464 replies to this topic

[Belorion]

Dual Gauss is only 30 points of damage which is the same as the 6 medium lasers that are allowed. I was kind of surprised that they didn't use 30 points of damage as the guideline by which to start adding the penalty. Except for the spread weapons which would go a little higher.

[Mister Blastman]

Ed Steele, on 17 July 2013 - 09:01 PM, said:

Tabletop does not always translate perfectly to realtime, if all shots were as completely random as in the board game, then why have anyone piloting a mech?

Do you even read what people write?

I said I was against random shot convergence in one of my previous posts.

[Zechs Raines]

Belorion, on 18 July 2013 - 04:28 AM, said:

Dual Gauss is only 30 points of damage which is the same as the 6 medium lasers that are allowed. I was kind of surprised that they didn't use 30 points of damage as the guideline by which to start adding the penalty. Except for the spread weapons which would go a little higher.

Medium lasers require you to be much closer, build much more heat, and necessitates that you hold your laser on that body part for the entire duration of its firing sequence (as opposed to one instant shot with gauss) in order to do that much damage.

[Belorion]

Zechs Raines, on 18 July 2013 - 08:05 AM, said:

Medium lasers require you to be much closer, build much more heat, and necessitates that you hold your laser on that body part for the entire duration of its firing sequence (as opposed to one instant shot with gauss) in order to do that much damage.

Dual gauss weighs 30 tons, plus extra tonnage for the ammo, in addition if one gets destroyed it blows up potentially taking out your mech. If you do live after one is destroyed your firepower is cut in half.

6 ML, is 6 tons, never runs out of ammo, and doesn't hurt your mech if they blow up. If you lose one, you are only down to a 25 point alpha.

[WarHippy]

Belorion, on 17 July 2013 - 08:27 PM, said:

I have often found that the people who level the most attacks in a conversation are the ones who are being hypocritical and delusional.

If you dislike the game so much, take a break... try reading the Tibetan Book of Living and Dying during your hiatus.

You are welcome to try and flip it around, but I'm not the one that demonstrates those characteristics.

As for taking a break why should I? I have already said that I like the game I just don't like some of the changes they are making because I think they are stupid, but then reading comprehension seems like it might be a struggle for you so perhaps it would be for the best if you didn't make book recommendations.

Belorion, on 17 July 2013 - 08:27 PM, said:

If they flat out remove aiming from the game you will see people leave in droves.

I agree with you on this.

[Edwyndham]

Well, I can't call the streak fix a 'bandaid fix' because streaks are completely worthless now. In the current environment of horrible hit detection, it was one of the few weapons effective against laggy spiders.

The fix for streaks all along should have been a way to dramatically increase the skill floor of using them, instead of having an easy lock-on weapon.

[Belorion]

zwanglos, on 18 July 2013 - 08:51 AM, said:

Well, I can't call the streak fix a 'bandaid fix' because streaks are completely worthless now. In the current environment of horrible hit detection, it was one of the few weapons effective against laggy spiders.

The fix for streaks all along should have been a way to dramatically increase the skill floor of using them, instead of having an easy lock-on weapon.

There is a segment of complainers on the forums that aren't happy unless streaks and/or lrms are worthless. I haven't made up my mind about streaks yet. I will have to take my A1 for a spin to see how much of an effect the current hit location spread has made. Part of the problem with both streaks and lrms are the boats. Perhaps the heat changes will have an equalizing effect once it is tuned more.

[Sir Roland MXIII]

Belorion, on 18 July 2013 - 09:05 AM, said:

There is a segment of complainers on the forums that aren't happy unless streaks and/or lrms are worthless. I haven't made up my mind about streaks yet. I will have to take my A1 for a spin to see how much of an effect the current hit location spread has made. Part of the problem with both streaks and lrms are the boats. Perhaps the heat changes will have an equalizing effect once it is tuned more.

Having tested them already I can tell you that they are now roughly equivalent in killing power to regular SRM2s, which honestly feels like a good result to me. You don't do as much damage but you hit more easily, and the spread keeps it from being excessive. Streaks are no longer able to function as a primary weapon system and are now as they were in BT, backups to your primary - as an example even Clans with the TimberWolf S and it's 4 SSRM6 played second string to the ERPPCs - so I feel it's appropriate.

Belorion, on 18 July 2013 - 04:28 AM, said:

Dual Gauss is only 30 points of damage which is the same as the 6 medium lasers that are allowed. I was kind of surprised that they didn't use 30 points of damage as the guideline by which to start adding the penalty. Except for the spread weapons which would go a little higher.

Problem there is, that's logical and makes sense, PGI isn't down with either of those concepts.

Edited by Sir Roland MXIII, 18 July 2013 - 12:06 PM.

[Belorion]

I just tested my A1 on the 12 v 12 servers. I think it felt pretty good overall. My A1 isn't a standard streak boat, but rather a hybrid with 4 ssrms, and 2 srm 6's. Pretty solid all in all.

[Peiper]

I guess I'll post here because, well, it probably doesn't matter anyway.

The July 16th patch was disappointing. I am happy with the changes that have been made. However, they are too few and the feelings of many of my unit, including my own, are ones of genuine concern. It's the middle of July and we've seen nothing of what we, as a unit, have been hoping for. We formed this unit thinking that we could, as a group, make a difference in the game. WHERE IS COMMUNITY WARFARE AND LOBBIES??? I don't see ANY sign of them, and I swear we were promised lobbies in June - which should have been in the game from DAY 1 of open beta. Some of us have been playing for OVER A YEAR now and we STILL can't schedule matches against other teams. This game is designed for team play, and despite that, it SEEMS PGI has done nothing but deny us what makes this game so much cooler than the others out there. Even back in the days of perfect world, matches could be set up and scheduled between teams, and that was 20 YEARS ago, and THAT is what people think of when they think of COMMUNITY warfare. I understand that in the inner sphere, our matches will be set up according to who is attacking and/or defending the various planets. But all the previous incarnations of mechwarrior have including a lobby. The Ask the Devs answers are saying that it's in the proposal stage or something like that and that when they are introduced, private matches will not be ranked - like ANY of us care about that. We want to have fun in our teams and play against our friends and rivals. YES, of course we want Faction warfare too, but we could make up our own faction warfare if we had to, with our own maps and stuff if you would stop di**ing us around.

Seriously, PGI. Get your priorities straight. Give us some freakin lobbies already!

[Zechs Raines]

Belorion, on 18 July 2013 - 08:35 AM, said:

Dual gauss weighs 30 tons, plus extra tonnage for the ammo, in addition if one gets destroyed it blows up potentially taking out your mech. If you do live after one is destroyed your firepower is cut in half.

6 ML, is 6 tons, never runs out of ammo, and doesn't hurt your mech if they blow up. If you lose one, you are only down to a 25 point alpha.

Indeed.

Range, non-existant heat and easier targetting in exchange for vulnerability and weight.

Sounds like it evens out quite nicely to me. I don't see the issue?

Edit: Not to mention, of the builds known for using 6 or more ML, you don't typically lose 1 medium laser, you lose that chunk of your mech and all the lasers nested in it. In the case of the swayback, the most popular ML boat, you usually end up losing all 6 in your shoulder in one epic moment of fail.

Edited by Zechs Raines, 18 July 2013 - 02:23 PM.

[AndyHill]

Kaeldric, on 16 July 2013 - 01:48 PM, said:

What we need to deal with the Alpha strikers is what kept them out of the TT version of the game. Bad Things^TM happening LONG before the heat scale ever hit max. Even low heat levels got you a reduced movement and weapon accuracy. These scaled up as the heat went up with chances of ammo cook off and shut down tossed in at medium and high heat levels.

Actually pinpoint alpha strikers were kept out of the TT game by the rules that clearly had no provision for a single hit roll for a group of weapons. For a very good reason.

[fil5000]

Zechs Raines, on 18 July 2013 - 02:19 PM, said:

Indeed.

Range, non-existant heat and easier targetting in exchange for vulnerability and weight.

Sounds like it evens out quite nicely to me. I don't see the issue?

Edit: Not to mention, of the builds known for using 6 or more ML, you don't typically lose 1 medium laser, you lose that chunk of your mech and all the lasers nested in it. In the case of the swayback, the most popular ML boat, you usually end up losing all 6 in your shoulder in one epic moment of fail.

Don't forget you lose one of the arm ones as well when the torso blows.

[Dart Nimrod]

Peiper, on 18 July 2013 - 12:43 PM, said:

I guess I'll post here because, well, it probably doesn't matter anyway.

The July 16th patch was disappointing. I am happy with the changes that have been made. However, they are too few and the feelings of many of my unit, including my own, are ones of genuine concern. It's the middle of July and we've seen nothing of what we, as a unit, have been hoping for. We formed this unit thinking that we could, as a group, make a difference in the game. WHERE IS COMMUNITY WARFARE AND LOBBIES??? I don't see ANY sign of them, and I swear we were promised lobbies in June - which should have been in the game from DAY 1 of open beta. Some of us have been playing for OVER A YEAR now and we STILL can't schedule matches against other teams. This game is designed for team play, and despite that, it SEEMS PGI has done nothing but deny us what makes this game so much cooler than the others out there. Even back in the days of perfect world, matches could be set up and scheduled between teams, and that was 20 YEARS ago, and THAT is what people think of when they think of COMMUNITY warfare. I understand that in the inner sphere, our matches will be set up according to who is attacking and/or defending the various planets. But all the previous incarnations of mechwarrior have including a lobby. The Ask the Devs answers are saying that it's in the proposal stage or something like that and that when they are introduced, private matches will not be ranked - like ANY of us care about that. We want to have fun in our teams and play against our friends and rivals. YES, of course we want Faction warfare too, but we could make up our own faction warfare if we had to, with our own maps and stuff if you would stop di**ing us around.

Seriously, PGI. Get your priorities straight. Give us some freakin lobbies already!

Are you kidding? You truly happy with this moronic heat scale addition system?

[Peiper]

Dart Nimrod, on 18 July 2013 - 02:53 PM, said:

Are you kidding? You truly happy with this moronic heat scale addition system?

Yes, though the PPC's still have to be nailed balanced out heat wise, I'm happy. It's not the perfect resolution, but it's progress. And it's incredibly trivial compared to the lack of lobbies. My team tried to sync drop against another 8 man today and it took us 5 drops to actually catch each other, and with the 2A/2H/2M/2L drop-weight restrictions we placed on ourselves, we were hard pressed when fighting against the walls of assaults we were facing. Lobbies are what kept people playing long after the game was basically obsolete, and yet, PGI is just sitting on their thumbs - snubbing us. I don't know why they're doing it, but its getting really friggin old. We founders dropped money into the game EXPECTING lobbies. I've got guys in my unit that show up once a month and ask: is CW in yet? Do they have lobbies yet? Well, nice to talk to you, see you whenever. It's friggin depressing. I don't want to ***** about it to my unit, because I don't want to smash morale, so I gotta write it up here in the vain hope that PGI will change their priorities.

I've been on the forums long enough to know what everyone's responses will be, and what PGI will spin in response should a bunch of people raise their voices. That's what makes it more frustrating. But I feel I gotta scream somewhere, so tonight it is here.

But like a friend described to me when attempting to correct an error with customer service for another game I've been playing: It's like ******* into a hurricane. It's just gonna whip up and hit you in the face.

[Dart Nimrod]

Sounds terrible, man... and I apologize, if I was a too harsh. But still some parts of this patch truly annoying me, as well as people from my unit. I'm a noob in MWO, and wouldn't pretend, that I understand what are these lobbies, you talking about. So let me just ask you: how all this can help, at least theoretically, to set things right, here in this mess? Because if every next patch gonna cut down most popular and realy working builds, one way or another, then this game will turn into a cheap parody on itself before release, I think.

Sorry for grammar mistakes, if they are.

[Dawnstealer]

Chronojam, on 16 July 2013 - 03:18 PM, said:

Aren't the people using jam-avoidance and overheat-avoidance macros going to continue to not-jam and not-overheat? .

Isn't that explicitly the advantage the macro confers? I don't see how making macro use more effective diminishes macro use, the heat change specifically targets people who rely on the game's built-in group fire.

I suppose, but they'll need to space out the macro a bit more, with that .5 time limit on the firing. They'll still use the macro, I have no doubt, but you won't be getting hit with a sequence of 20 AC2 shells in the span of a couple seconds.

[Splice]

RE: Heat Scale Addition
These are my observations, yours may vary. I played one evening in my favorite build of Stalker. This is the first time that I’ve played that the MWO to me felt like a “game” as opposed to a “simulator”. I had read all of the patch notes and on my first drop I aimed at some hapless rock and did a Quad ERPPC shot. Heat shot to 100%, my mech shut down, and apparently started taking internal damage. In this situation there is actually a double “penalty” for using groupings of said weapons. Why this feels like a “penalty” as opposed to design limitation, is that when I fired each weapon individually in rapid succession I could get off 6-8 shots depending on ambient temperature. PPC and ERPPC has always been my weapon of choice if available. I feel that there are many other ways to address the issue of pinpoint, high alpha damage if the community really feels it is an issue, and apparently it does since this was rolled into the patch.
I really feel that the implementation chosen was poor at best. Better options would be convergence adjustments, slight firing delay on PPCs (time for the charge to ramp up), slow the shot slightly. I can adjust and will, but I hate the feeling of a “game” instead of a “simulator.” This is simply my $0.02.

Thanks,

[Dart Nimrod]

I agree, mostly. But since you can't fire from more than two PPCs of all kinds or LRM15s, the only choise you have is AC-Laser-SRM/SSRM hodgepodge, that provides only few worthy builds. As it was before, when PPC and LRM boats "reigned" on the battlefield.

[Warge]

Belorion, on 17 July 2013 - 12:49 PM, said:

PGI knows better what weapons are OP than we do

Vice versa.