490 replies to this topic

[William Knight]

Airic Gryphon, on 04 September 2013 - 02:02 PM, said:

Gauss Sound: Not sure if anyone else would like this but would be cool to have a sound similar to a sidewinder lock for the gauss. For example: you hear a growl while the capacitor is charging then a solid higher pitched tone while the weapon is hot. For me this would be more intuitive then watching for the green light.

Thanks again for a great patch.

This! My eyes are for looking out for an enemy, let my ears tell me about my weapon ready status.

[Locan Ravok]

Could you guy put a "ping" or something similar when the gauss is ready to fire? The new mechanics is great, but the sound need a little work.

[SteelPaladin]

MustrumRidcully, on 04 September 2013 - 01:05 PM, said:

ice-cold practical reasons. You can install 2 Gauss, but you can't install a third. So you install a Medium Laser. Or a SRM. Whatever.

You don't stop using the Gauss at close range. You just add the Medium Laser, or SRM, or whatever. Your firepower doesn't compete with someone only using short range weapons, but at least you don't suck entirely and if you're caught in a melee situation you at least have a bit extra to hurt your enemy.

You install 2 PPCs and 2 ER LL because that ends up to work more heat efficient then 4 PPCs and more destructive then 4 ER LLs, and you think that's exactly the mix of efficiency and firepower you need.

Stuff like that.

The incentive to install another weapon is that you still have tonnage and space left for them but not tonnage and space for something else.
Special weapon mechanics are the reason you don't mix weapons, because you can't work them into your firing rotation and even, will likely lose precision so much that you might as well not have them.

All that means is that folks will pick a primary weapon and a backup/space-filler weapon. If you don't add some form of differentiation to make weapons shine in place of what you're taking away, the go-to weapons just become more clear.

How do you make an AC/2 synergize w/other weapons? Do you drop it's projectile speed and refire rate so it's more in line w/other ballistics? At that point, who's going to want to use it at all, that kind of tonnage for 2 damage against double armor that'll scatter like crazy towards the upper bounds of its range because the projectile is so slow? Do you speed up other ACs? At that point, is an extra 100m range even worth it when you can have an AC/5 for only 2 tons more?

Nobody's got 6 tons plus ammo weight just sitting around that they're going to burn on it if the gun doesn't stand out in some fashion. If the only reason to pick it is "eh, I've got the space, and it'll nudge my damage," it's never going to get picked. There's always something better to do w/that much weight.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think giving weapons firing quirks like the GR is going to do anything good for variety. They do need to make sure that weapons have firing patterns that synergize better so that combining multiple weapons is not more painful than loading more of the same gun. At the same time, however, they also need to make sure that every weapon has a role in which it shines. Any weapon that doesn't have one is just a trap for players who haven't learned enough to know that using it is hurting them (kind of like SHS right now).

[SilentWolff]

Congrats on the guass nerf. You did such a good job, no one uses it now, cause its ****.

[Cobaltgreen Fetladral]

You have unbalanced the game drastically. Gauss now has a 4.75 sec recycle for 15 damage and weighs 15 tons. An AC/2 does 19 damage in the same time with no fine tuning at all, weighs 6 tons so you get two of them for the same weight for a total of 38 damage. THIS IS BROKE. Welcome to the new meta. Also the Gauss sometimes fires when you hold the button after it charges, other times when you let off the button, and other times when you click the button again. there is no consistency and results in lost shots. Total broke system.

You should realy look at the game as it was designed to be played table top. You have ignored that double heat sinks dissipate 2 heat not 1.4, that XL engines weigh 1/2 that of a standard engine, that all weapons should be doing the specified damage for them at a similar recycle rate. And the game balance for the weapons is in the combination of heat/range/damage/ammo. A basic formula which you ignore.

Edited by cobaltgreen, 04 September 2013 - 07:11 PM.

[PappySmurf]

Here PGI why don't you look into the real sucky gameplay as in why the armor is total {Scrap} and does not work or why the mechs maneuver like {Scrap} and get stuck on everything or why the weapons are so Fing overpowered and after initial contact you die under 60 seconds in 60% of your matches or why your crappy MM does not work? these are some of the reasons players are leaving this game and your getting bad reviews. Who in the helll likes a big tough mech game your mech is like a frigging paper doll? and dies so quick?. And here come the trolls I can hear it now =Get skill learn to play blahh blahh blahh say what you want but some aspects of this game just suck. To bad the gameplay was not as brilliantly done as the mech designs and the map designs.

[Mech Wrench]

Niko Snow, on 03 September 2013 - 02:50 PM, said:

- Paul[/spoiler]
[color=#959595]. I've also asked Dave to take a look at lights the same way mediums were addressed. Stay tuned for more information on that.[/color]

[color=#959595]As per usual, feedback can go here: [/color]http://mwomercs.com/...rward-feedback/

OK, I just did a word search on all 13 pages in this thread and my biggest light complaint hasn't been brought up. I love my lights. I own all the spiders and Jenners. So i can only speak for those two chassis. What i noticed while piloting the three different Jenner variants was that while piloting the K and D I would get front center torso cored more often then when piloting the F variant. Even while running away from the threat with my back square to them (not exclusively).. and i especially noticed that missiles would hit front center torso too often... After some forum research i found people talking about the missile pod on the top of the mech, the thought was that it can be hit from all sides, dealing damage to the front center torso. Now this would not be a big deal except the CT is nearly 95% (exaggerated) of the mechs surface area.. Jenner pilots know what i mean, we do EVERYTHING we can to make shots land ANYWHERE except the CT!

In short, the jenner doesn't spread damage well, most shots land front CT, and in my opinion this needs looked at when making your lights pass.

Edited by Mech Wrench, 04 September 2013 - 07:16 PM.

[Leigh]

Change to the gauss is bad. It just seems like there is no synergy. Just feels completely awkward. PPC/ERPPC heat gain and velocity slow down is bearable.

It just seems like the PGI balancing team just doesn't have strong direction. Seems like "Lets just keep changing things this way and that way, maybe we'll get it right" mentality. Loads of people calling this nerfwarrior online and it just seems like that's the way it's going. Pretty soon we're all going to be only sporting medium lasers. Do the people that cry the loudest get the changes implemented?

[Renthrak]

Gauss Rifles being too good at close range is an issue that I thought has been resolved months ago. Brawling hasn't been dominated by Gauss in a long time, so I am having trouble agreeing that the asinine brand-new added game mechanic is worth a tenth of the trouble it brings.

Worse, you have a metal slug traveling faster than a stream of charged particles consistently described as 'man-made lightning' in reference, which could not possibly make any less sense. A zero time-of-flight PPC, firing like a laser, would be better. Mind you, I wouldn't want to see that either.

I remember the Beta in mid-late 2012. The PPC was so ineffective that it was a waste of tonnage to take one instead of a laser. With a moronically slow projectile, even more base heat, and the totally nonsensical ghost heat ********, we've gone from the 6xPPC Stalker being the iconic overpowered mech-of-doom to a punchline at best. 2 friggin PPCs and a Gauss Rifle were a problem, so you give a weird firing rate to the Gauss and make the PPC closer to {Scrap} than it has been since last winter?

I'm trying to remain civil, but I can only write so many well thought out walls of text with zero impact on anything before even my patience wears thin.

What is the freaking point of having suggestion forums and game balance feedback if you're going to ignore 90% of it, and take the remaining 10% with a ******* grain of salt? Who the hell asked for ghost heat? Who was demanding a charge-to-fire system for any weapon, Gauss or otherwise? Who said the PPC projectile was too fast and the Gauss too slow? People have been dumping brilliant solutions to the game's broken systems in your lap for the last year, and the tiny fraction that were not ignored or passed over for some random bizarre thing that nobody on this end of the screen can understand is depressing at best.

The bottom line is you don't have the credentials as a developer to say "We know what's good for this game better than you players, so we're justified in ignoring your feedback.". The last game franchise revival that ignored players to this extent was Tribes: Ascend, and it's already been dropped by the developer. It didn't become a persistent cash-cow for them, it didn't turn into the new hot competitive e-sport. It stopped being worth the time spent to even write a patch for it in about a year. I do NOT want to see MechWarrior go the way of the Tribes universe, but you're making the same damn mistakes and you don't even realize it.

You've cited new player retention as evidence that you're on the right track with the game. What I'd like to know is whether you're paying attention to OLD player retention, as in the people that wanted this game enough to sponsor it before it was even decently playable. The people that used to participate in balance discussions and share detailed ideas for improving the game have been disappearing from these forums at a steady rate.

You're losing the people who are here because this is a MechWarrior game, in the BattleTech setting. New players that are here for a stompy robot game are going to move on to the next one as soon as MWO gets old. Stay the course if you want a flash in the pan. If you're looking for a durable product that people will still be playing in two or three years, PLEASE rethink your priorities.

I frigging HATE these posts. It's annoying as hell when people make them, and I've been right there pointing and laughing when it's happened in the past. The fact that I'm writing one of these should be a hint.

[Koniving]

TexAss, on 04 September 2013 - 10:20 AM, said:

I used them a lot (Large Pulse Lasers mostly) before they pumped the heat on them.

What you don't have in your comparison is one thing: Weight.
The 4MLas are TEN TONS lighter. If you take that into account I'd happily take the Mlas + 10 tons over the 2 LPLs.
Its true that MPlas and SPlas got a buff a few weeks ago but the LPL got nerfed hard for no reason. It wasn't that they were much used before that to begin with. They were lackluster most of the time.

Technically the heat is supposed to be identical to PPCs. It's at 8.5 while PPCs are at 10. Be happy. I did this with just 2 LPL when they were 11 heat each, and 101% caused instant death. 8.5 is 0.5 heat higher than the heat of 2 ML.

[DarkCain]

The charge delay makes the Gauss rifle inferior to that of the PPC and ER PPC for the purposes of mobile sniping and sniping in general. Once everyone figures out you are packing GRs they will pop you with PPCs then duck behind terrain before you can hit them back. The .75 second is a long time in the terms of combat. Add the travel time of the shot and opponents have all the time in the world to avoid you. The other problem with it I am noticing is that the weapon will fail fire due to the charge mechanic. If you are having any connection issue with the server, high ping, packet loss, planets not being aligned, the charge can take longer than a second. If it fails to charge correctly you are forced to restart the whole process over again wasting another .75 to 1 second. This effectively makes the GR a 5.5 second weapon. Plenty of time for an opponent to scurry out of harms way when they know you are using GRs. Pretty sad to see what you have done with this weapon. You need to change the charge characteristic. Once charged it stays charged until you fire. Once you run out of ammo, the weapon is no longer in a charged state, hence no ammo explosion when the GR is hit.

Personally, I shouldn't have to be using a mouse macro to play this game but this recent change has forced me into it.

[eaglemaster42]

As a dual gauss jagersniper, I'm still averaging 600 dmg per match. The tweaks to the gauss definitely make it better for long range than brawling (especially with the improved zoom module!). The biggest difference i notice is that it forces me to stay out of cover longer to get my shot off when brawling (obviously encouraging me to stay at range). Overall I think the gauss tweak was a fair trade-off, tho I feel like the faster projectile speed might allow really good snipers to really deal some serious damage. I personally wouldn't like to see the charge time be any longer tho

[Felix Dante]

I'm sorry to say I understand the need for the change to the Gauss, but my arthritis doesn't like it.

It's hard enough just puching the buttons and coordinate my hands to hit targets accurately...but now I can barely get a shot off. I went through an entire game with 40 shots of gauss ammo and used a total of 5 of them in the 10 minutes of fighting I did in my Highlander. I either didn't give the charge enough time to finish, or the charge timed out while I tried to aim the thing.

The new gauss system sucks IMHO. But it seems I may be in the minority again...

I understand the charge time, but can you just have the damn things automatically fire when they are charged ? Make that an option possibly?

Also: Since we aren't charging a Gauss Rifle until they fire now, doesn't that mean they shouldn't explode when hit unless they are charged for that split second? The whole reason they explode is that they are constantly "Charged" right? So how does that make sense?

[Renthrak]

Felix Dante, on 04 September 2013 - 08:25 PM, said:

Also: Since we aren't charging a Gauss Rifle until they fire now, doesn't that mean they shouldn't explode when hit unless they are charged for that split second? The whole reason they explode is that they are constantly "Charged" right? So how does that make sense?

Making sense hasn't been a priority for a while. 'Simulation' died, unnoticed and unloved in a dark corner about a month ago. It's a damn arcade game now.

[MustrumRidcully]

SteelPaladin, on 04 September 2013 - 06:26 PM, said:

All that means is that folks will pick a primary weapon and a backup/space-filler weapon. If you don't add some form of differentiation to make weapons shine in place of what you're taking away, the go-to weapons just become more clear.

When you got one ballistic, 2 energy and 2 missile hardpoints, I would expect the go-to build be 1 Gauss and 2 PPCs in the current meta, and not use the missiles, unless the mech really has the weight for it.
There is little chance you'd see a Gauss + 1 PPC +1 LRM build here, despite this being, range-categorywise, completely sensible. It isn't sensible because that's 3 different aiming and firing characteristics and only about a 4.25 second interval to make it all work together.

Quote

How do you make an AC/2 synergize w/other weapons? Do you drop it's projectile speed and refire rate so it's more in line w/other ballistics? At that point, who's going to want to use it at all, that kind of tonnage for 2 damage against double armor that'll scatter like crazy towards the upper bounds of its range because the projectile is so slow? Do you speed up other ACs? At that point, is an extra 100m range even worth it when you can have an AC/5 for only 2 tons more?

Yes, that is the kind of stuff I would do. I might also rename it "Small Auto-Cannon" and give it whatever damage per shot it needs to do to be viable and synergize with other weapons, instead of being slaved to that stupid number 2.

My synergy groups would probably be AC/2 and AC/10 (same speed, AC/2 half the cooldown as the AC/10 or something like that) and AC/5 and AC/20 (same speed, AC/5 half the cooldown as the AC/20).

Quote

Nobody's got 6 tons plus ammo weight just sitting around that they're going to burn on it if the gun doesn't stand out in some fashion. If the only reason to pick it is "eh, I've got the space, and it'll nudge my damage," it's never going to get picked. There's always something better to do w/that much weight.

Is there? If the AC/2 is worth its 6 tons, there isn't anything better, only something equally useful. If the weapons synergize, then adding an AC/2 to the mix of some other weapons is practical and useful.

Quote

Don't get me wrong, I don't think giving weapons firing quirks like the GR is going to do anything good for variety. They do need to make sure that weapons have firing patterns that synergize better so that combining multiple weapons is not more painful than loading more of the same gun. At the same time, however, they also need to make sure that every weapon has a role in which it shines. Any weapon that doesn't have one is just a trap for players who haven't learned enough to know that using it is hurting them (kind of like SHS right now).

The AC/2 has a role - it's one of the longest ranged direct-fire weapons in the game. Currently it also has the role of the massive ROF weapon, but I think that's hurting its viability more than it helps.

Maybe part of this game's problem is that weapon ranges are inflated. You don't need the ability to fire up to 1.200+m Most of the action is probably within 0 to 800m. if the damage drop offs started much earlier, then yes, 100m extra range can make a difference. I think it's part of the problem why the AC/10 is so lackluster compared to the AC/20 - the AC/20 is in a "sweet spot" of range, still dealing 10 damage at 540m, a range at which the AC/10 is already no longer at 10 damage. So it seems bascially superior in 3/4 of the main engagement range, and it costs only 2 tons more.

[Seleucus Ontuas]

If you're going to buff Lights, don't bother with torso twist speeds and torso pitch and yaw. They need acceleration and deceleration buffs along with actually turn speed, not twist speed, but turn speed buffs.

Mediums need the same turn and acceleration buffs, too. And Blackjacks still need their engine sizes buffed; 255 for the 1, 1DC, and 3, and 300 for the 1X!

Also, when are you planning on giving the small pulse the same duration as the Mediums and Larges, and actually plan on reducing the damn heat on Mediums and Larges. Medium Pulses need 4.5 heat and Larges need 7.5. I'm paying twice the tonnage on the Medium Pulses over Mediums, give me a reason to do so. Duration is not enough.

[The Great Unwashed]

Perhaps the short-range disadvantage of the delayed Gauss can be partly compensated by giving it a (range-decreasing) probability to score a critical hit even while the armor is not stripped; after all, it is a high-velocity weapon that could puncture armor locally. This would work opposite to the PPC's short-range malus and differentiate the weapons further. If so, it should be the only weapon to do so, the ACs firing a different type of shell and the AC20 being powerful enough for brawling already.

[ciller]

I hope they don't wreck uac5's, they are just on this side of useable and enjoyable. I don't want them to be nerfed into no fun land like everything else has. Most of the weapons in the game are turning into boring versions of what they used to be.

Excuse me while I STILL cry over SRMs for another 6 months longer. I'll be okay.

[Effectz]

Leave Uac5's alone Paul,there's nothing wrong with them.

[RacerX]

If the Guass Rifle now requires charging does this mean the rifle won't explode 97% of the time when the armored is gone? The explosion was implemented to both nerf the weapon and to represent the capacitors exploding as depicted in the fiction. Now that the capacitors will be discharged 90% of the match does it make sense that still have a 97% of exploding when damaged? If the weapon is damaged while the capacitor is charged or charging then the explosion makes sense. If the capacitor is discharged then it should explode or be treated like an ammo explosion.

That's my opinion. Does anyone else agree?