461 replies to this topic

[Pvt Dancer]

The patch is harmful because you take CT damage from heat. Your punishing a player twice for Heat because they also shut down. You know what, I don't have a problem with boating, because shutdown should more than make up for it. PGI keeps ******* around with Heat and failing at it, much like damage. You want to stop boating, make shutdown a issue that you want to avoid at all costs, not a minor set-back. PGI created the Coolent Flush BS to make money, and now they want to make Heat such a problem you /have/ to run that stuff. Ditch the coolant flush BS, ditch the heat spikes, ditch the damage to CT, allow people to actually make a mech that runs cool by making Heat sinks actually ******* work. ****'s sake... this is just total ********.

[Oy of MidWorld]

Razerbeast, on 17 July 2013 - 04:23 PM, said:

This patch hasn't changed boating tho, ppl are still doing it and winning games. Patch is a failure. Personally i use none of the problem boats, but objectively speaking, this patch adds no value to the game.

Yeah, and I'm still not doing it and winning games...

Your argumentation discourages any tweaking at all - people will always win games. I can't speak objectively (you neither), but subjectively this patch adds a lot of value to this game. Less people run around in those horrible builds you favor. Matches have been a lot more fun since the patch. At least for me.

This debate is useless, as people with favored playstyles as different as yours and mine will never really agree on this point.

Shadinator, on 17 July 2013 - 04:17 PM, said:

YES - *massive applause*

Well, thankyouverymuch *bows*

Edited by Oy of MidWorld, 17 July 2013 - 04:41 PM.

[keith]

Oy of MidWorld, on 17 July 2013 - 04:34 PM, said:

Yeah, and I'm still not doing it and winning games...

Your argumentation discourages any tweaking at all - people will always win games. I can't speak objectively (you neither), but subjectively this patch adds a lot of value to this game. Less people run around in those horrible builds you favor. Matches have been a lot more fun since the patch. At least for me.

This debate is useless, as people with favored playstyles as different as yours and mine will never really agree on this point.

could be the level that u play at. when we finally had ppl come on last night to play the patch, really saw all the same boats on being played basically the same. the matches didn't seem as 1 sided because u could push the advantage as fast. still didn't fix the under lying problem. too much tonnage in matches, can put way too much dam in 1 panel. most wep are still sub par beside ppc, guass, lrm, and new buffed srm.

[Oy of MidWorld]

keith, on 17 July 2013 - 05:04 PM, said:

could be the level that u play at. when we finally had ppl come on last night to play the patch, really saw all the same boats on being played basically the same. the matches didn't seem as 1 sided because u could push the advantage as fast. still didn't fix the under lying problem. too much tonnage in matches, can put way too much dam in 1 panel. most wep are still sub par beside ppc, guass, lrm, and new buffed srm.

I don't know. It just feels less boaty somehow. I find it hard to determine at what level i play. My mates and I have all very solid stats, despite not using cheesebuilds, so i don't think it is very low.

[Burpitup]

Ok so if i fire my 6 ppc stalker all at once now i die. How is that good. Next you are going to tell me that 6ppc's is to overpowered and had to be nerfed. Really it never was a good set up. You couldn't get to shots off in a row with out shutting down and getting killed in shut down.

This is just another example of how the Whiners are ruining this game.

[Rippthrough]

Congratulations Paul, you implemented a crock of ****.

[Rippthrough]

Oy of MidWorld, on 17 July 2013 - 05:31 PM, said:

I don't know. It just feels less boaty somehow. I find it hard to determine at what level i play. My mates and I have all very solid stats, despite not using cheesebuilds, so i don't think it is very low.

4+ K/D and W/L for a few thousand matches should do it.

[Ningyo]

No he is right it is less PPC around right now. BUT it has nothing to do with the heat scale changes. Its because many of the players that normally boat are trying out their SRM mechs and likely will be for the next couple days. Then they will go back to using their 4 (ER)PPC stalkers, or Gauss + 2-4 (ER)PPC lots of other things.

AC 40 jaggers will mostly disappear though and be replaced by either double gauss, AC/20+ 2(ER)PPC, AC/20 + gauss. There will be no noticeable change in how effective they are though.

And stop attributing the 15-25% of players running around in SRM mechs to the Heatscale changes it is clearly because the patch raised their damage by 33% and people that are extremely bored with the meta are testing them out to see if they are actually useful again. (my opinion they seem about right if you compare them to LL and ML. If comparing them to the OP pinpoint alpha meta they are still weak)

[Oy of MidWorld]

Rippthrough, on 17 July 2013 - 05:57 PM, said:

4+ K/D and W/L for a few thousand matches should do it.

[BR0WN_H0RN3T]

Pvt Dancer, on 17 July 2013 - 04:31 PM, said:

The patch is harmful because you take CT damage from heat. Your punishing a player twice for Heat because they also shut down. You know what, I don't have a problem with boating, because shutdown should more than make up for it. PGI keeps ******* around with Heat and failing at it, much like damage. You want to stop boating, make shutdown a issue that you want to avoid at all costs, not a minor set-back. PGI created the Coolent Flush BS to make money, and now they want to make Heat such a problem you /have/ to run that stuff. Ditch the coolant flush BS, ditch the heat spikes, ditch the damage to CT, allow people to actually make a mech that runs cool by making Heat sinks actually ******* work. ****'s sake... this is just total ********.

Couldn't have said better myself except with more expletives.

[Maccaroni]

Highlanders with Gauss - 2 PPC - 1 ER PPC are reigning supreme atm. Just saying.

[Marchant Consadine]

Ningyo, on 17 July 2013 - 06:04 PM, said:

No he is right it is less PPC around right now. BUT it has nothing to do with the heat scale changes. Its because many of the players that normally boat are trying out their SRM mechs and likely will be for the next couple days. Then they will go back to using their 4 (ER)PPC stalkers, or Gauss + 2-4 (ER)PPC lots of other things.

AC 40 jaggers will mostly disappear though and be replaced by either double gauss, AC/20+ 2(ER)PPC, AC/20 + gauss. There will be no noticeable change in how effective they are though.

And stop attributing the 15-25% of players running around in SRM mechs to the Heatscale changes it is clearly because the patch raised their damage by 33% and people that are extremely bored with the meta are testing them out to see if they are actually useful again. (my opinion they seem about right if you compare them to LL and ML. If comparing them to the OP pinpoint alpha meta they are still weak)

Yet a lot those same people will notice that SRMs are actually usefull now. I agree the heatscale change did little to change the meta, but making brawler builds much more effective close up (than snipers) will change the meta and give back the choise. Now all they need to do is fix pulse lasers and everything is fine (well at least better).

I don't think the problem ever was that snipers were overpowered. The issue was that they were also the kings of brawling (or close enough at least).

Making heat a real problem in general is a good thing IMO. Stacking penalties I can live with. Bottom line is the game is better now than it was two days ago.

[megoblocks]

Pvt Dancer, on 17 July 2013 - 04:31 PM, said:

The patch is harmful because you take CT damage from heat. Your punishing a player twice for Heat because they also shut down. You know what, I don't have a problem with boating, because shutdown should more than make up for it. PGI keeps ******* around with Heat and failing at it, much like damage. You want to stop boating, make shutdown a issue that you want to avoid at all costs, not a minor set-back. PGI created the Coolent Flush BS to make money, and now they want to make Heat such a problem you /have/ to run that stuff. Ditch the coolant flush BS, ditch the heat spikes, ditch the damage to CT, allow people to actually make a mech that runs cool by making Heat sinks actually ******* work. ****'s sake... this is just total ********.

Apparently you're unaware of the fact that in TT, your mech can explode if you get hot enough (not too mention other smaller penalties as heat builds).

[Burpitup]

My goodness this game is getting boring. Same thing happened to Battlestar Galactica online. they made each side completely equal, listened to all the whiners and nerfed all the good builds. Then they wonder why no one plays it anymore. Same thing will happen here. They will make the game unplayable here too if they keep listening to all the whiners that can't stay alive.

[Aim64C]

Oy of MidWorld, on 17 July 2013 - 04:07 PM, said:

It is about skill.

Because we are knights trained for battle, our skills honed over years of grueling training and apprenticeships.

You're clicking a button. Don't make it more glorified than it is.

Quote

As it should be. But it should be about more different skills than just aiming and releasing four to six PPC's or two AC20's at once. Managing different weapon groups, firing three to four different types of weapon effectively are skills too, and they are a lot harder to master. If used effectively, these skills should give a good mechwarrior an advantage. Which is not really the case yet. But as the heat changes discourage boating, they are clearly a step in the right direction.

Honestly, an AC40 Jaeger is already nerfed to hell by double armor. Keep in mind that in tabletop - an AC20 would do an effective 40 points of damage in our game to a somewhat random section of a mech.

The main problem is in the PPC's mechanics. It gives you ballistic performance at a fraction of the weight, a fraction of the space, a bonus to range, and no ammunition concerns.

Even past MechWarrior games that didn't alter heat capacity, stayed as close to possible with TT heat and damage values, etc, have all had a huge amount of difficulty balancing the PPC (even when most mechs could only carry 2 of them). That's because the PPC is an autocannon/gauss rifle.

This game did wonders for autocannons by shifting lasers from hit-scan full-damage weapons to weapons with a DOT factor to them. It also made lasers a bit more interesting as a weapon to use (with very good damage rewards for using them effectively).

Altering the mechanic of PPCs should follow as a natural solution to addressing the superiority of PPCs.

If convergence was merely the issue - then we'd see other 'boatable' weapon systems (like AC5s) being huge problems in terms of convergence. The same could be said about firing a few weapons at once - we'd see completely unbalanced play from being able to do that with many of the weapon systems out there.

The main issue with these problems has been the PPC - which is a weapon that has been the bane of MechWarrior balancing since its inception. Because its mechanics have not been explored for solutions to make other energy weapon systems more desirable (and not just to certain chassis).

Marchant Consadine, on 17 July 2013 - 07:32 PM, said:

Yet a lot those same people will notice that SRMs are actually usefull now. I agree the heatscale change did little to change the meta, but making brawler builds much more effective close up (than snipers) will change the meta and give back the choise. Now all they need to do is fix pulse lasers and everything is fine (well at least better).

I think it's more shock value than anything else. SRMs are somewhat more viable - but the main problem there is hit detection. LRMs suffer from a similar problem (or at the very least, have in the past) and it was all kinds of unplayable. It was neat when it worked and you knocked the wind out of an Atlas. It was delightfully frustrating when you watched a hunchback physically receive over 200 missiles and the spider with a flamer register more damage against the thing.

People have also shifted their loadouts to avoid the heat penalty without actually experiencing it. As they learn to deal with it - they'll gravitate back towards their preferred loadout. The PPCs will come back in time, because they still behave the same as they always have.

Besides... what are you going to replace them with? Large lasers?

Quote

I don't think the problem ever was that snipers were overpowered. The issue was that they were also the kings of brawling (or close enough at least).

It's an AC10 for a fraction of the weight, space, and without ammunition. Sure, it generates more heat - but that's hardly an issue.

Quote

Making heat a real problem in general is a good thing IMO. Stacking penalties I can live with. Bottom line is the game is better now than it was two days ago.

Give it time. I've already seen the instance of PPC 'boats' returning, with a fair degree of success.

The other thing is: "Do the ends justify the means?"

You could get rid of PPC boats just as easily by saying: "no more than 2 PPCs per mech."

We would have gotten a similar result to what we see now. That doesn't mean the idea was a good one.

Rather than fix the weapon(s) and the mechanics determined to be overpowered, the developers have decided to pick and choose which weapons receive additional heat for 'boating' penalties.

Rather than enforcing a better hardpoint system that would give mechs a more distinguished personality and restrict the availability of 4+ PPC builds (which is precisely what they are trying to do, here), they decided to establish an arbitrary number of weapons that can be present on a mech before heat begins to scale.

And it only affects some weapon systems. The small lasers are fine. The pulse lasers are fine (as if they need any more heat, anyway). **** the large laser - that cheesing, OP so-and-so. ACs 2-10 are fine (well, aside from an unstated value that got patched in regarding AC2s) - but that AC20 needs to generate enough heat to make your engine go critical. LRM 5-10 are good. LRM 15s are too much. LRM 20s... are okay again (... HUH!?).

This solution is going to turn into Wheel-Of-Stupid. Every two weeks, we're going to have a new list of weapons to add to the heat scaling list and remove from it. That will go on for a few months before they start playing craps with the heat scale values and the number of weapons that trigger heat scaling effects.

They've got a whole separate table (aside from the ones for damage values, range, heat, weight, weapon space, etc) of nonsense to spend another year trying to balance.

Not only is it a poor solution in terms of how it works. It's also a poor solution in that it creates even more problems and even more factors (for EVERY WEAPON) to be juggled in discussions of balance. They've already been all over the place with regards to damage values for weapons (just about everything has been nerfed and de-nerfed, supped up, then nerfed again) - now they've created another table of values to do the same thing.

What I wouldn't give to be a fly on the wall at the design meetings for this game... (or do those actually occur?)

[Zuesacoatl]

Kyocera, on 16 July 2013 - 10:51 AM, said:

Ok so my feedback.

Patch 1.2.231 = WIN

To all the whiners, how about you take your own F*****G advice for once - adapt or die!

^^^^^THIS x1000000000

Honestly though, with as much whining that is going on in here from people who boat the mentioned weapons, it has to be working, or your tears would not be flowing. ADAPT... I did, I still use my Jager to great effect, alpha, chain, chain, hide(or Alpha and take shut down for a kill) or Chain, Chain, Alpha, so many ways to use these builds. Again, ADAPT, use your own rules here, you pick the one you want to follow L2P, or Adapt or Die, your choice.

[Aim64C]

Zuesacoatl, on 17 July 2013 - 08:54 PM, said:

^^^^^THIS x1000000000

Honestly though, with as much whining that is going on in here from people who boat the mentioned weapons, it has to be working, or your tears would not be flowing. ADAPT... I did, I still use my Jager to great effect, alpha, chain, chain, hide(or Alpha and take shut down for a kill) or Chain, Chain, Alpha, so many ways to use these builds. Again, ADAPT, use your own rules here, you pick the one you want to follow L2P, or Adapt or Die, your choice.

*rolls eyes*

The only build I have that is affected by this change is my 4 large laser blackjack - which was such a cheesing ******* in every match I ran.

This system is absolutely horrible.

What happens when omnimechs come along, and the hardpoint system can be (to some degree or another) circumvented?

How many AC2s should be able to go on my madcat?

Or how many medium pulse lasers?

Why does an SRM-24 mech receive a heat penalty with its shotgun-like damage (at 48 points, currently - but will be 36 points once collision detection is fixed) when my 6 medium pulse laser blackjack gets away with a 36 point pinpoint alpha over 0.75 seconds?

Or how many AC10s can be fit on a mech before it starts to experience heat penalties?

Or Gauss rifles?

The point is that the "high alpha boating" was meant to be restricted by the current hardpoint system in play. Why do you think there are no 2 gauss assaults?

That's right.

Why do you think lasers deal damage over time?

That's right.

But, somehow, no one thought about the PPC - the bane of MechWarrior balancing since MechWarrior existed. No one thought about, in their hardpoint system, how each medium laser could become a PPC (and the player base would favor it).

No one thought about the firing and damage mechanics of the PPC (how it works like a light gauss rifle without ammunition at a fraction of the tonnage and space... the same weapon system they have gone out of their way to arbitrarily restrict on heavies and assaults).

They made it work the same as it always has. And here we are today.

The hardpoint system they implemented did not fix the problems it set out to.

Did they fix it? No.

They implemented another system that will take years for them to play a weird balancing game with - with each new weapon being a complicated balancing act of not just damage, range, heat, etc - but also this new heat scaling idea.

And that's before we get into the clans and omnimechs.

While their own statement lists Community Warfare in the -design- phase.

Which means none of this **** has been thought about. None. CW should have been designed and in production when the open beta launched. The 'official launch' should not even be given a date until CW is out of production and undergoing testing.

I'm beginning to wonder if any kind of meetings take place in regards to this game, or if it's just a bunch of isolated people reporting to individuals who make unilateral decisions without contacting other parts of the 'team.'

[Event Horizon]

Bravo PGI! Bravo! Well done =)

[Packman]

In tabletop, and in previous mechwarrior games, the computer is smart enough to shut the 'mech down BEFORE the mech starts taking damage. If you want to lower the heat capacity of all mechs, sure, whatever. If you want to make more weapons fired at the same time cost more heat, fine, whatever. (doesn't hurt the gausscats, btw, you remember the original snipers right?) If my mech is going to be damaged by going too hot, great, that's canon. I like that.

But I want my computer to shut my 'mech off before I kill myself. Don't make me shut down and take damage at the same point. It's stupid, suicidal, and unneccessary. Lower the auto shutdown point if you have to. I would prefer that to the current implementation.

[Jacmac]

I don't like the heat scaling penalty blanket-applied as a way to solve the problem of boating. Some chassis designs are simply meant to have more than the arbitrary limits the developers decided to use. I agree with a lot of the others that think the problem is better solved by changing convergence, especially on torso mounted weapons. For arm mounted, maybe those could have heat scaling issues but the convergence works as expected. Some chassis should have arms with no convergence, if the arm design wouldn't support it.

As others have stated, some of the limits don't make logical sense. It drives design changes, but rather than only solve the problem for a problem chassis, it breaks designs where the alternative ends up being not worth playing any longer. The AWS-8Q was already junky because of the ultra-wide torso. Why punish it even further? Same idea for the HBK-9P and it's laser pod.