70 replies to this topic

[Moriquendi86]

First of all I want to say that many of suggestions sounded good and reasonable to fix the issue. But since I know a little about game development I understand reasons why they are not following them.

I know that you are skeptical about CW right now, but lets look at this right now. They have bunch of people working on it and now you want to have some of those people to solve alpha boating without delaying the schedule. Few possible solutions appear, some sounds amazing could hugely change gameplay but are time consuming a can have unforeseen consequences that can result in breaking the game in many ways (active reticule would be an example, from code side it's much more complicated than people think... I would say it 3 month is absolutely required to have satisfying prototype, possibly 3 more to fix it). Other are simpler, not as satisfying but can be prototyped in 2 weeks without delaying other tasks and after it's live it can be tweaked with simple numbers change. I know that every person in my company would choose easier solution, easier and more flexible are 9 out of 10 times right way to go.

So please have understanding for game developers, it's not an easy job and requires a lot of effort and overtime to get results on time. In worst time for me I was working 240 hours a month just to deliver product on time so the company will not go under. And its never like devs do not care about community because they don't deliver fixes in time you want, there are reasons for that and it usually comes from experience that if you are to reactive, impulsive and don't spend time analyzing data you will break more things that you fix.

[Kahoumono]

At least it is not a step backwards although this sounds like this simplest of change took them this long to implement. I can't imagine how this will actually launch in a couple weeks as a supposed polished product. I am going to have to wait and play to give final judgment on PP. 50/50 I'd say cause I feel guilty about rewarding some one for a so so job.

[Sgt Helmet]

With this change I don't see any problems with boating or any energy builds. Just need to fire the weapons in 0.5 sec intervals and in appropriate groups (< penalty size). So boating is still good option as you can shoot all weapons before the cooldown of the ones fired first is over, without any heat penalty.

Damage potential is still intact, but most likely intake of hostile projectiles etc. will increase as shooter need to be exposed more.

[Victor Morson]

Kerenskij, on 11 July 2013 - 11:46 PM, said:

The numbers of PPC Snipers will dwindle, be sure of it (especially at the end of the month). Of course, the "pro" gamers will find ways to bypass this (macros, chain fire, etc.), but for the masses it will be less convenient to use and so the numbers will dwindle (see poptarts).

2 PPC + 1 Gauss Victor all day every day, more things change the more they stay the same.

[Victor Morson]

Kerenskij, on 11 July 2013 - 11:52 PM, said:

This Victor is far less dangerous then a 4PPC Boat - Most people will have Problems to hit the exactly same spot with the 2ppc+gauss combo, not so with the 4PPC Boat.

You see, things change.

Don't have problems in my 3D.

[That Guy]

I am not going to jump on the hate bandwagon. but, I also know that the heat changes wont stop high volley alphas. all you munchkins have already found ways around the heat system (2ppc+G, 2PPC+2ERPPC [that combo WILL work for a couple weeks] AC20+ERPPC etc).

part of me wants to slap victor. after-all, major balance issues have always been resolved. back in CB the big thing were super fast laser boats with +10 lag shields. things like 9sl hunchies, 6 MPL K2 (back when they had more hard points), 80-90 kph Awesome and so on. this was addressed by adding in engine restrictions, and finding out the small lasers heat generation was bugged causing 1/3 of its intended heat. Gauss cats were big then too. that got addressed by making the other ballistic weapons worth a squirt of **** (remember when the ac10 had the same reload as the Gauss, and had a muzzle velocity lower than the current ac20?).

then there was ECM. for a long time it was the end all be all piece of gear. its been acceptably brought into line

also, some of you may remember a few months back when missiles were king of the mountain where the SRM boat, and streak boat ruled the skies (LRMs had their own hilarious ups and downs). that was fixed after missile splash damage was fixed.

back before HSR only really good, or foolish took ballistic weapons because of the high levels of unpredictability with them and very high skill cap.

which brings us to today. HSR suddenly made the usually bad and unpredictable ballistic weapons suddenly amazingly good. most of us predicted this would happen as pointed out many times in this thread.

which brings me to why i don’t slap victor, and the source of my own pessimism... PGIs complete and utter failure to even remotely address double heatsinks in relation to singles. (actually no I'm sorry, they did tweak them. they set the internal engine HS from 1.4 to the full 2.0).

Doubles have to be by far, bar none the worst balancing decision made by PGI. and the worst part is it HAS to have been an intentional way to "tier" mechs or something. I just cannot comprehend how anyone in their right mind would look at them and say "yup, doubles and singles look fine to me!". It is just so mind bogglingly stupid, counter productive, and outright ****ing ******** I just cant think straight.
i mean they are intentionally ****ing over new players with single heat sinks(most stock mechs use SHS, and DHS just adds an arbitrary 1.5m extra to every mech purchase). its just so... brain hurtingly stupid to implement DHS they way they have. the only way to screw it up more is to make all DHS full 2.0.
so yeah, on one hand PGI has had a good record of addressing specific problems, but are ignoring one of the most fundamental imbalances in the whole game, and have been since its implementation in sept or oct (whenever the upgrades were patched in). I find it down right INSULTING to all of us, and any future mechwarriors that DHS are so low in the balancing priority list.

On a final note, the previous weapon imbalances were caused by bugs (SL, SRM), or being feature incomplete (ECM). However, in this case the imbalance is not caused by a bug or individual weapon stats, but by a fundamental system, aiming, and convergence, which will be a whole hell of a lot harder to address.
I guess we will see

(and why has it taken the forums taken 30 min to post?)

Edited by That Guy, 12 July 2013 - 12:40 AM.

[Egomane]

Please use the official feedback thread for the discussion of the upcoming heatscale changes.

http://mwomercs.com/...pdate-feedback/

Thies thread is now closed!