113 replies to this topic

[Villz]

Khobai, on 07 September 2013 - 10:47 AM, said:

Apparently I read the thread better than you did. Because Mister Blastman said, and I quote: "It'd be nice if they revert the UAC mechanic to the way they are handled in MW:LL". The discussion was clearly about MWO adopting UAC mechanics from MWLL. Do you even read before you type up a response?



Neither. I play for fun. If I use macros its simply to automate a game mechanic I feel is unfun... like having to hold down a button to keep TAG on constantly.

I personally think its extremely lame that the UAC/5 and AC/2 reward players for using macros. Especially when fixing both is so easy. Just increase the UAC/5 cooldown to 1.5 and AC/2 cooldown to 1.0 and there would be absolutely no advantage to using macros with either one.

No where did i mention mister blastmans thoughts as my own thats just an assumption that happened to be wrong in this instance

And i don't like the mechanic of AC's being a single solid projectile. Imagine how much cooler it would be if they were balanced around shooting a short burst like a proper autocannon does (youtube it) like siba said the immersion of spamming these massive autocannons in peoples faces would be alot more fun. And a great way to mitigate ghost heat at the same time on them. twin ac20's not so imba when it comes out ina stream of 1 damage projectiles really fast in a blaze of hail

[Villz]

seriously though why do uac/5's have to be the best weapon atm...

such a skilless rng weapon just tunnel vision all game and hold in 1 button fml.

seeing ilyas do over 1k dmg in under 4mins of game time is just depressing now

P2W LOL

[Khobai]

Quote

seeing ilyas do over 1k dmg in under 4mins of game time is just depressing now

The truth is, Ilyas were always capable of doing 1k dmg in under 2 minutes with the use of a macro. All thats changed is that now you dont need the macro anymore; the cat is out of the bag, and everyone knows about it, instead of just a small handful of macro players who kept it a well-guarded secret.

Quote

And i don't like the mechanic of AC's being a single solid projectile.

And in lore, autocannons are supposed to fire rapid bursts, however if you make autocannons into bursts weapons, then everyone will just switch to gauss. Because doing all your damage at once to a single location is significantly better than spreading your damage out. And thats never going to change as long as we have a system based on precise aiming and convergence.

Edited by Khobai, 08 September 2013 - 02:44 AM.

[A banana in the tailpipe]

The new Meta is UAC5s until they fix them.

[Kazairl]

HSR is not right yet. As a high latency player I can see projectile hit detection has improved, however, the in-game feed back is not always synced correctly or is non existent. On countless occasions I have been hit by projectiles with no discernible hit registering on my mech, just a loss of health. This you may think would have its advantages, but not knowing you are under attack is really not great. Not only can you not react, but because your mech doesn't register the hit you have no way of knowing where you were hit from.

[Villz]

Khobai, on 08 September 2013 - 02:34 AM, said:

The truth is, Ilyas were always capable of doing 1k dmg in under 2 minutes with the use of a macro. All thats changed is that now you dont need the macro anymore; the cat is out of the bag, and everyone knows about it, instead of just a small handful of macro players who kept it a well-guarded secret.



And in lore, autocannons are supposed to fire rapid bursts, however if you make autocannons into bursts weapons, then everyone will just switch to gauss. Because doing all your damage at once to a single location is significantly better than spreading your damage out. And thats never going to change as long as we have a system based on precise aiming and convergence.

making ppl who want to snipe have to use the over 5 seconds cooldown (including charge) that has somewhat of skill curve to it now. This is a bad thing?

[Khobai]

Quote

making ppl who want to snipe have to use the over 5 seconds cooldown (including charge) that has somewhat of skill curve to it now. This is a bad thing?

If you changed autocannons to be more like lasers and do damage over time, everyone would just use gauss, and thats what would be a bad thing.

[Villz]

Khobai, on 08 September 2013 - 06:51 AM, said:

If you changed autocannons to be more like lasers and do damage over time, everyone would just use gauss, and thats what would be a bad thing.

yeh sry but i really don't agree at all with that statement. Is this kind of liek your prediction that when they nerfed ppc's every1 would just revert back to Dual gauss only?

Cause that kind of never happened lol

and yeh i do think they do need to make AC's proper AC's. I also think they need to lower laser damage and laser heat at that point i think all the weapon systems would be somewhat close to on the same page.

Edited by Villz, 08 September 2013 - 07:23 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

yeh sry but i really don't agree at all with that statement. Is this kind of liek your prediction that when they nerfed ppc's every1 would just revert back to Dual gauss only?

Except its happened before. Everyone used PPCs over lasers. PPCs are proof that players prefer weapons that do their damage all at once over weapons that do damage over time.

And dual gauss is coming, the meta hasnt evolved yet, and UAC/5s need to be nerfed first. The metagame will take weeks, if not months to change, metagames dont change overnight silly

The way MWO is currently set up, pinpoint damage is better than anything else, so players will always gravitate towards the weapon combination that gives them the most pinpoint damage. Right now its dual/triple UAC/5s, but when theyre nerfed, and we know they will be, its going to revert back to Gauss.

Although that prediction is based on them not buffing other weapons. For example, if they were to massively buff SRMs, that would change my prediction. Strong SRMs are one of the requirements for a healthy metagame IMO because strong SRMs means brawling is a viable role. Weak SRMs are largely responsible for the current metagame deteriorating into sniping.

Edited by Khobai, 08 September 2013 - 07:30 AM.

[Villz]

Khobai, on 08 September 2013 - 07:18 AM, said:

Except its happened before. Everyone used PPCs over lasers. PPCs are proof that players prefer weapons that do their damage all at once over weapons that do damage over time.

And dual gauss is coming, the meta hasnt evolved yet, and UAC/5s need to be nerfed first. The metagame will take weeks, if not months to change, metagames dont change overnight silly

The way MWO is currently set up, pinpoint damage is better than anything else, so players will always gravitate towards the weapon combination that gives them the most pinpoint damage. Right now its UAC/5s, but when theyre nerfed, and we know they will be, its going to revert back to Gauss.

Gauss rifles shoot 1nce every 5seconds or so. And do 15 dmg
how much dmg does a UAC5 do over 5 seconds again?

How much does each weigh?

Having 5 seconds to react to being hit vs a constant stream of cockpit rocking blindness seems preferable to me. Also Gauss blows up.

So do this exercise.To truely gauge weapon balance.

Take an atlas and throw out the hardpoint system. Completly. Stick to crit slots and weight but pretend every slot is an omni slot.

What build do you think would be best?


Also the meta game does change overnight. For the 1% of the population who makes it. Than it slowly trickles down as more ppl copy what we are using to maul them.

Edited by Villz, 08 September 2013 - 07:28 AM.

[Villz]

Khobai, on 08 September 2013 - 07:31 AM, said:

Like I said, UAC5s need to be nerfed first, which we both know will happen.

Developed in 3062 by the Federated Commonwealth[3], the Rotary Autocannon/5 is based only loosely on the Autocannon/5. While it has the same bore, it is capable of firing up to six times as many rounds as its standard cousin, allowing it to deal up to three times the damage of even an Ultra AC/5.

Hmm so a 10 ton ilya?

sounds pretty balanced.

Edited by Villz, 08 September 2013 - 07:34 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

Gauss rifles shoot 1nce every 5seconds or so. And do 15 dmg
how much dmg does a UAC5 do over 5 seconds again?

Like I said, UAC5s need to be nerfed first, which we both know will happen.

Quote

Also the meta game does change overnight. For the 1% of the population who makes it. Than it slowly trickles down as more ppl copy what we are using to maul them.

It doesnt happen overnight. Metagame shifts are gradual often taking weeks or months depending on the number of players. Typically in a healthy metagame, once a build has achieved dominance, players will attempt to create a counter-build to topple the dominant build. So in a healthy meta, wed be seeing players building mechs designed specifically to counter UAC/5 mechs right now. Unfortunately we have no weapon that counters UAC/5s, so the result is we have to wait for PGI to initiate change in the system, by nerfing UAC/5s.

Quote

Developed in 3062 by the Federated Commonwealth[3], the Rotary Autocannon/5 is based only loosely on the Autocannon/5. While it has the same bore, it is capable of firing up to six times as many rounds as its standard cousin, allowing it to deal up to three times the damage of even an Ultra AC/5.

Hmm so a 10 ton ilya?

sounds pretty balanced.

Rotary ACs dont come out for 12 more years in the current timeline. They arnt even the most powerful weapon in 3062. We will way have bigger problems by then, lol.

And actually im far more worried about clan ultra autocannon/10s. There are a number of clan mechs that can spam 3, 4, or even 5 of the things.

Edited by Khobai, 08 September 2013 - 07:46 AM.

[Villz]

Khobai, on 08 September 2013 - 07:40 AM, said:

Like I said, UAC5s need to be nerfed first, which we both know will happen.



It doesnt happen overnight. Metagame shifts are gradual often taking weeks or months depending on the number of players. Typically in a healthy metagame, once a build has achieved dominance, players will attempt to create a counter-build to topple the dominant build. So in a healthy meta, wed be seeing players building mechs designed specifically to counter UAC/5 mechs right now. Unfortunately we have no weapon that counters UAC/5s, so the result is we have to wait for PGI to initiate change in the system, by nerfing UAC/5s.



Rotary ACs dont come out for 12 more years in the current timeline. They arnt even the most powerful weapon in 3062. We will way have bigger problems by then, lol.

i dont know what would be more powerful than 4 roatary ac5's at current implimentation. 4 rotary ac5s = 12 u/ac5's

what would that be a 20 alpha with 4 heat every .3 seconds?

how about they just make ac's a short duration stream normal ac's could have a 1/6th uptime ultras could have a 1/3rd uptime and rotary would just constant shoot a stream? lore noobs happy and still could be balanced

Edited by Villz, 08 September 2013 - 07:50 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

i dont know what would be more powerful than 4 roatary ac5's at current implimentation. 4 rotary ac5s = 24 ac5's

Whats sarnas not telling you is the downside to rotary ac5s though. They jam like crazy compared to UACs. And unjamming them is very difficult to do, and requires you to basically stand still and fire no weapons for 1-2 turns, and you can only unjam one at a time.

[Villz]

Khobai, on 08 September 2013 - 07:56 AM, said:

Whats sarnas not telling you is the downside to rotary ac5s though. They jam like crazy compared to UACs. And unjamming them is very difficult to do, and requires you to basically stand still and fire no weapons for 1-2 turns, and you can only unjam one at a time.

Yeh well Uac's arent mean to be able to be unjammed at all so yeh >.> can't quote that ****

EDIT : "S h i z is a filtered word >.>"

Edited by Villz, 08 September 2013 - 07:59 AM.

[D1al T0ne]

The hardpoint system will always, and I mean always, lead to people cramming several of the current "best" weapon onto their mechs.

I see only four ways to fix this, if you even believe it needs fixing:

1) Put weight limits on each limb. For instance, the JM6-DD Jagermech has six ballistic hardpoints on the arms. Put a weight limit on those arms of say 16 tons. So you can fit an AC/5 and an AC/2 and a machine gun, or six machine guns, or a single AC/20, or a UAC/5 and 2 machine guns... but you couldn't cram two UAC/5's on that spot. Basically, force people into mixed weapons loadouts, which is what Battletech/Mechwarrior is all about in the first place.

2) Give each hardpoint a list of weapons that are allowed to be mounted on it. This way the devs can control how many UAC/5's or ERPPC's are possible to cram on any given mech.

3) Only give players the option to downgrade from the stock weapons. For instance, if you want to put a bigger engine on your mech, you can downgrade the stock weapons to one with a lower tonnage, but you cannot go above the tonnage that was originally mounted to that hardpoint to begin with.

4) Go back to stock mechs entirely. No more swaps. If you want an omni mech, then wait for the damned omni mech expansion. What PGI has essentially done, and yes I know that omni mechs can even change what type of hardpoint they have mounted, is given us semi-omni mechs early.

[Villz]

D1al T0ne, on 08 September 2013 - 08:12 AM, said:

The hardpoint system will always, and I mean always, lead to people cramming several of the current "best" weapon onto their mechs.

I see only four ways to fix this, if you even believe it needs fixing:

1) Put weight limits on each limb. For instance, the JM6-DD Jagermech has six ballistic hardpoints on the arms. Put a weight limit on those arms of say 16 tons. So you can fit an AC/5 and an AC/2 and a machine gun, or six machine guns, or a single AC/20, or a UAC/5 and 2 machine guns... but you couldn't cram two UAC/5's on that spot. Basically, force people into mixed weapons loadouts, which is what Battletech/Mechwarrior is all about in the first place.

2) Give each hardpoint a list of weapons that are allowed to be mounted on it. This way the devs can control how many UAC/5's or ERPPC's are possible to cram on any given mech.

3) Only give players the option to downgrade from the stock weapons. For instance, if you want to put a bigger engine on your mech, you can downgrade the stock weapons to one with a lower tonnage, but you cannot go above the tonnage that was originally mounted to that hardpoint to begin with.

4) Go back to stock mechs entirely. No more swaps. If you want an omni mech, then wait for the damned omni mech expansion. What PGI has essentially done, and yes I know that omni mechs can even change what type of hardpoint they have mounted, is given us semi-omni mechs early.

Or make all weapons have a specific role / niche and just balance them in accordance with that? avoiding even more BS complexity thats in the game ala ghost heat

[D1al T0ne]

Villz, on 08 September 2013 - 08:33 AM, said:

Or make all weapons have a specific role / niche and just balance them in accordance with that? avoiding even more BS complexity thats in the game ala ghost heat

All weapons already have a role. Apply damage to enemy mechs. Some apply it at long range, some apply it at short range. The only thing I've seen in this thread is a bunch of crybaby whining that such and such weapon killed me so it must be overpowered. I'm simply saying that maybe these weapons are not overpowered at all, but the hardpoint system is the root of evil here and needs to be further micromanaged.

A single UAC/5 for instance is pretty garbage. It's incredibly unreliable. But you cram three of them on a mech and suddenly that mech and pop an Atlas like a zit. It's not the weapon... it's the hardpoint system. PPC's weren't OP... cramming three of them on a single chassis was overpowered.

This game is complex? lol, sorry, but I've been playing EVE for eight years. This games learning curve is upside frakking down compared to EVE.

Edited by D1al T0ne, 08 September 2013 - 08:41 AM.

[Villz]

D1al T0ne, on 08 September 2013 - 08:40 AM, said:

All weapons already have a role. Apply damage to enemy mechs. Some apply it at long range, some apply it at short range. The only thing I've seen in this thread is a bunch of crybaby whining that such and such weapon killed me so it must be overpowered. I'm simply saying that maybe these weapons are not overpowered at all, but the hardpoint system is the root of evil here and needs to be further micromanaged.

A single UAC/5 for instance is pretty garbage. It's incredibly unreliable. But you cram three of them on a mech and suddenly that mech and pop an Atlas like a zit. It's not the weapon... it's the hardpoint system. PPC's weren't OP... cramming three of them on a single chassis was overpowered.

This game is complex? lol, sorry, but I've been playing EVE for eight years. This games learning curve is upside frakking down compared to EVE.

Clearly u should be on PGI's balance team >.>

Also for the most part this has been a pretty civil thread with alot of discussion on game balance.

And being that this is this game balance discussion forum. Thus to be expected.

Imo you just want to have your opinion that every1 elses opinion is wrong. And than proceeded to drop your sage like wisdom bomb on our heads.

And you did.

And it crit.

For over 9000.

On my derp o meter

Thnx for coming

P.S.

well i'v been playing Streetfighter for 20 years. So i'm right ! SORRY

(c what i did there? i took a 100% unrelated thing and tried to make it relevant)

Edited by Villz, 08 September 2013 - 08:47 AM.

[D1al T0ne]

I did drop an "sage like wisdom bomb". I addressed the root of the issue and then you went off on a raving lunatic tangent of quadruple post edits in some strange juvenile attempt to discredit my premise.

Fix the hardpoint system, and there won't be any need to keep balancing weapons around the fact that people will try to cram as many of the most powerful weapon on their mech that they can. It's pretty damn simple really.

This thread reads like the three stooges standing around a patient who has a splinter in his finger, and they're all trying to decide the best way to cut his finger off, but I'm in the back going "Hey, why don't we just pull the splinter out?"

Thanks for having me.

Edited by D1al T0ne, 08 September 2013 - 09:07 AM.