155 replies to this topic

[FupDup]

GalaxyBluestar, on 23 November 2013 - 10:48 PM, said:

i just hope we're not encouraging extra spam just to throw figures out of whack "because it killed me whaaa" hatred "i'll spam it to convince devs to destroy it" mentality. i could've gone off the rails like this over AC's but i investigated further and found out it wasn't an OP weapon. {in my case hitreg was terrible ppcs and gauss were not hitting and getting low dmg just the same} if i didn't do that and if many others don't and jump on "kill it" bandwagons we'll just have dev times wasted making more silly bandaid "fixes." it's at times like these when i'm glad the forums have a low readership.

Something we need to keep in mind is that not all builds accused of being OP are actually OP. Consequently, some random average Joe trying to play a build he thinks is OP may discover the hard way that it wasn't really OP in the first place. So, he'd probably stop playing that build or at least stop accusing it of being OP (but keep playing it anyways because he thinks it's fun or whatever).

And if the build in question does turn out to be OP, then it rightfully deserves the nerf in the first place.



The only loophole is that this process depends on PGI correctly noticing which things are truly OP/not OP, and what the actual causes of that state are. (Sometimes they attack OP things from the wrong angle, i.e. using everybody's favorite heat system modification instead of directly changing the stats of the afflicted weapons, the heat system itself, or convergence). That is more of a problem of the developers choosing the incorrect venue to attack the issue, rather than a flaw with the method outlined in the original post.

It's sloppy, but the only other alternative we have to the "Take Matters Into Your Own Hands" method is to literally do nothing and watch the galaxy burn, fruitlessly rage on the forums, and pray for deliverance.

Edited by FupDup, 24 November 2013 - 08:09 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

But in general the meta is due to people overusing/abusing a particular set-up. Just look how long it took them to "fix" the PPC/ERPPC meta.. Although a good suggestion OP it has been tried before and still takes forever.
The best way seems to be repeatedly to kill certain devs using whatever you consider OP.

Exactly.

The best way to get devs to change their game is not to spend any $ and tell them why.

[Corvus Antaka]

months later that signature hasnt achieved anything

[FupDup]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 24 November 2013 - 08:38 AM, said:

months later that signature hasnt achieved anything

My current signature hasn't been in use for very long (not nearly as long as my previous one, with the PGI logo in it). I don't remember quite how long, but I don't think it's been much longer than one month or maybe two.

[Sandpit]

Khobai, on 24 November 2013 - 08:02 AM, said:

Exactly.

The best way to get devs to change their game is not to spend any $ and tell them why.

I would normally agree with you BUT, in this particular case, you still have new players coming in and spending, which can completely offset that regardless of balancing issues.

[MrMadguy]

I see, it's one of those threads with "nerf ballistics" implication? Don't want to disappoint you, but my most effective mech is laserboat... Again, if you compare weapons only on 1-2 parameters and you think, that you know everything about balance, then you should know, that you're wrong. Grab your "nerf everybody, except me" and get back to Wow with your cries about "unfair" balance.

Edited by MrMadguy, 24 November 2013 - 10:21 AM.

[Sandpit]

MrMadguy, on 24 November 2013 - 10:14 AM, said:

I see, it's one of those threads with "nerf ballistics" implication? Don't want to disappoint you, but my most effective mech is laserboat... Again, if you compare weapons only on 1-2 parameters and you think, that you know everything about balance, then you should know, that you're wrong. Grab your "nerf everybody, except me" and get back to Wow with your cries about "unfair" balance.

This isn't about "nerf" anything. It's about how to actually help the devs achieve good balancing. I don't see how people are getting that idea......

[FupDup]

MrMadguy, on 24 November 2013 - 10:14 AM, said:

I see, it's one of those threads with "nerf ballistics" implication? Don't want to disappoint you, but my most effective mech is laserboat... Again, if you compare weapons only on 1-2 parameters and you think, that you know everything about balance, then you should know, that you're wrong. Grab your "nerf everybody, except me" and get back to Wow with your cries about "unfair" balance.

Actually, no. This thread's target audience includes two demographics:
A. People who believe anything is OP
B. People who believe anything is UP

This thread is intended to give either/both of those demographics a more practical way to seek their changes instead of making forum posts. Ballistics were only brought up in the original post as an example of something that is commonly complained about.

[James Montana]

To: OP

Good post, you get a complimentary flash (.)(.)

[Urdasein]

Quote

Something we need to keep in mind is that not all builds accused of being OP are actually OP. Consequently, some random average Joe trying to play a build he thinks is OP may discover the hard way that it wasn't really OP in the first place. So, he'd probably stop playing that build or at least stop accusing it of being OP (but keep playing it anyways because he thinks it's fun or whatever).

Yop. I tried poptarting and discovered i was terrible at that.

I the other hand, people says that lazors are not enough powerfull or generate too much heat... well... i agree i have to put at least 20 DHS to reach at least 20s (under that, i don't play the build) of sustained fire BUT medium lasers do quite high dps for the weight and ERlarge lasers are the perfect weapon for trolling jumping highlanders (36dmg in the shoulder, they dont like that)

[Navy Sixes]

Yeah, we've been down this road. All the try hard meta chasers are really "trying to fix the game." When they push everyone out of the unit for not running whatever the FOTM is, they're "trying to fix the game." When idiots TK people in the PUGS who are running mechs counter to whatever the FOTM is, they are teaching them a lesson and "trying to fix the game." When you hear people say they hate goons, a lot of that comes from the behavior of some during this lame period in MWO history. What's more, this "abuse it 'till they fix it" mentality only seems to apply to certain things. For the rest, they come here and QQ like everybody else. (Which is why you would see these people dropping a tiny engine in a huge mech so they could cram in a gazillion broken PPCs, and then complain about the rules when they get capped. Capping is part of the meta that the try-hards refuse to see. Suddenly they want everyone to honor some bull*!t code when it comes to capping.)

Of course, when PGI fixes whatever they think is broken, these try-hards are happy, right? They won! Nope. Under the rhetorical aegis of "I wanted it fixed but I don't like the way they fixed it (It won't really work, it's inelegant, it's too broad, ect. ect.)" which, from what I've read, they've dusted off and brought out for this discussion, these same people who were not only abusing the broken meta but making everyone who didn't miserable, who did all of this out of "a love for the game," cried longer, louder, and harder than anyone else. From what I've read here they're still crying about it. Many of them started a long and silly rage-storm against PGI that amounted to nothing except a lot of players mad at each other and a lot of people who didn't like the way the game was headed leaving forever who are magically still here.

You find these people skulking about in the "MWO In The News" forums, happy whenever they read a negative review and raging at anyone who gives MWO high ratings. Every ersatz sign that the game is doing poorly is proof that they are right and everyone else who just wants to play is wrong. They come out in parade formation to agree with any post that assumes the game's failure: "Why Is MWO a Steamy Pile of S*!t That No One Wants To Play?" etc.

Yeah, it sounds really good. You can get PGI to do everything you want, if you can get enough people on board who agree with you. Want to see where it will end up? #savemwo (if you're new here, that's sarcasm. Everyone who was around for that gets it).

Or you can just play the game the way you want to play it, let others play the game the way they want to play it, and accept that the developers are going to develop the game the way they want to develop it. Jesus, with the amount of time and energy some people devote to waging a war against the game (Dude, just let it go. It's like trying to beat up ground) they could start their own game and do it themselves.

So, to recap: People who say they are trying to fix the game by abusing broken mechanics have a point, but are invariably more of a game-diminishing experience than the one they claim they want solved. We all have a more perfect version of MWO in our heads. It has the advantage of never having to actually prove itself the way the game that PGI has given us (for FREE!) has. Quit trying to make this game conform to that make-believe game in your head. Play the game we have been given and try to have fun. Balance issuses will be worked out without you ruining the game for everyone else, thanks.

[Sandpit]

Tycho von Gagern, on 24 November 2013 - 11:43 AM, said:

Play the game we have been given and try to have fun. Balance issuses will be worked out without you ruining the game for everyone else, thanks.

That's pretty much what he's saying to do....

"Broken" "OP" and "Useless" are 3 of the most common words used here. If those posts were factually correct you would see nothing, and I mena absolutely nothing, but ballistic poptarts and lrm mechs on the field. You definitely wouldn't see anyone win a match in anything but those. Do you see what we're getting at?

[Lykaon]

Tolkien, on 23 November 2013 - 08:16 AM, said:

Sad but true but the squeaky wheel in a multiplayer game is the one that gets the grease.

ECM was 'no op' until it was progressively abused and rolled back over several months.

Craven 3L's were murder birds until they were fixed (broken hit boxes on the back, broken hitboxes on the legs) and HSR was implemented.

Streaks were broken until they were abused (brilliant splash damage implementation causing several times intended damage to mechs like the spider and commando)

I agree to know how broken something is I always take that something out for a spin and run it through it's paces.This does provide additional metrics for the Dev team to work with and gives me insight on exactly how a broke thing is broke so I can develope counter tactics and strategies.

Now I quoted the above because...

ECM was and still is over featured (over powered) ECM was never rolled back and the grand total of actual nerfs to ECM's actual performance is ONE. 1 lone nerf to an otherwise absurdly potent game feature.The very idea that ECM is now balanced is the result of successful propaganda.the only reason we do not see constant ECM threads is ECM is not used as it once was and it's not because of a roll back.It's because of a perception that ECM isn't what it once was yet it still is.

Raven 3Ls were largely OP'd due to ECM and the common hit reg issue with small targets from that period.There were some slight adjustments in the hit boxes that were needed.However,since HSR the Raven chassis in general has fallen into disuse because the legs are way to vulnerable to damage.The hitbox fix was done BEFORE HSR and now post HSR it was to much of a "fix" and needs to be brought back in line.


Streaks had a number of issues that have/are being addressed.
There was the faulty lock on mechanism that allowed locks to be gained and maintained on targets that were not under the targeting reticule.

There was the faulty impact tracking that placed hits on the boarders of target's body locations.

There was the faulty splash damage mechanic that was made even more potent by the faulty impact tracking above.

And now with the proposed changes to how artemis will be applied to launchers and not chassis we will have phantom artemis removed from streaks so artemis will no longer provide lock speed buffs to streaks for zero crits and tonnage.

[Tolkien]

Lykaon, on 24 November 2013 - 12:42 PM, said:

I agree to know how broken something is I always take that something out for a spin and run it through it's paces.This does provide additional metrics for the Dev team to work with and gives me insight on exactly how a broke thing is broke so I can develope counter tactics and strategies.

Now I quoted the above because...

ECM was and still is over featured (over powered) ECM was never rolled back and the grand total of actual nerfs to ECM's actual performance is ONE. 1 lone nerf to an otherwise absurdly potent game feature.The very idea that ECM is now balanced is the result of successful propaganda.the only reason we do not see constant ECM threads is ECM is not used as it once was and it's not because of a roll back.It's because of a perception that ECM isn't what it once was yet it still is.

Raven 3Ls were largely OP'd due to ECM and the common hit reg issue with small targets from that period.There were some slight adjustments in the hit boxes that were needed.However,since HSR the Raven chassis in general has fallen into disuse because the legs are way to vulnerable to damage.The hitbox fix was done BEFORE HSR and now post HSR it was to much of a "fix" and needs to be brought back in line.


Streaks had a number of issues that have/are being addressed.
There was the faulty lock on mechanism that allowed locks to be gained and maintained on targets that were not under the targeting reticule.

There was the faulty impact tracking that placed hits on the boarders of target's body locations.

There was the faulty splash damage mechanic that was made even more potent by the faulty impact tracking above.

And now with the proposed changes to how artemis will be applied to launchers and not chassis we will have phantom artemis removed from streaks so artemis will no longer provide lock speed buffs to streaks for zero crits and tonnage.

Not to quibble too hard, but I think there have been 2 nerfs to ECM. One was that it used to cloak allies from your radar when an enemy ECM was around making it hard to keep friend/foe straight and leading to a lot of friendly fire. The other was that BAP used to be countered by it, now it's flipped, though I suppose that could also be called a buff to BAP as well as a nerf to ECM.

I still agree that it's absurdly imbalanced on cost:benefit - if I could take it on any mech, I would make room for it on most.

[Wolfways]

MrMadguy, on 24 November 2013 - 10:14 AM, said:

I see, it's one of those threads with "nerf ballistics" implication? Don't want to disappoint you, but my most effective mech is laserboat... Again, if you compare weapons only on 1-2 parameters and you think, that you know everything about balance, then you should know, that you're wrong. Grab your "nerf everybody, except me" and get back to Wow with your cries about "unfair" balance.

Of course there's no chance that you're just doing it wrong...

[Nick Makiaveli]

Sable Dove, on 23 November 2013 - 06:41 PM, said:

People need to stop assuming that just because something is changed, that means it was broken before.

Ravens and Spiders got nerfed. Not fixed. The Raven's leg hitboxes were not broken. They were too accurate to the Raven's small legs. So PGI gave them invisible bubble legs so that people didn't have to actually hit to deal damage. As to back hitboxes, I don't recall them ever being broken except that it's now fairly common for the Raven to take rear damage from front hits (more so than other mechs).

Spiders got the same, except that it's virtually the entire mech that's surrounded by a bubble now. I wonder if they're going shrink the hitboxes of mechs that are too big as well, rather than changing the model size.


Ghost hitboxes is PGI's solution to HSR-shortcomings in the same way that ghost heat is their solution to the shortcomings of their bad heat system. PPCs/lasers weren't 'fixed' by ghost heat; they were nerfed by ghost heat. Ravens and Spiders weren't 'fixed' by hitbox bubbles; they were nerfed by hitbox bubbles.



Can't fix something that's not broken.

So if something is OP, that isn't broken? If something is negatively impacting players, that isn't broken? Thus correcting those issues wouldn't be fixing them? Sure the argument could be made they were working as intended, and thus were technically not broken. In which case it would be more accurate to say they were adjusted or modified.

Seriously, if you want to argue a point and try to take some intellectual high road, avoid slang terms. "Nerf" is a trademarked term used by a toy company. So if you are going to argue over semantics, need to get your facts and your terms correct.

[Zolaz]

It is a shame that PGI doesnt play more. Seems like we only get "fixes" to problems when PGI employees get a first hand taste of how broken some of the MWO systems are.

[Deathlike]

Zolaz, on 24 November 2013 - 12:56 PM, said:

It is a shame that PGI doesnt play more. Seems like we only get "fixes" to problems when PGI employees get a first hand taste of how broken some of the MWO systems are.

I'm pretty sure that is classified as "working as intended™".

[New Day]

FupDup, on 23 November 2013 - 08:10 AM, said:

snip

According to your logic there are plenty of people using Flamers and Pulse lasers since they have yet to be buffed.
It's literally a 1 min XML change and I just...

Edited by NamesAreStupid, 24 November 2013 - 01:18 PM.

[Sandpit]

"over featured" =/= "OP"

There's a distinct different between the two. OP implies that it is jsut about an insta-win. The latest bandwagons are poptart, lrms, acs, and arty. (IF you don't believe me feel free to peruse the forums and count the number of threads on those subjects alone)

Almost every one of the complaints involves "They're OP because I get hit by a lot of them". Hate to break it to ya, but that's coordination and teamwork, not OP weapons

If all of those were truly OP and out of balance you would see nothing but that on the field. You would also not be able to win with other weapons and systems. You can, players do it all the time everyday. That's not opinion that's factual. Just because a select portion of the player population uses a select few builds and systems doesn't make them "OP" or unbeatable