactions to the heat system summed up in 5 seconds:

[Oderint dum Metuant]

All depends on the application from the 30th patch.
The first one won't do anything, once PPC's are all the same it then depends on the application there has to be a timeframe for the application of the heat penalty.

Will we be able to macro around it, lets wait and see.

The other factor is this system does nothing to stop people who you know can actually aim.
2PPC&Gauss alpha
Fire third PPC
And because I can aim I will still hit the right area.

And one more thing I presume by the 30th there will be an in game tutorial to explain to new players why your arbitrary band aid makes no mathematical sense compared to what their mech lab told them

Edited by DV McKenna, 12 July 2013 - 02:22 AM.

[Jakob Knight]

Egomane, on 12 July 2013 - 01:31 AM, said:

As someone who refused to run high Alpha/Pinpoint builds, I welcome the change. Maybe will will now see some mechs with a little more thought put into it then: "How many Gauss and PPCs can I cram into it?"

Except that putting together a mech with those loadouts -did- require thought, in that the person was analyzing what worked best in the environment MWO provided. Now, in addition to the unrealistic restrictions imposed by the Hardpoint system, these people are being told that they can't have their configurations because they are 'too good'. It is also interesting that some of the heaviest hitting weapons (UAC/5, Guass Rifle) are excluded from these restrictions while similar weapons (PPCs) are penalized heavily. It is hard to say that mounting 3 PPCs is overguning a mech, but having 3 AC/10s is not.

Also, this system will make quite a few stock designs impossible to run (HBK-4P, BLR-1G, ect). While we have heard there will be chassis modifications to this system, none are included in the notes to date, so might as well be considered to not exist at this time. Putting this system into test without all the chassis modifications also in place creates a flawed testing environment at the least if they are to be implemented, and destroys the use of normal, unmodified battlemechs if they are not.

My own opinion is that players should be required to come up with tactics and strategies to defeat the challenges posed to them in the game within the rules of the game, and not seek always to have the game developers change the game so they do not have to. This is a road to mediocrity rather than challenge.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Jakob Knight, on 12 July 2013 - 02:24 AM, said:

Except that putting together a mech with those loadouts -did- require thought, in that the person was analyzing what worked best in the environment MWO provided. Now, in addition to the unrealistic restrictions imposed by the Hardpoint system, these people are being told that they can't have their configurations because they are 'too good'. It is also interesting that some of the heaviest hitting weapons (UAC/5, Guass Rifle) are excluded from these restrictions while similar weapons (PPCs) are penalized heavily. It is hard to say that mounting 3 PPCs is overguning a mech, but having 3 AC/10s is not.

Also, this system will make quite a few stock designs impossible to run (HBK-4P, BLR-1G, ect). While we have heard there will be chassis modifications to this system, none are included in the notes to date, so might as well be considered to not exist at this time. Putting this system into test without all the chassis modifications also in place creates a flawed testing environment at the least if they are to be implemented, and destroys the use of normal, unmodified battlemechs if they are not.

My own opinion is that players should be required to come up with tactics and strategies to defeat the challenges posed to them in the game within the rules of the game, and not seek always to have the game developers change the game so they do not have to. This is a road to mediocrity rather than challenge.

There is an obvious reason why Gauss rifles have been excluded.
And is ironically the reason why this system is stupid.

Edited by DV McKenna, 12 July 2013 - 02:28 AM.

[Victor Morson]

They can't possibly listen to people who have seen all these mistakes repeated over and over in the franchise and have called every problem so far. No, there is too much pride for that.

This really does bring up the question of artistic integrity here, because you could argue we're asking them to break with their vision. The problem is, that's not what's happening really: Take a look at my sig and you'll see their vision is some utopia where every 'mech and variant is being fielded with diverse weapon load outs.

Now if I am in fact to take that as their vision, then every complaint we've lodged and every warning we've given is to the end to help them reach that. I just want every weapon and piece of gear to have a place, and all kinds of weapons both have good synergy, but also run good together. This is not an unobtainable goal, and it should be possible to at least mostly accomplish it. But that requires understanding the game and how it plays out on the field, not on paper or in an isolated test area. And they refuse to do that, and cling to the idea that their balance decisions alone will solve everything.

I really feel like next year PGI will be giving an interview as to why MW:O failed and they will cite, possibly even fooling themselves into believing it, that the "audience wasn't there." Never, to the end, will they admit they had no idea what was going on with game balance and refused to listen until it was far, far too late if ever.

Edited by Victor Morson, 12 July 2013 - 02:32 AM.