545 replies to this topic

[hammerreborn]

Aim64C, on 18 July 2013 - 11:25 AM, said:

That is the peak of PGI's incompetence. Not ours.

Community Warfare is listed as "Late Design/Early Production."

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot.

That should have been its state three months before the Open Beta began. Hell - many would argue that should have been its state when the closed beta began!

A launch date shouldn't even be on the table.



It's a stupid system, and you know it.

4 Large Lasers? Nope. That's a build that needs to be penalized.

6 Medium pulse lasers? That's fine. No penalty, there.

Keep in mind - when people were complaining about the "boomcat" (AC40 cat), saying that it was stupid that people could turn machineguns into AC20s - the developers said that was the kind of customization they wanted to support. So they put their art team to work to "make it look right."

Yet, here we are - the developers have turned around and said: "On second thought... because we're not going to fix our hideous hardpoint system, we're going to implement this idea."

Because a weapon system that is so large you can only plausibly mount four on a mech at any time, that takes up 14 tons a pop, and requires ammunition at a frighteningly close range.... needs to be 'controlled.'

That's why we don't have any assaults with so much as a machine-gun on an opposing arm from an autocannon. Because the devs don't want 2 gauss or 2 AC-whatever assaults running around. Yet, in creating their hardpoint system to 'balance' MechWarrior... they never considered that every God damned medium laser on an Assault can (and likely will) become a PPC (unless it's on the head or center torso).

Of course - it doesn't help that the PPC (which has never had its firing and damage mechanics revisited) can achieve the same damage for the same tonnage with 60% of the critical space with absolutely zero ammunition concerns.

Because PGI decided to dabble with the heat system even further and design mechs to overheat - 4 PPC alphas (which should damned near shut you down - let alone 6) became viable and even preferable to stagger-firing lasers amidst a brawl (since heatsinks affected your cap almost more so than they affected your dissipation).

The problems this system is designed to 'fix' can be just as easily addressed by playing with the heat capacity and dissipation values.

Apparently - the previous MechWarrior titles knew a little bit about what they were doing.



... Seriously?

What builds 'deserve' to be penalized?

This is going to be an endless crusade. So my 8 Clan ER Medium Pulse Laser Nova gets put on the list of "yeah, don't want that **** running around without a heat penalty." - So I drop 3 of them (5 CERMDPLSR) and add 6 CERMDLSR to alpha with them.

Well ****.

Can't have that. So we're going to link medium lasers and pulse lasers together... that will only get six months to get 'right.'

In the mean time, I've dropped down to 2 medium pulse lasers, 4 medium lasers, and 2 large lasers. All clan (so they are ER).

This is without considering this thing is an omnimech - it is still within its canon hardpoint allotment.

Now you've got to link all of that together and figure out what heat scaling to apply to what and under what circumstances (since it applies if I link-fire within a 0.5 second period, too - and what if the large laser comes before the medium laser that breaks the penalty - or the large laser after the medium laser is what breaks the penalty?)

Then you're going to have people running LBX 10s with SRM6s. And we can't have that, either.

Why not just give everyone small lasers and be done with it?



See above.

You're insane.



See above.

That begins a never-ending crusade to determine "how many weapons fired at the same time is too many waeapons?"

Is my Jenner firing too many lasers at the same time?

It IS a rather small mech to be firing four lasers for a possible 20 point alpha.

And Should I be able to fire my SRM4 just before-hand? I mean - that's an alpha strike of every weapon I have. Shouldn't that come with some kind of penalty, or something?

I can already see the QQ once this crusade forces everyone into knife-fight ranges and my Jenner is running the ****** train on them. I -can- down assaults in a hell of a hurry (especially with my Foxtrot).

The logic behind all of this is just silly. I can get an 18-point alpha using medium pulse lasers out of each arm of my BJ-1X. But to get a 40 point alpha, a 24 total ton (plus ammunition) piece of equipment that can only fit in the arms of certain mechs needs to be penalized even further by having over 500% heat applied to it when it fires?

But the same 36 point alpha from 4 large lasers is too much and needs to be penalized (even though it comes at a cost of 20 tons as opposed to 12).

"Well, Aim, it has to do with range..."

Let me stop you there. SRM6s producing more than a 36 point alpha are too much - even though a good percentage of those missiles completely miss, not to mention dust their damage all over the mech.

So it has to do with range? SRMs even have the additional penalty of ammunition.

The system is completely arbitrary and it's going to spawn a never-ending crusade to add weapons and weapon combinations to the list of "needs heat penalty." At the same time - there will always be a quest to lessen the heat penalty on 'out of date' penalties because new ones have come along.

Which is why I refer to it as: "Wheel of Stupid."

There's a lot of nerdrage and tears in this post, for a system that isn't even finalized.

[Aim64C]

AntiCitizenJuan, on 18 July 2013 - 11:45 AM, said:

I'm finally going to chime in here and say that there is one thing that this change has addressed (technically on the 30th) is the elimination of most high damage, long range alpha strikes.

Yes you can still boat PPCs, and yes you have to fire them 2 at a time. But thats a good thing. Especially when we see PPC heat go up, forcing long range builds to stay at long range for most effective damage.

So the problem wasn't Large Lasers, SRM6s, AC20s .... it was PPCs?

Quote

Could it have been done better? Definitely.
Would I have preferred a Hardpoint Size system? Most definitely.

And why would you have preferred those things?

Quote

But the meta is slowly shifting away from the ******** we've put up with for 4 months, and I have to say that it makes me very happy.

Now the villain will be my 6 medium pulse laser BlackJack (which has seen some blazing successes), my 6 small pulse laser Jenner Seven-Foxtrot, or anything that has more than two AC5s.

Oh, and the Gauss+PPC combo.

And the people who manage to stagger-fire their PPCs and still manage to chew you up (because they can deposit 20 points of damage every 0.75 seconds - it doesn't take too much to fire PPCs on the move, which would hinder counter-fire efforts unless PPCs were being used to counter, as well).

The PPC meta will return because PPCs are the premier weapon. You can get the damage of an AC20 for the same tonnage at literally three times the range without ammunition concerns. Oh, and for less than half of the critical space investment.

Because PPCs behave exactly like autocannons.

Which is how lasers used to behave in most of the MechWarrior games, before. That was thought through, this time around - with lasers behaving differently so that autocannons actually have a place in combat (unless you want to reduce the damage of lasers like Mech4 did).

No one thought to address the PPC's firing mechanics.

No matter how you change the 'meta' of the game or try and impose various restrictions - the PPC reigns supreme among energy weapons. If you have the tonnage and space for it - it should go on your mech first.

The same goes if you put in hardpoint restrictions. The same goes if you start introducing heat spikes.

The only way to balance it is to change how the weapon behaves. Introduce a charge mechanic to its firing sequence (say, 1.5 seconds, or so), make the firing sequence apply damage over, say, 0.4 seconds as a hit-scan weapon (since it is a stream of particles traveling at nearly the speed of light).

Hold button to charge, release to fire. Now you've already accounted for the inclusion of support equipment like PPC capacitors that add more heat to the charge cycle but increase damage from the weapon by 5 (you could also have the duration of fire increase slightly with each additional capacitor).

The weapon becomes intuitive to use, has a place in combat while not replacing lasers and autocannons in practical utility.

Adjustments to the heat capacity of mechs and the heat dissipation can address problems with people sticking 4 of the things on their mechs (the same with other energy weapons).

[Corvus Antaka]

hammerreborn, on 18 July 2013 - 11:54 AM, said:

There's a lot of nerdrage and tears in this post, for a system that isn't even finalized.

no kidding.

I WANT MY 6 PPC alpha back! WAHHHHHHHHH!!!!!

[AntiCitizenJuan]

Aim64C, on 18 July 2013 - 12:06 PM, said:

People build around being able to repeatedly alpha strike and cool down before the alpha is ready again.
PGI didn't like that, and to be frank, I dont either.

Less alpha strikes is better for gameplay.

And hardpoint sizes is my preference because it would take one afternoon to balance every variant to be unique and good at a specific role.

[Aim64C]

hammerreborn, on 18 July 2013 - 11:54 AM, said:

There's a lot of nerdrage and tears in this post, for a system that isn't even finalized.

You can call it whatever you want, kiddo. It doesn't change the facts of the matter.

You -cannot- make this system work. Because of exactly what I describe.

They've linked PPCs - but are they going to link gauss in with PPCs for heat spikes?

Within the PPC and ERPPC ... let's say I link-fire all of them within 0.75 seconds with 0.25 seconds between each. I fire 2 ERPPCs and one PPC. Which one gets the heat penalty?

Splitting hairs?

We've already had the request to link in the gauss.

I do the same. Two ERPPCs and then the Gauss. Does my Gauss generate a PPC heat penalty equal to that of firing an ERPPC, or to that of firing 2 gauss rifles?

Now you care to address things like what I described with the Nova - where I'm tying a 12+28+20= 60 point alpha together using 3 different weapon systems? What if I start with the 2 CERLGLSR and finish with the medium lasers (assuming you decide to assign a penalty for it). Can I 'skirt' the penalty by not firing the higher heat generating weapons last?

Or does the combo get its own heat penalty?

The system is fundamentally ********.

You can call it "nerdrage" and "tears."

That's a cop-out for not being willing or able to think past the end of your nose.

[hammerreborn]

Aim64C, on 18 July 2013 - 12:15 PM, said:

You can call it whatever you want, kiddo. It doesn't change the facts of the matter.

You -cannot- make this system work. Because of exactly what I describe.

They've linked PPCs - but are they going to link gauss in with PPCs for heat spikes?

Within the PPC and ERPPC ... let's say I link-fire all of them within 0.75 seconds with 0.25 seconds between each. I fire 2 ERPPCs and one PPC. Which one gets the heat penalty?

Splitting hairs?

We've already had the request to link in the gauss.

I do the same. Two ERPPCs and then the Gauss. Does my Gauss generate a PPC heat penalty equal to that of firing an ERPPC, or to that of firing 2 gauss rifles?

Now you care to address things like what I described with the Nova - where I'm tying a 12+28+20= 60 point alpha together using 3 different weapon systems? What if I start with the 2 CERLGLSR and finish with the medium lasers (assuming you decide to assign a penalty for it). Can I 'skirt' the penalty by not firing the higher heat generating weapons last?

Or does the combo get its own heat penalty?

The system is fundamentally ********.

You can call it "nerdrage" and "tears."

That's a cop-out for not being willing or able to think past the end of your nose.

Those are a lot more words that amount to nothing but tears and nerdrage, for a system that isn't finalized, and for mechs that aren't even in the game.

Edited by hammerreborn, 18 July 2013 - 12:20 PM.

[Aim64C]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 18 July 2013 - 12:07 PM, said:

no kidding.

I WANT MY 6 PPC alpha back! WAHHHHHHHHH!!!!!

I have no such thing.

The only build I have affected by this is my 4 large laser blackjack.

I, actually, prefer out-damaging assaults in my Jenner.

AntiCitizenJuan, on 18 July 2013 - 12:10 PM, said:

People build around being able to repeatedly alpha strike and cool down before the alpha is ready again.
PGI didn't like that, and to be frank, I dont either.

The internal damage mechanic combined with a lower heat threshold is all that is necessary for that. The PPC should generate 10 heat. The ERPPC should generate 15 heat.

Interpreting classic battletech rules to real-time is tricky, as a mech would dissipate heat over its 10 second turn and -then- suffer the consequences of any remaining heat (meaning your 'effective' heat capacity was something like 60 heat).

However, 4 PPCs should damned near shut you down. 4 ERPPCs should shut you down and deal internal damage. 6 ERPPCs should cause you to go critical.

The problem with the current system is that it allows high alphas to exist while the dissipation is not fast enough for link-firing to really make much of a difference.

Quote

Less alpha strikes is better for gameplay.

No doubt - but at the same time, a simple adjustment to the existing systems would put a huge stop to the main offenders.

Quote

And hardpoint sizes is my preference because it would take one afternoon to balance every variant to be unique and good at a specific role.

And how long will it take for this system to do that?

Or, better yet, -can- it actually do that?

[Aim64C]

hammerreborn, on 18 July 2013 - 12:19 PM, said:

Those are a lot more words that amount to nothing but tears and nerdrage, for a system that isn't finalized, and for mechs that aren't even in the game.

It's simply one of the easier examples. Though it is one of the original Clan mechs.

I can play your game, though. Stalker. Two ERPPC. Two Large Pulse Laser. Two ER Large Laser.

18+20+20 = 58 point alpha. The PPCs can be fired before or after, depending upon the engagement ranges - though at ranges for the LRGPLSR, you can practically hit the alpha-strike button and be rewarded - given how fast the weapon travels.

Since you're the intelligent one around here - how about you suggest how the system could possibly take this type of thing into account.

[Snowcrow]

Hardpoint size would be more intuitive I believe, but it would severely limit what kind of builds you could do, which pgi doesn't want. So the boating penalty is a good solution I think.

[FupDup]

Snowcrow, on 18 July 2013 - 12:29 PM, said:

Hardpoint size would be more intuitive I believe, but it would severely limit what kind of builds you could do, which pgi doesn't want. So the boating penalty is a good solution I think.

The boating penalty limits what builds you can use too ya'know. The only difference is that it uses heat instead of mechlab graphics to tell you what not to use.

Edited by FupDup, 18 July 2013 - 12:31 PM.

[MustrumRidcully]

Itkovian, on 18 July 2013 - 06:02 AM, said:

Love the new system, and from what I've seen it certainly has a positive effect in the gameplay.

Is it perfect? No. Is it the best solution? Probably not, but I'm going to bet there is a compromise involved between complexity of implementing the solution and its effectiveness.

As it is, this system gives the dev a powerful new set of dials to fiddle around with to maintain balance. That's a good thing, no matter if it isn't the best solution.

And it's certainly had a major positive impact in the game.

I don't think it will act as a powerful dial. The way I see it, it's a turn-off switch, mostly.

People will do everything they can do avoid the penalty, which either means chain-firing, or it means switching to a different loadout. The trade-off of taking the penalty is not worth it. So basically the only important part of the system is the "max-alpha" value. They could just not have a heat penalty and simply disallow shooting more guns than at once than the max-alpha value.

The whole "heat multiplier" is set to values right now that will not be worth taking the penalty. Just look at the AC/20 - the penalty is higher than the heat of a single AC/20, why risk it?

[hammerreborn]

Aim64C, on 18 July 2013 - 12:27 PM, said:

It's simply one of the easier examples. Though it is one of the original Clan mechs.

I can play your game, though. Stalker. Two ERPPC. Two Large Pulse Laser. Two ER Large Laser.

18+20+20 = 58 point alpha. The PPCs can be fired before or after, depending upon the engagement ranges - though at ranges for the LRGPLSR, you can practically hit the alpha-strike button and be rewarded - given how fast the weapon travels.

Since you're the intelligent one around here - how about you suggest how the system could possibly take this type of thing into account.

Whats wrong with that loadout? Once again...lots of tears and whining over an incomplete system.

With that loadout you have 2 different cooldowns, 3 different ranges, three different weapon durations (pinpoint, .75 and 1), and it's unlikely you hit anyone in the same spot with the 4 lasers.

Essentially, that loadout, compared to a 4 ERPPC stalker:

Yours:
59 damage 0 -> 300
49 300 -> 600
38 600 -> 675
29 675 -> 810
19 810 -> 1350 and
10 1350 -> 1620

And 4 of the weapon systems are duration

Total Heat: 53

Normal stalker:
40 damage 0 -> 810
20 damage 810 -> 1620

All 4 weapons are pinpoint

Total Heat: 44

Do you see where this is an improvement for making the game not devolve into snipe fests? The build is entirely worse everywhere but in the brawling range and runs far hotter.

Edited by hammerreborn, 18 July 2013 - 12:43 PM.

[Aim64C]

hammerreborn, on 18 July 2013 - 12:40 PM, said:

Whats wrong with that loadout? Once again...lots of tears and whining over an incomplete system.

With that loadout you have 2 different cooldowns, 3 different ranges, three different weapon durations (pinpoint, .75 and 1), and it's unlikely you hit anyone in the same spot with the 4 lasers.

Essentially, that loadout, compared to a 4 ERPPC stalker:

Yours:
59 damage 0 -> 300
49 300 -> 600
38 600 -> 675
29 675 -> 810
19 810 -> 1350 and
10 1350 -> 1620

And 4 of the weapon systems are duration

Total Heat: 53

Normal stalker:
40 damage 0 -> 810
20 damage 810 -> 1620

All 4 weapons are pinpoint

Total Heat: 44

Do you see where this is an improvement for making the game not devolve into snipe fests? The build is entirely worse everywhere but in the brawling range and runs far hotter.

I really couldn't care less if this pathetic excuse for a system garners a perceived beneficial result. We could simply have made AC20s get two shots/ton of ammo, or given PPCs 30 heat and gotten the same.

The result is easy to achieve when you're a developer. You can dictate it in the code in any manner of ways.

The point is that you can alpha the large pulse laser and large laser together for slightly over 38 points of damage. My 4 large laser blackjack, however, suffers a penalty.

Which is something this type of system is always going to suffer from.

Sure - they are 'different ranges' - but how many PPC stalkers did you see nailing people at 700 meters all the time? It was usually at 400 meters or so. They could do some damage at range - but only the best of them could reliably hit anything at their weapons' max effective ranges.

At that point, you were leading, anyway - and weapon convergence was behind the target - meaning that a lot of those long-ranged PPC shots were diffuse when they actually made contact.

The other point is that I can simply sit there and keep cycling through different weapon selections that are not currently on the list.

Or let's take the Gauss example. 2PPC plus a Gauss. No penalty currently. Should there be?

If no - then why are 2 large lasers penalized?

If yes - then should something be done about the 36 point alpha my 6 medium pulse laser blackjack has? Or what about the 2-gauss Cataphract or Jaeger?

These are fundamental questions that have to be asked for the system to be finalized.

Which means that the system will almost never be finalized as it will have to take into account every different little build that comes along.

Sure - my proposed build is "not as effective" as a 6 PPC stalker. But it's certainly capable of burning through a lot of things that the AC40 Jaeger is getting penalized for being able to do.

I was playing effectively with a variety of different builds even within the PPC meta. Because I only solo-drop, there's only so high of a bracket that I can achieve - which means I was not encountering the most effective PPC players - but that's not withstanding.

The point is that we're going through and deciding which builds are "Fair" and "Not Fair." It's not what weapon systems are unbalanced. It's not what mech chassis are unbalanced. It's - "Which weapon combinations are not fair?"

And we're trying to weed them out.

Which launches a never-ending crusade for fairness with absolutely no guidance as to what is fair other than: "I just want to be able to make more boom before I die."

Edited by Aim64C, 18 July 2013 - 01:02 PM.

[Fajther]

My reason for liking it ..... When playing mgt, i went to several turnaments. We had to work under restrictions for deck size, number of cards, and even band cards. Playing under the system made it better, even if i lost the ability to play with my band cards. Plenty of other games have to do things like this. It was only a matter of timee.

[AntiCitizenJuan]

Everyone in here is starting to sound like b.utthurt dwellers

Id rather deal with 2 salvos of 2 PPCs than 4 all at once, even if it only requires half a second more to fire them.

Thats a half second to torso twist, or get behind cover, spreading damage or totally avoiding it.
The change is across the board because they dont want people to die so easily, and the system isnt finished.

Not seeing what the huge problem is.

1 Gauss 2 PPCs is better for gameplay than 1 Gauss 3 PPCs. It's a step in the right direction.

Edited by AntiCitizenJuan, 18 July 2013 - 01:14 PM.

[Tsula]

So your saying you want to have your high alpha's back. What if I told you they still can be made with skill, and though process. Sorry could not help myself.


Here's is the deal. Boating is down is the system right don't know really never one to boat except for LRM's you can still mount 2(ER)PPC and Gauss Rifle. Some have pointed out you can mount 1 PPC + 2 ERPCC + Gauss Rifle. OK that is going to change once they lump them together. What I think everyone is forgetting is:

Quote

Investigation started: For the 30th patch, we are looking at possibly bumping PPC and ERPPC base heat generation. If we do bump the base heat, the heat scale for these weapons will be lowered. This is just an update and not a guarantee that this change will be added to the game.

as stated by Paul.

I see less boating and people trying new things its better then everyone arms racing to the next cheese build Splatcat died with SRM nerf good. Streak Cat DOA with tuning of SSRM joy. Now the 6 or 4 (ER)PPC Stalker is dying good. Less then normal x amount of (ER)PPC + Gauss rifle build good. We see less A/C 40 Jagermechs OK at range they die fast anyhow See above on how Splatcats are easy to kill at range. See King Crab a mech that was hot on heat that sported 2 x A/C 20. Jager is a lot lighter so yes needed to balance them they needed something to hit them back in line. Ok ya we see a increase dual guass' now well they kind of go boom easy kind of a counter balance already.

I'm cutting this short, because no matter how I tries to explain it makes the game better. I'll be told I am a brown noisier, stupid player, who can't figure out the be all to end all build. When one build is used and the others go by the way side its dull. All other weight classes become useless to the alpha arms race. The game becomes stale and stagnate. With this one little tweak that is not perfect by no means it has improved the other option to be competitive. I'm seeing more Light, Medium chassis coming back into the field because its not a get blasted in secs anymore. Ya they hurt but they learn and its not a instant you fail.

I have a Stalker I can point 58 points at that's more then the perffered x (ER)PCC + Guass Rifle at 45 Combo or the 40 Jager, and No I am not sporting LL or LPL.

If you want a instant kill game their are tons of them coming out and already out. Please go find them, and stop slamming the community with negative remarks, non constructive feedback and discouraging new players from trying it out...... Not saying this is a perfect fix, but it did help the meta and we are seeing other builds come out besides the long range pop tart or turret builds.

[FunkyFritter]

I'm not a fan of unintuitive changes, I can't imagine trying to explain to a new player that fielding specific weapons in specific quantities is bad. Even if the metagame works out to be incredibly diverse I'd still much prefer something that doesn't operate outside the existing equipment stats.

[Rippthrough]

tsula, on 18 July 2013 - 01:29 PM, said:

and we are seeing other builds come out besides the long range pop tart or turret builds.

You may be, some of us aren't. That's why we're pissed that a half-arsed arbitrary system of numbers plucked out of the air was implemented instead of a proper fix.
Especially when it's just going to cause even more balancing issues down the line.

[hammerreborn]

Aim64C, on 18 July 2013 - 01:01 PM, said:

I really couldn't care less if this pathetic excuse for a system garners a perceived beneficial result. We could simply have made AC20s get two shots/ton of ammo, or given PPCs 30 heat and gotten the same.

The result is easy to achieve when you're a developer. You can dictate it in the code in any manner of ways.

The point is that you can alpha the large pulse laser and large laser together for slightly over 38 points of damage. My 4 large laser blackjack, however, suffers a penalty.

Which is something this type of system is always going to suffer from.

Sure - they are 'different ranges' - but how many PPC stalkers did you see nailing people at 700 meters all the time? It was usually at 400 meters or so. They could do some damage at range - but only the best of them could reliably hit anything at their weapons' max effective ranges.

At that point, you were leading, anyway - and weapon convergence was behind the target - meaning that a lot of those long-ranged PPC shots were diffuse when they actually made contact.

The other point is that I can simply sit there and keep cycling through different weapon selections that are not currently on the list.

Or let's take the Gauss example. 2PPC plus a Gauss. No penalty currently. Should there be?

If no - then why are 2 large lasers penalized?

If yes - then should something be done about the 36 point alpha my 6 medium pulse laser blackjack has? Or what about the 2-gauss Cataphract or Jaeger?

These are fundamental questions that have to be asked for the system to be finalized.

Which means that the system will almost never be finalized as it will have to take into account every different little build that comes along.

Sure - my proposed build is "not as effective" as a 6 PPC stalker. But it's certainly capable of burning through a lot of things that the AC40 Jaeger is getting penalized for being able to do.

I was playing effectively with a variety of different builds even within the PPC meta. Because I only solo-drop, there's only so high of a bracket that I can achieve - which means I was not encountering the most effective PPC players - but that's not withstanding.

The point is that we're going through and deciding which builds are "Fair" and "Not Fair." It's not what weapon systems are unbalanced. It's not what mech chassis are unbalanced. It's - "Which weapon combinations are not fair?"

And we're trying to weed them out.

Which launches a never-ending crusade for fairness with absolutely no guidance as to what is fair other than: "I just want to be able to make more boom before I die."

You know, instead of typing all of that. A picture says a thousand words.

[Drehl]

I know I'm going to attract the hatred of the "lol wut stupid pgi screw heat penatly" faction but:

Do you guys realise that this change isn't either a dedicated ppc nor a sniper nerf? And never was intented to be.

It is a boating nerf. It punishes masssive usage of one single weapon and firing it at once.
And it works.
There aren't that much 4 ppc stalkers alpahing all the time or ac40 jagers anymore. Even 6 srm6 splat cats are rare. (and seriously.. compared to a ac40s flood we had before, that splat cats are just adorable)
Yes I know there is still the dual ppc/erppc build but they announced that they're going to link these weapons at the end of the month, so stop stating that this is an easy way to work around the penalty -.-.
BUT you can still use this build if you want.. it just isn't the no-brainer option it used to be. Thats great.

So I voted yes. I like the change. Even when it's arbitrary and there is no locical cause of the magically appearing bonus heat.. doesn't matter as long as it helps to bring the meta back to more diverse builds.


High alpha meta is still no fun. There are still to much ppc/gauss. But there aren't that much stupid single weapon boats.

(remember: its a boat, not sniper nerf. 2ppc+ gauss isn't really a boat)


The only thing that bugs be of, is the very low threshold for large lasers. 3 large lasers or even 4 have never been as powerfull as 3 or 4 ppcs fired at once.. for the reason alone that they don't do pinpoint damage and you can easily spread their damage by torsotwisting.
I used to pilot my heavy metal, flame and trebuchet with 3 ll (and intendet to do the same with my viktor) but the change forced me to overthink my builds.
Now I have at least in my viktor joined the dark side and build in a gauss and 2 erppcs (because it's so much easier to use than 3lls...
That's the only point I could agree in with the "heat penalty is bad" guys.

Everything else is fine imo.
I'm sure they're going to adress the sniper meta and especially the slightly overpowered ppcs in future patches.
(and they said they're going to look into increasing the base heat of ppcs.. maybe thats already enough to bring them back in line.. who knows)