483 replies to this topic

[mekabuser]

i get the impression they are up to their necks
All i can do is wish them luck.

[Joseph Mallan]

Royalewithcheese, on 12 August 2013 - 04:13 PM, said:

I've got my fingers crossed that this is something logical like a projectile speed change and not 2 Ghost Heat 2 Furious.

So long as it does nothing to weaken the damage done I will be fine. If it nerfs convergence I am cool.

[FireDog]

^{My take from Dev 44 is that PGI really needs to reallocate their priorities. The increasing staleness of the game should be their number one issue, Not hit detection, not new user experience and not even game balance. In all honesty, those PGI has down fairly well. However, anyone who has played the game for several months wants more varied and rich gaming experience. IE New GAME MODES!!! Or at least add code to change up the ones we got. The current "Assault the Pumps" and "Capture the Pumps" are getting old! Can't PGI just add a few variables like setting game orders or change the rules of engagement, like "Team A attack, B defend", "B attack, A defend", "Both Attack (current mode)", "Capture only after half of opposing team is eliminated" or maybe just shorten the time limits and whoever has the most mechs, or weight of mechs, or capture points (or gallons of whatever those pumps pump) on the field, wins? Note: A few of the MW4 mission maps like Talon Enjoy Game Meters".}

[Chronojam]

Niko Snow, on 12 August 2013 - 01:27 PM, said:

Question from Chronojam: Are there any plans to increase internal health to capture that stubborn resilience we're told mechs have, to capture the feel of wrangling a giant war machine as various weapons and support systems shut down over time, to diminish the impact of the high-alpha long-range dominance over short range builds, to reduce the odds of a lucky snap-shot or bad maneuver insta-killing lighter mechs, and ultimately to increase time to kill so we feel we're playing a mech sim where strategy and maneuvers (plus a commander's quick decision-making) matter more?

Answer from Paul:
We currently have the ability to do this on a global scale (i.e. all Mechs are affected by the same multiplier.) However, it wouldn’t be pertinent to set this number yet as we are still waiting on HSR improvements. Depending on the amount of time HSR fixes will require, we MAY bump IS health by a small percentage to hold us over until the majority of HSR issues are dealt with. We are going to be looking at this on 2 levels. We need to make sure we don’t end up with a bunch of Mechs running around with no weapons/ammo and we need to make sure we don’t make the armor destruction time shorter than the IS destruction time.

Whichever team is out of offense-capable mechs first should lose. They're mission-killed. You won't end up with mechs simply running down the clock, but that can still happen in the current gameplay with a full-health mech (especially with jumpjets) that hides carefully.

It's also currently still feasible that, for example, two remaining LRMboats can disarm each other as they exchange volleys. Ruling the first side to suffer the loss of all offensive weaponry the match's loser is something that will handle this existing edge case.

The matchmaker and emphasis on high-alpha long-range burst damage that comes in a single pinpoint hit merely makes it less likely for that mutual-disarmament edge case, much like it makes it less likely for a mech to take more than "yellow" damage to anything but the CT.

[Drollzy]

Desynching the PPC and Gauss... You have nerfed the crap out of the sniper builds and I feel that you have finally got it at a good place. Please don't listen to the minority that complain that they are getting killed easily because they are tactically ********? LRM's hitting CT backed up by 'invincible' spiders spotting seems to be more of an issue and given you are looking into it this is great news.
The PPC and Gauss are a intrinsic part of the Btech and having to adjust/penalise further because of the 8% of users that whinge is so counter productive. Its a part of the game i have learnt to adjust and adapt to that meta without having to cry foul why cant the rest of the other player do it too. Lets not nerf and buff the game to mediocrity. the other 98% of players have no qualms with weapons balancing and I think its at its best that I have seen.

For once I just want to drop a Kudos message in here to give you guys a break from all the whining that only happens in these forums. Well done keep up the good work and I am thoroughly enjoying your game, immensely.

(I would not have bought 7 Seismic sensors if i knew you would reduce the range to less than 40% )

Look forward to seeing some of you on the battle field...

[Archon Adam Steiner]

PPC/Gauss being off-set isn't a bad idea, and can be accomplished by a BattleTech fiction idea; PPC's needing a charge time. It doesn't have to be long, but fiction frequently referred to 'charging' the PPC. It makes sense, and even a half-second or full-second to charge the shot would offset the PPC an gauss, or make syncing them more difficult - especially for pop-snipers.

Should be interesting to see how things work out.

[Orzorn]

As long as its just a recycle difference, that would be fine. 5 seconds gauss, 4 seconds PPC?

Just please don't implement something that makes the game even harder to learn for new players, such as a mechanic that ONLY happens with 2 PPC + Gauss.

[TOGSolid]

cdrolly, on 12 August 2013 - 04:37 PM, said:

Desynching the PPC and Gauss... You have nerfed the crap out of the sniper builds and I feel that you have finally got it at a good place. Please don't listen to the minority that complain that they are getting killed easily because they are tactically ********? LRM's hitting CT backed up by 'invincible' spiders spotting seems to be more of an issue and given you are looking into it this is great news.
The PPC and Gauss are a intrinsic part of the Btech and having to adjust/penalise further because of the 8% of users that whinge is so counter productive. Its a part of the game i have learnt to adjust and adapt to that meta without having to cry foul why cant the rest of the other player do it too. Lets not nerf and buff the game to mediocrity. the other 98% of players have no qualms with weapons balancing and I think its at its best that I have seen.

For once I just want to drop a Kudos message in here to give you guys a break from all the whining that only happens in these forums. Well done keep up the good work and I am thoroughly enjoying your game, immensely.

(I would not have bought 7 Seismic sensors if i knew you would reduce the range to less than 40% )

Look forward to seeing some of you on the battle field...

It's really not 8%. Guys who think the current PPC/Gauss meta is ok are absolutely the minority here.

[Chronojam]

cdrolly, on 12 August 2013 - 04:37 PM, said:

Desynching the PPC and Gauss... You have nerfed the crap out of the sniper builds

You're going to have to elaborate on this. What nerfs have hit the dominant 2ppc/1gauss build? They increased PPC heat by one (trivial change), and removed blue-vision thermals ages ago (more of an across-the-board "nerf").

If you are referring to 6-PPC stalkers when you talk about "sniper builds" then you are referring to a joke build that, much like the 4-Machinegun Spider, can still be dangerous in specific situations if the enemy outright ignores it.

[MisterFiveSeven]

TOGSolid, on 12 August 2013 - 04:47 PM, said:

It's really not 8%. Guys who think the current PPC/Gauss meta is ok are absolutely the minority here.

Pretty sure no one is okay with it.

You just REALLY disagree with anyone who thinks PGI's solution(s) is(are) curiously spontaneous/utterly ineffective/intellectually offensive?

Orzorn, on 12 August 2013 - 04:45 PM, said:

As long as its just a recycle difference, that would be fine. 5 seconds gauss, 4 seconds PPC?

If this is what it is, I'm totally happy.

If it's something else, I'm probably not. Balance can be achieved with the tools available; it doesn't need gimmicky mechanics.

Edited by MisterFiveSeven, 12 August 2013 - 04:57 PM.

[TOGSolid]

MisterFiveSeven, on 12 August 2013 - 04:54 PM, said:

Pretty sure no one is okay with it.

You just REALLY disagree with anyone who thinks PGI's solution(s) is/are curiously spontaneous/utterly ineffective/intellectually offensive?

Did I say I agree with that either? I absolutely agree that they've cocked up the balance issues in this game and just keep slapping band-**** on it, including this one. It is cute that you're putting words in my mouth just because I don't blindly agree with everything the echo chamber around here has to say though.

EDIT: Lol, overaggressive word filter much?

Edited by TOGSolid, 12 August 2013 - 04:58 PM.

[Urdnot Mau]

They need to change the "bullet" speed for Gauss and PPC. PPCs should be slower and Gauss should be faster. This way, as they have stated, Gauss will become a primary long-range weapon (since leading will be harder for PPC). Plus: If a target is moving, the faster weapon is more likely to hit where the player was aiming and the slower weapon will hit another place. If that happens in the situation i proposed, 20 damage would either miss or hit a different spot. What they shouldn't be is equally fast, so they will always hit at the same location. I understand that by intuition PPC should be faster than Gauss, but for the gameplay's sake, i'll be ok with that. I also wouldn't mind if they increased the base heat for PPC and ERPPC for 1 more point. They feel amost where they should be.

Edited by Urdnot Mau, 12 August 2013 - 05:00 PM.

[MisterFiveSeven]

TOGSolid, on 12 August 2013 - 04:55 PM, said:

Did I say I agree with that either? I absolutely agree that they've cocked up the balance issues in this game and just keep slapping band-**** on it, including this one. It is cute that you're putting words in my mouth just because I don't blindly agree with everything the echo chamber around here has to say though.

EDIT: Lol, overaggressive word filter much?

Forum wars are for children, but read your previous posts and tell me if I didn't pick up your vibes correctly.

The goons are being ********, but that doesn't mean they don't have valid points.

Keep in mind I completely hate them, and space chicken is best served fried

Edit2 :: yes it is silly that a i d s in that form is filtered. That's the internet's accessibility to 12yo's lol

Edited by MisterFiveSeven, 12 August 2013 - 05:05 PM.

[Chronojam]

TOGSolid, on 12 August 2013 - 04:47 PM, said:

It's really not 8%. Guys who think the current PPC/Gauss meta is ok are absolutely the minority here.

Curiously, you also cannot have 8% whine and 98% be fine, unless the playerbase has grown to 106% of what it was before (does not seem to be the case).

[TOGSolid]

Urdnot Mau, on 12 August 2013 - 04:58 PM, said:

They need to change the "bullet" speed for Gauss and PPC. PPCs should be slower and Gauss should be faster. This way, as they have stated, Gauss will become a primary long-range weapon (since leading will be harder for PPC). Plus: If a target is moving, the faster weapon is more likely to hit where the player was aiming and the slower weapon will hit another place. What they shouldn't be is equally fast, so they will always hit at the same location. I understand that by intuition PPC should be faster than Gauss, but for the gameplay's sake, i'll be ok with that. I also wouldn't mind if they increased the base heat for PPC and ERPPC for 1 more point. They feel amost where they should be.

PPCs could easily go slower just because "sci-fi space magic woogy woogy." How these weapons behave can largely be interpreted however the hell they want to really. Hell, PPC's have even been shown as being almost a beam in some artwork. The MW video games are what has resulted in them being portrayed largely as a ball of splatty plasma.

MisterFiveSeven, on 12 August 2013 - 05:00 PM, said:

Forum wars are for children, but read your previous posts and tell me if I didn't pick up your vibes correctly.

The goons are being ********, but that doesn't mean they don't have valid points.

Keep in mind I completely hate them, and space chicken is best served fried

Edit2 :: yes it is silly that a i d s in that form is filter. That the internet's accessibility to 12yo's lol

I apologize for sounding a little ****** earlier. Sometimes these guys need to have their cages rattled though less they get too full of themselves.

Edited by TOGSolid, 12 August 2013 - 05:05 PM.

[Chronojam]

TOGSolid, on 12 August 2013 - 05:01 PM, said:

I apologize for sounding a little ****** earlier. Sometimes these guys need to have their cages rattled though less they get too full of themselves.

It's completely cool to hate us as long as you're not foolish enough to let that hate blind you into thinking the game is "in the best state to date." It's uncool to bash community efforts and all the units that are involved in #saveMWO just because they are something we agree with.

[Corvus Antaka]

im sorta concerned over dysncing ppc & gauss. I tend to use 1 PPC & 1 gauss, and while it's a decent punch it's only 25 damage. desyncing this basically completely nurfs the build and makes it even worse & more useless for fighting lights.

Still, 25 pinpoint damage with current weapon numbers is quite advantageous, and desyncing gauss and ppc could in theory do what linking guns did - make pinpointing damage harder as the aimer must land consecutive shots to 1 location.

gonna have to wait and see for now i suppose.

[Deathz Jester]

You could sum up all their answers with "After launch" or "post launch" instead of the long winded, information absent, answers they provided just replace them all with those two phrases.

[Crumbum]

What a joke. I wonder if it will ever become worth patching for again.

[Kiiyor]

Druidika, on 12 August 2013 - 01:38 PM, said:

I wonder what would happen if you changed the projectile speeds of PPCs a bit. Maybe they would be harder to aim and not hit the same spot as a gauss rifle. Crazy stuff, I know.

If they slow PPCs down, they will get closer to matching the projectile speed of the gauss....

I don't think projectile speeds are (quite) the answer to the issue. All people need to adjust is an aim off point, and once they are used to it, the whole pinpoint issue is still there.