1084 replies to this topic

[Miken]

Heat penalty is strong deviation from Battletech universe. Weapons already have their parameters. And PGI wants make it's own stupid and unclear limitation...
We already have poor DHS and SHS nerfed because of pathetic heat system... and more more ... The game is moving further in wrong direction right away from logic and bt.universe

[Victor Morson]

Darkside7777, on 12 July 2013 - 12:55 PM, said:

******* jesus ******* christ. Did they really think that the option of NOT increasing SRM damage would win? Are they delaying the damage increase until next patch just because of this stupid vote? SRMS SHOULD destroy larger mechs quickly, that gives mediums and lights a fighting chance against the assault spam.

I also like how 2.5 wasn't an option because Paul's "blow up in one shot" Catapult would break the game.

Do you even read what you write, Paul? Like, ever read it and put it to 10 seconds of logical thought? This doesn't hold water to even 30 seconds of foresight.

Simply put whoever is coming up with these ideas is terrible at their job and have been terrible for nearly a year. For the good of PGI, for the love of God, if they're unwilling to deviate from their vision.. get someone with a different vision up there.

I could show you poll after poll about general satisfaction and it's huge. You keep thinking "Add more features, make more money!" but that doesn't work for long. If you have crappy gameplay - which game balance can directly cause - all the other things cease to matter.

The only way MW:O is going to be here next year is if people are fired, or moved to a different department, but I have a feeling they'll death grip it until the end.

PGI: Please don't shut down MechWarrior: Online until Star Citizen comes out so my unit has something to play, OK? Here's hoping.

Edited by Victor Morson, 12 July 2013 - 01:03 PM.

[Teralitha]

Glucose, on 11 July 2013 - 10:51 AM, said:

Yeah I feel like this is implemented a little wrong.

Wouldn't it make sense to have an Alpha Limit value of 10.

Each PPC is 5 alpha limit, each ER PPC is 5 alpha limit.

Each Ac20 is 10 alpha limit.

Now if you fire any combination of weapons in a single alpha strike you'll want to fit under the spread? Do we really care that they are exactly the same weapon type?

The interesting part of this system, is then you can assign different alpha limits to different mechs. You could let the hunchback be more of an alpha striker.. for example.

Well.... The easiest and best solution would be to remove double heat sinks, and add the proposed heat penalties.

Why does no one else realize that double heat sinks are the root of all this corruption? I must be the smartest person here.....

Edited by Teralitha, 12 July 2013 - 01:16 PM.

[Victor Morson]

Tarzilman, on 12 July 2013 - 07:56 AM, said:

And what the hell is this **** about "You (PGI) are stupid, heat scale isn't the problem, the problem is convergence and your silly heat penalty is way to complicated!"??

To be fair, a lot of us hate convergence changes (other than removing Arm Lock which makes syncing arm/torso guns way, way too easy) too. So that's just one possible option. I'm more a fan of them adding "Levels" to the hard points, so that we can restrict weapons on a variant to variant basis, far and away.

That said, a reticule that gets bigger isn't exactly hard to understand. This heat penalty system, however, is newbie poison.

Edited by Victor Morson, 12 July 2013 - 01:08 PM.

[jakucha]

Victor Morson, on 12 July 2013 - 12:58 PM, said:

Whoever is working on balancing MW:O needs to step down before they drag the whole game down with them.

It is clear now they have no idea what they are doing at all and have far too much pride to admit it.

They're not the only ones with far too much pride in that case.

[Wieland]

I still say hardpoint size would have been a better way to balance the game.

[AntzRevenge]

IMHO, the limit of 2 LL is silly, due to things like beam duration etc. Its not like the game plagued by constant LL boats. Second, these arbitrary numbers still wont help in the long run. as the 2 PPC/Guass load out will be king. Cataphract 3D anyone? Really, it is my opinion that the base heat of both particle canon varieties needs to be upped. firing 2 PPCs at once should give a serious heat load, 3 PPCs should be risky, 4 and above should be downright dangerous/impossible without risking serious damage. Keep the 120% threshold for damage, and make sure that there are serious consequences for super high heat alphas. PPCs really are the issue, not MLs, or LLs, or LPLs, SRMs, (maybe AC/20s, but only because of the BoomJaegers, but their armor is thin enough they can be beat when engaged properly.) PPCs must be dealt with, not arbitrary across the board limits to all weapons.


Ideally, the thing to do would be to individualize Mechs. Mechs built to their original intentions should not be punished. Im still in favor of sized/limited hardpoints above all. If an Awesome wants to carry 3 ER PPCs, let it, the heat load should require careful management, but it should be able to do it. A PPC in the chest of a Spider? No, that should not happen.

[Kraven Kor]

JagdFlanker, on 12 July 2013 - 12:26 PM, said:

if this whole argument is over the ERPPC being too accurate for either it's weight or it's heat then maybe the simplest solution is to make the ERPPC do 15 heat like in the original rules or increase it's weight. lasers spread their damage everywhere, PPCs have a minimum range and guns/missiles are heavy/need ammo

ER PPC already is 15 heat I thought?

[Teralitha]

Darkside7777, on 12 July 2013 - 12:55 PM, said:

******* jesus ******* christ. Did they really think that the option of NOT increasing SRM damage would win? Are they delaying the damage increase until next patch just because of this stupid vote? SRMS SHOULD destroy larger mechs quickly, that gives mediums and lights a fighting chance against the assault spam.

This poll just proves that the player base cant be trusted with game balance either. No they shouldnt increase the damage.

[jakucha]

AntzRevenge, on 12 July 2013 - 01:13 PM, said:

Second, these arbitrary numbers still wont help in the long run. as the 2 PPC/Guass load out will be king.

As people have already pointed out, they're already around, and people don't complain about them. PPC spam is generally much worse.

Edited by jakucha, 12 July 2013 - 01:16 PM.

[Corusmaximus]

I am glad small lasers and small pulse lasers are not affected here.


Question: medium and large lasers are listed but not pulse variants. I assume they are combined?

[Bilbo]

Corusmaximus, on 12 July 2013 - 01:17 PM, said:

I am glad small lasers and small pulse lasers are not affected here.


Question: medium and large lasers are listed but not pulse variants. I assume they are combined?

No the are not. The heat on the pulses generally take care of themselves though.

[80Bit]

I will withhold judgement on most of this until it comes out to play with, because a lot of it will come down to the numbers and needed tweaking.

On the surface, it seems like an inelegant and needlessly complex solution, but it's better than no solution. If it stays in place I hope it is represented very clearly in the new UI or new players will end up very confused.

The only number that really stands out is the LRM15 one. Is LRM15 the only one getting an Alpha penalty, or will all the LRMs share one? I didn't know LRM Alphas were really considered a problem. This change really only hits one mech hard, the Awesome 8R, where firing 4 LRM15s at once was the entire point of the mech, and heat management on that was hard enough already.

And the 2 number for Large Lasers is off as well. Alpha strikes are much less of a problem with beam weapons. If someone can hold their lasers on one target location for the full beam duration, that should be rewarded. Large Lasers are light, smaller, and hard to damage with than PPCs and should not have the same Alpha cap.

Still, I'm eager to see how these changes actually feel.

[Teralitha]

I really hope they dont listen to this poll. These yes voters dont have a clue what they are asking for.

Post srm damage increase:

"omg why are srm's so OP????"

"change it back waaaaaaaaaaaah"

"pls nerf SRMS waaaaah...."




Be careful what you wish for.... you just might get it.

Edited by Teralitha, 12 July 2013 - 01:27 PM.

[Aim64C]

Victor Morson, on 12 July 2013 - 12:58 PM, said:

Whoever is working on balancing MW:O needs to step down before they drag the whole game down with them.

It is clear now they have no idea what they are doing at all and have far too much pride to admit it.

My favorite is this:

"Testing shows that a lot of new players find that their legs being pointed in a different direction from their torso is confusing. So, we're going to implement third person view. Any discussion about it is not to discuss whether or not it should exist, but how to implement it."

Then they come up with this crap.

Because people who can't figure out how to ******* walk in the game are going to go: "Oh, so firing weapons at the thing that is trying to destroy me needs to be done slowly and gently, else I'll blow myself up because I haven't purchased all the new and nearly mandatory upgrades to be competitive."

And why the hell should someone stick around to learn how to check their leg position versus their torso facing; let alone fight through the backwards 'balancing' schemes? There's no immersion. There's no substance. You're just dropping into a box canyon (or whatever) and blowing **** up. The novelty wears off in a hurry, and the game is simply not attractive to those who are not relatively passionate battletech fans.

And PGI seems to be intent on expending every creative resource to find new ways to **** off the only people who really want to see this game succeed. The rest of the potential game market couldn't care less whether this game makes it or breaks it. There's a new ARMA, there's a new Call of Duty, there's a new Battlefield. They'll be content to take their time and consideration elsewhere.

This game has potential to push new life into the universe of Battletech - to capture the imaginations and hearts of hundreds of thousands if not millions of people. The story of the Inner Sphere can be told in a way it's never been told before. The Clans and their invasion can (could have been?) be played out and experienced like it never truthfully was.

There's a great story behind it all, there are great characters. The universe rivals Star Wars in scope, depth, and raw size of material. It's just been a rather quietly told story.

That's part of what will draw people in - making them feel a part of that universe. Making them feel like they are part of a house they identify with - or allowing them to attach themselves to the ideals of certain Clans and play out the community warfare aspect.

THAT is what new players will want. Where they become the story - live the story... that's why they'll fight through the somewhat unorthodox (though, to me, still very intuitive) leg/torso movement until it's second nature to them. That's what will draw them and their friends to the game.

And what other MMO-esque game has so -many- different -palpable- factions? Most take place in some world of magic where you can only identify with issues on a tangent. While Battletech is a more advanced technological society - the factions are believable. The factions form alliances, break alliances, squabble unofficially and fight proxy wars. They're factions you can really identify with in their behavior and themes because they're innately human.

.... *sigh*

Which is why I am horrified at the September launch time frame. The initial goal of this development team, when they began the MechWarrior Reboot project is simply not attainable within that time frame. Unless they have a game that is roughly three times the size and complexity of the current game (which would still be bare-bones basic) being put through the final alpha stages.

It's like watching a girl you crushed on through school grow up to get involved with the types of guys that more or less beat and **** her.

[Solis Obscuri]

Aim64C, on 12 July 2013 - 01:29 PM, said:

My favorite is this:

"Testing shows that a lot of new players find that their legs being pointed in a different direction from their torso is confusing. So, we're going to implement third person view. Any discussion about it is not to discuss whether or not it should exist, but how to implement it."

Then they come up with this crap.

Because people who can't figure out how to ******* walk in the game are going to go: "Oh, so firing weapons at the thing that is trying to destroy me needs to be done slowly and gently, else I'll blow myself up because I haven't purchased all the new and nearly mandatory upgrades to be competitive."

You left out the part where they decided too many n00bs were getting confused by the two reticules, so "Lock Arms to Torso" became the new default mode. (No, of course, that allowing instant convergence with all weapons could've had any role is encouraging the PPC/Gauss boat meta we have now...)

But this has me concerned too. Especially with internal damage starting at 100% heat - I mean, isn't the point of a shutdown to save you systems from melting? Now I guess it just lets your structure melt from the inside while your opponents melt you from the outside, while you're immobile and defenseless. Might as well put "Override Shutdown" on a toggled macro, because there's no point in ever allowing the auto-shutdown.

[AntzRevenge]

jakucha, on 12 July 2013 - 01:15 PM, said:

As people have already pointed out, they're already around, and people don't complain about them. PPC spam is generally much worse.

I agree. I still find the 2ppc/guass annoying. But I wholeheartedly agree PPC boats are much worse.

[arghmace]

To all those wondering what's the point of not overriding shutdown when CT starts taking damage at 100% here's why:

This CT taking slight damage is a whole new thing. But since forever mechs have been going BOOM when overriding shutdown. Not exactly sure how this old mechanic works but seems to me that if you do not shutdown and linger long over 100% your mech takes pretty serious damage at random sections every now and then. Might even hit an ammo storage and then it's bye bye.

So yes, after 100% you will take slight continuous damage to CT whether you override shutdown or not. But if you override you risk getting huge random damage here and there as has been the case all the way from closed beta. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong but I personally remember exploding to bits many times due to overheating and overriding shutdown all the way since I've played this game. This new CT dmg mechanic just came out 2 weeks ago.

[Barkem Squirrel]

I like the proposed buff to SRM's. The 2.5 damage was a bit much and the 1.5 needs a buff. Going with 2 damage should be good and make the six pack scary again with a potential of 12 damage vs. 9 damage now. It also has implications for the lights running with SSRM's. Now it will be 4 instead of 3. Then again it is you game play, use SSRM's on lights or carry a six pack to strafe the larger mechs.

The restrictions on the lasers I do have an issue with, but lets see how that progresses. Myself I do not run with more than two large lasers and do not have the ability yet, (Oct 15) to run with more than six lasers. If I could hit something consistently with all the damage, yes this nerfing of the lasers would be good, but look at the data on how many people can hit with greater than half of the lasers duration.

The threshold for heat damage, is going to drive players to have less or smaller heat generating weapons. I see adaption comming, but again what form will it have? Maybe four AC 5 Jagers running around. Or a 6xSML, 2xMG firebrand running around. Then there is the 6xMG and 2xML Jager running around. I still liked the 120%, but if the data shows this still is a problem try looking at a level between 100 and 110 that would reduce the over heating. Just going after half the players that over heat will make most stop. There should be a small percent over the shutdown level that will allow some people to shutdown without damage. I would expect an engineer to develop a system with a small margin of safety.

[arghmace]

While I don't like this max alpha heat scale -thingy, some people here make ridiculous points against it.

1. People will just make macros that fire between 0.5 seconds and thus pinpoint alphas are still present. Wrong. That's not a pinpoint alpha, that's more or less like chainfire. You have to keep your crosshair on the enemy for at least half a second or even a second if your macro shoots the weapons in three batches.

2. Gauss and PPC is just as fine as 2 PPC's for pinpoint alpha. Wrong again. Their projectile speed is different so if you fire Gauss and PPC at a mech moving sideways at a reasonable distance, both projectiles won't hit the same section if even hit the mech at all.

Actually the second point gave me an idea. Why not make PPC projectiles slower than ER PPC projectiles. Kinda makes sense actually. We're talking about a bolt of lightning more or less so it will dissipate in time. If the bolt has a certain lifetime, you achieve more range by making it go faster. So ER PPC should go faster than PPC by the same ratio than it has more range.

Now if we would have PPC, ER PPC and Gauss all having different travel speeds, you couldn't really combine any of them for a certain pinpoint alpha when talking about shooting at a sideways moving enemy. Which would be exactly what people want, right?