248 replies to this topic

[Vincent Quatermain]

Monlex, on 28 July 2013 - 12:06 AM, said:

For all the nay sayers of a "convergence" fix, please explain to me why you dont like it?

Ozric and Taemien basically said it. The cost and complexity of implementing convergence, combined with the possibility that it will only nerf mid-Elo alphas makes it a potential complete waste of dev hours. Given the awful alpha heat mechanic, I would really like to discourage PGI from wasting more dev hours adding new variables into the balance equation.

They should adjust the numbers they have, not create a bunch more new untested numbers.

[Vincent Quatermain]

DaZur, on 28 July 2013 - 07:36 AM, said:

The problem is the cycle-time of these apex weapons (PPC, Gauss) do not have a large enough disparity between them and the remaining middling weapons.

This is actually a really interesting idea. It's possible that PPC heat could remain the same with a massive nerf to recycle time (at least 6 sec, probably more like 8 sec). This would make PPCs a terrible brawling weapon, since even though it would actually even out the heat, the time between shots would be far inferior to other energy weapons or SRMs.

I also like this suggestion because it alters a variable PGI already has rather than creating new ones.

[KingCobra]

DaZur, on 28 July 2013 - 07:36 AM, said:

Christ... (Looking for the mic that someone keep dropping)...

The apex weapons don't need to be crippled and combining them doesn't either... Apex weapons are supposed to "be" apex weapons, be it in games, TT or lore. They're OP because they are the pinnacle weapon in the game.

The problem is the cycle-time of these apex weapons (PPC, Gauss) do not have a large enough disparity between them and the remaining middling weapons.

As is, a stack of PPC or a combination of PPC + Gauss can reach out and touch someone at range for a 20- 60 pinpoint {Dezgra} slap. Thats not a problem... That's what they are supposed to do. The problem is the fact that a pilot can fire off 3 to 5 of these in short order, so short in fact the target mech has little recourse.

Additionally the fact that these apex weapons cycle-time are too similar to the middling weapons, it creates the logic of "why should I take a middling weapon for brawl-range when I can continue to use my front-loaded ranged weapons and use them as effectively with little down-side."
Solution is to increase the cycle-time of the apex weapons... maybe even 2-fold.

This allows them to continue to fulfill their battlefield role as a ranged support weapons, diminishes their ability to be used as an area suppression weapon and severely nerfs their effectiveness inside brawl-range, thereby intensifying use of the middling weapons.

Damn it.. wish I had a mic to drop.

OMG some else with a brain I have been trying to tell PGI and the Devs this for almost 2 years along with other things but rest assured DAZUR they wont listen to you either. My pic of the day------>A MechWarrior -->

[Nicholas Carlyle]

While I appreciate what DaZur is saying; I don't think it will fix the issue.

Now before I say this...I'm not saying team work shouldn't be applauded. I enjoy team work.

But the problem is, that fixes one PPC/Gauss boat. What happens when there are 12 of them?

I'm still leaning more and more towards a system and forces a chain fire scenario.

You want to use PPC and Gauss Rifles? That's fine, but now you need to aim each shot you make.

Keep in mind also, that I'm from a mind set that mechs should live a good while in games. And not melt under huge alpha's 30 seconds into the game.

I want LONG drawn out battles of attrition, where that great component system they implemented gets put to use.

Edited by Nicholas Carlyle, 28 July 2013 - 10:01 AM.

[Master Q]

No, not someone with a brain. Someone without a perspective.

FACT #1: If boating a set of these weapons in normal Battletech, they will splash over the mech targeted. Weapons aim INDIVIDUALLY for a reason. Part of an alpha strike missing and different weapons hitting different panels isn't just an effect of the system, it is a CRITICAL GAME MECHANIC.

FACT #2: The implementation of a Clan targeting computer doesn't change this. Sure, you can now say "pick a panel" and try to hit it. But the chance of actually hitting is still quite low, because +3 to hit on 2d6 can take a 7 target number to a 10, and against faster mechs takes you right past 12 and makes the shot impossible.

FACT #3: Convergence was SUPPOSED TO BE A MECHANIC FROM DAY ONE. Two of the skills in the pilot skill tree talk about it. The devs have admitted it's not working right now, but it needs to be.

Edited by Master Q, 28 July 2013 - 10:06 AM.

[KingCobra]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 28 July 2013 - 09:59 AM, said:

While I appreciate what DaZur is saying; I think it doesn't fix the issue.

Now before I say this...I'm not saying team work shouldn't be applauded. I enjoy team work.

But the problem is, that fixes one PPC/Gauss boat. What happens when there are 12 of them?

I'm still leaning more and more towards a system and forces a chain fire scenario.

You want to use PPC and Gauss Rifles? That's fine, but now you need to aim each shot you make.

Keep in mind also, that I'm from a mind set that mechs should live a good while in games. And not melt under huge alpha's 30 seconds into the game.

I want LONG drawn out battles of attrition, where that great component system they implemented gets put to use.

Look as long as there is a ALPHA STRIKE in the game players will min-max any weapons to achieve max fire power for there mech and teams will combo those builds to dominate the gameplay. The true only way to achieve player skill over massive alpha fire power is to eliminate the Alpha Shot-Lengthen the cycle time x4 for the group weapons fire and chain fire. Then players start to take on a more neutral or defensive role based on skill not firepower per mech and this makes players use team efforts to actually win battles. Which OMG leads to a actual reason to keep playing this game along with a few other things.

[Gamgee]

NERF THE MOTHER ******* HEAT YOU STUPID *******!!!! /MONTHS AND MONTHS OF RAAAAGGGEEEEEEEEE!!!!

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Maybe a mechanic where if you group fire weapons they go to 4x normal cooldown might be a way to go.

Or something like that.

[Vulix]

You know what you can do about 2xPPC+Gauss? Actually use cover. The guys I kill the most are people who just run out into the open blindly at me, shooting their medium lasers from 500 out while I blast them. Smarter guys will use cover to get to me, and actually do most of the time because I can't get enough shots on them as they are making it hard for me.

As soon as PPCs get nerfed, people are just going to complain that LRMs or SRM boats are OP again. It's a terrible cycle of bad players complaining that they are dying a lot.

[KingCobra]

Vulix, on 28 July 2013 - 10:23 AM, said:

You know what you can do about 2xPPC+Gauss? Actually use cover. The guys I kill the most are people who just run out into the open blindly at me, shooting their medium lasers from 500 out while I blast them. Smarter guys will use cover to get to me, and actually do most of the time because I can't get enough shots on them as they are making it hard for me.

As soon as PPCs get nerfed, people are just going to complain that LRMs or SRM boats are OP again. It's a terrible cycle of bad players complaining that they are dying a lot.

And your right to a certain degree as long as they let new players run in and get killed like sheep against the lions players will complain until they learn enough skill to get under cover and play the game. But having a alpha fire core a new player in 10 seconds does not make the new player want to stay with this game and learn to be a MechWarrior pilot. That's why I say make the game more skill based not alpha fire power based. I can honestly say more new player have tried this game been blown away by to overpowered mechs and teams and left this game than there are actual players playing MWO right now.And PGI still will not listen to players that have seen this pattern of game downfall before.

Edited by KingCobra, 28 July 2013 - 10:32 AM.

[Vulix]

KingCobra, on 28 July 2013 - 10:31 AM, said:

And PGI still will not listen to players that have seen this pattern of game downfall before.

As long as PGI makes lame trial mechs such as the flamer Blackjack, I don't think new players have any hope at all honestly =P

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Vulix, on 28 July 2013 - 10:23 AM, said:

You know what you can do about 2xPPC+Gauss? Actually use cover. The guys I kill the most are people who just run out into the open blindly at me, shooting their medium lasers from 500 out while I blast them. Smarter guys will use cover to get to me, and actually do most of the time because I can't get enough shots on them as they are making it hard for me.

As soon as PPCs get nerfed, people are just going to complain that LRMs or SRM boats are OP again. It's a terrible cycle of bad players complaining that they are dying a lot.

That's great and all, but even when I use cover and get closer to the PPC/Gauss mech, it can still shoot a 35 alpha into my chest.

It's not as if they are bad brawlers.

They are arguably better brawlers than the brawlers are due to SRM hit detection and spread being meh, and AC/20's getting their heat penalty.

[Chavette]

What you can do about them: as a player, nothing.

What you can do against them: 2xppc+gauss better than them.

If you lose to them, its you and not the game.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Chavette, on 28 July 2013 - 10:40 AM, said:

What you can do about them: as a player, nothing.

What you can do against them: 2xppc+gauss better than them.

If you lose to them, its you and not the game.

While you aren't wrong, it makes for a crappy game.

[Keifomofutu]

Chavette, on 28 July 2013 - 10:40 AM, said:

What you can do about them: as a player, nothing.

What you can do against them: 2xppc+gauss better than them.

If you lose to them, its you and not the game.

Definition of OP:When the best counter to something is itself.

[Vincent Quatermain]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 28 July 2013 - 09:59 AM, said:

But the problem is, that fixes one PPC/Gauss boat. What happens when there are 12 of them?

Having played in the 12v12 public tests, I noticed that it is actually very rare to have a situation where all of your mechs can find an open firing lane. We are used to seeing ~6 out of 8 mechs able to get shots maximum, and it's easy to assume that this will scale up to ~9 out of 12 mechs getting shots. Turns out, not so much. We are actually very near the maximum already. Having 12v12 just means that you are much more likely to have multiple fights rather than just one big one.

Nicholas Carlyle said:

I want LONG drawn out battles of attrition, where that great component system they implemented gets put to use.

That's why Saben Zero's idea of buffing internal structure might help. After armor is gone, there are three states that a location can be in:

1) Breached but un-damaged
2) Some components destroyed
3) Entire section destroyed

That second state almost never occurs right now and, even when it does occur, it rarely lasts very long. It would be really interesting if partially damaged sections were more common.

However . . .

Let's keep in mind that mech survivability is a separate issue from weapon balance. Weapons need to balanced on the basis of the tonnage required to use them effectively (although we are going to need some kind of a tech-level modifier when Clan tech arrives). Once the weapons are all relatively equal, with trade-offs of course, then we could adjust armor or internals to increase or decrease how long mechs survive in battle.

[Master Q]

KingCobra, on 28 July 2013 - 10:31 AM, said:

But having a alpha fire core a new player in 10 seconds does not make the new player want to stay with this game and learn to be a MechWarrior pilot.

This. This. A thousand times this.

I have a large number of friends who TRIED this game out. Their callsigns are still on my Social tab.

How many have actually played in the last month? Near as I can tell, two. I try to invite others to come back and PGI's screwups over the course of beta have left them so disillusioned and so angry at the game that I can't imagine what will get them back.

Every day PGI runs more players off by not fixing what really IS broken.

[Vulix]

Well, PPCs take up 7 tons, create a lot of heat, and really punish you if you can't aim. They have a higher skill ceiling as a weapon to use properly, than say lasers. To me, they seem balanced already - they reward players who practice aiming precisely and from range. Sure they should be marginally tweaked to ensure balance with other weapons, but how much change do you guys actually think they need? I think the 1 heat increase PGI is doing is exactly the type of balancing needed, not sweeping changes.

[Orzorn]

Vulix, on 28 July 2013 - 12:11 PM, said:

They have a higher skill ceiling as a weapon to use properly, than say lasers.

No they don't, they have less. They don't have a burn time.

1 PPC also generates only 8 heat. That isn't exactly scorching heat, not when a gauss and 15 DHS is involved.

Edited by Orzorn, 28 July 2013 - 12:38 PM.

[Blackadder]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 28 July 2013 - 10:20 AM, said:

Maybe a mechanic where if you group fire weapons they go to 4x normal cooldown might be a way to go.

Or something like that.

already put that in the feedback thread when they first announced the heat cap. its basically the same thing as the heat penalty, just a reload penalty which would have been better.


there are plenty of solutions that will work , however until PGI accepts that they have to do something , nothing with change.

Vincent Quatermain, on 28 July 2013 - 11:06 AM, said:

Having played in the 12v12 public tests, I noticed that it is actually very rare to have a situation where all of your mechs can find an open firing lane. We are used to seeing ~6 out of 8 mechs able to get shots maximum, and it's easy to assume that this will scale up to ~9 out of 12 mechs getting shots. Turns out, not so much. We are actually very near the maximum already. Having 12v12 just means that you are much more likely to have multiple fights rather than just one big one.



That's why Saben Zero's idea of buffing internal structure might help. After armor is gone, there are three states that a location can be in:

1) Breached but un-damaged
2) Some components destroyed
3) Entire section destroyed

That second state almost never occurs right now and, even when it does occur, it rarely lasts very long. It would be really interesting if partially damaged sections were more common.

However . . .

Let's keep in mind that mech survivability is a separate issue from weapon balance. Weapons need to balanced on the basis of the tonnage required to use them effectively (although we are going to need some kind of a tech-level modifier when Clan tech arrives). Once the weapons are all relatively equal, with trade-offs of course, then we could adjust armor or internals to increase or decrease how long mechs survive in battle.

Buffing structure is at best a short term solution which wont solve long term problems, and brings its own set of issues. without a targeted buff to individual components, which is probably lengthy, you wont solve many of the issues. A flat increase across the board, will reinforce heavy and assaults more then lights and mediums, although some lights will be monsters due to hit detection even more so then now.

its the same as buffing armor, you will have to revisit it in 6-8 months or a year or whenever new weapons/tech is put into the game constantly.