1080 replies to this topic

[Varent]

Dock Steward, on 07 January 2014 - 04:05 PM, said:

Right, but the sentence before that you said you wanted to nerf the jump jets because of it. AC/40 Jagers emphasize the strengths of pin-point damage, but few people believe it's a good idea to nerf the Jager outright. Usually people nerf the thing causing the problem, not the thing that brings the problem to light.

there isnt a problem with the ac40 jagers. THey are easy to kill. Play smart and you will win if you are on equal footing with an equal pilot. There is an issue with balance when mechs of equal weight lose when the same quality of pilot is in a mech. If your smart you can easily beat an ac40 jager. Its just a gimic.

Every time I here people whining about dieing to one of them over an over all I can think is. "Ok so your bad and refuse to improve and want the game to drop to your level.?!"

Edited by Varent, 07 January 2014 - 04:27 PM.

[Dock Steward]

Varent, on 07 January 2014 - 04:27 PM, said:

there isnt a problem with the ac40 jagers. THey are easy to kill. Play smart and you will win if you are on equal footing with an equal pilot. There is an issue with balance when mechs of equal weight lose when the same quality of pilot is in a mech. If your smart you can easily beat an ac40 jager. Its just a gimic

I agree. Though a seemingly large portion of people don't. Vocal Minority? Representative of the Majority? I don't know, but it's an example of something people want nerfed at any rate.

What did you want to see "altered" about JJ's? Anything specific?

[Cimarb]

Sandpit, on 07 January 2014 - 02:40 PM, said:

No this one in particular would simply be applied to ballistics (MAYBE missiles) but lasers and PPCs produce no recoil. So this would simply apply to ballistics and adjust them accordingly to caliber size
2 AC20s firing off? slightly more divergence
2 AC10s? not so much
2 AC5s? minimal at best
2 AC2s negligible at best
Now you could also add in if you fire THREE AC2s or AC5s (I don't think LBX and possibly UAC? would apply here) then they add to the divergence a bit. It takes care of large pinpoint damage outside of a singular shot (or 2 or 3 in the case of smaller calibers) which I think would handle a lot of the complaints. The largest pinpoint frontloaded damage without any divergence would be 20.

To reduce those effects players could actually invest in pinpoint, fast firing, etc.

I'm not opposed to that. I still think it is adding unneeded complexity, but at least if it is something that could logically be considered "recoil" without having to explain rules why it affects different weapons differently, I would love to test it out.

Varent, on 07 January 2014 - 03:06 PM, said:

anyways, not gonna reread 3 more pages to catch up on the thread, just responding from here on out. But that said, anyone else happy about the ac10 and ac20 changes? Makes em more brawler oriented and less jump sniping oriented nice change I feel. Thoughts?

It doesn't affect jump sniping at all, as you just have to relearn the timing (again) and then there is no change.

Sandpit, on 07 January 2014 - 03:49 PM, said:

That's also assuming you find something "wrong" with jump sniping.

That's where I think we run into issues. We have people who want something changed due to a tactic being used as opposed to the weapon's stats

I agree. Jump sniping is not the problem, just an aggravator of the problem.

Sandpit, on 07 January 2014 - 04:08 PM, said:

Well since there's only 2 known variants (that I can think of, correct me if I'm wrong) that means you could eliminate that "broken" part by nerfing the K2 and Jagers. Then no more AC40s but I see your point. I don't see where Varent said nerf JJs though?

How would you nerf them to fix it? The only purpose they have over other variants is to mount those big cannons.

Also, Varent has talked about nerfing jump sniping many times in this (or the other) thread and how he would like to eliminate it. You guys were talking about locking arms/torsos, blocking weapon fire, etc.

[Sandpit]

Dock Steward, on 07 January 2014 - 04:29 PM, said:

I agree. Though a seemingly large portion of people don't. Vocal Minority? Representative of the Majority? I don't know, but it's an example of something people want nerfed at any rate.

What did you want to see "altered" about JJ's? Anything specific?

I can't speak for Varent but one of my ideas was locking torso and arms while in the air. This would actually bring to the forefront those pilots that are really skilled at performing the act while not making it impossible. It would actually let individual piloting skill shine through. Add into that the potential I see with the ballistics change that came in today's patch and it could be interesting.

[Dock Steward]

Sandpit, on 07 January 2014 - 04:35 PM, said:

I can't speak for Varent but one of my ideas was locking torso and arms while in the air. This would actually bring to the forefront those pilots that are really skilled at performing the act while not making it impossible. It would actually let individual piloting skill shine through. Add into that the potential I see with the ballistics change that came in today's patch and it could be interesting.

Not to be a pain in the butt, but I've never used Arm Lock. I know what it does, of course, just never seen it in action. What effect would it have on jump sniping? Make it so you couldn't hit things drastically lower than you because of having less torso vertical movement, right? Is the difference even noticeable when Jump Sniping against anything further than 100 meters?

[Cimarb]

Varent, on 07 January 2014 - 04:27 PM, said:

there isnt a problem with the ac40 jagers. THey are easy to kill. Play smart and you will win if you are on equal footing with an equal pilot. There is an issue with balance when mechs of equal weight lose when the same quality of pilot is in a mech. If your smart you can easily beat an ac40 jager. Its just a gimic.

Every time I here people whining about dieing to one of them over an over all I can think is. "Ok so your bad and refuse to improve and want the game to drop to your level.?!"

A Jager of any type is easy to kill, but 40 points of damage in one hitbox is crippling to most mechs, and we aren't talking about dueling, so the AC40 should be with a group, minimizing your chance of dealing with them before they pop you. I can't say I have ever been killed by one myself, but I'm sure I have. I have also killed a lot of opponents in one myself. I know you have never died in a match before, but your being a little full of yourself if you say they aren't a threat. Lose the ego, please.

Dock Steward, on 07 January 2014 - 04:38 PM, said:

Not to be a pain in the butt, but I've never used Arm Lock. I know what it does, of course, just never seen it in action. What effect would it have on jump sniping? Make it so you couldn't hit things drastically lower than you because of having less torso vertical movement, right? Is the difference even noticeable when Jump Sniping against anything further than 100 meters?

It would nerf the lights that use jump jetting to survive while fighting, while leaving the Victors and other heavy hitters virtually untouched because they don't torso twist (much) when jump sniping anyways.

[Sandpit]

Cimarb, on 07 January 2014 - 04:33 PM, said:

How would you nerf them to fix it? The only purpose they have over other variants is to mount those big cannons.

Also, Varent has talked about nerfing jump sniping many times in this (or the other) thread and how he would like to eliminate it. You guys were talking about locking arms/torsos, blocking weapon fire, etc.

I wouldn't nerf them. I was just pointing that out. I believe we were talking about nerfing weapons because of tactics and such. I was just using that as en example because I think it was either Varent or Dock mentioned nerfin something that wasn't the issue. I wasn't seriously suggesting nerf mechs, but it's at a basis of a lot of the "nerf this" threads.
I was reading a nerf LRMS thread today because a player felt getting nailed by a hundred LRMs made them "op"
Just an example of how a tactic, situation, build, etc. is used to show how one particular weapon is "op". Which is not a good way to make balance changes in my opinion

This is one area Varent and I don't agree on. I don't see poptarting as that big of an issue. I think it's a valid tactic and has its place but I don't feel it dominates anything. This could be for a few reasons. His ELO puts him into different matches, it's more prevalent in 12mans, etc.
As with you and some of my ideas on how to help bring more balance to ballistics I was just offering ideas as to how to help balance poptarting more.

Dock Steward, on 07 January 2014 - 04:38 PM, said:

Not to be a pain in the butt, but I've never used Arm Lock. I know what it does, of course, just never seen it in action. What effect would it have on jump sniping? Make it so you couldn't hit things drastically lower than you because of having less torso vertical movement, right? Is the difference even noticeable when Jump Sniping against anything further than 100 meters?

I think it would help reduce the frequency you see it used. Pilots using the tactic would have to move and aim very carefully.

Basically it locks arm movement to torso limitations.

[Sandpit]

Again a lot of ideas I offer up are just to try and help kick around ideas in general. Most of it doesn't come from me thinking there are imbalances but more of I don't always like some of the ideas that have been offered up lol IE burst fire, no convergence, etc.

I understand that even though I personally don't see issues with a lot of things other players do, I'm not the only person this game is being designed for. In order for this game to grow then we can't all be happy but we can at least get close enough to share a sundae

And, truth be told, sometimes it's just fun to troll what I consider nothing more than QQ threads lol

[Varent]

Dock Steward, on 07 January 2014 - 04:29 PM, said:

I agree. Though a seemingly large portion of people don't. Vocal Minority? Representative of the Majority? I don't know, but it's an example of something people want nerfed at any rate.

What did you want to see "altered" about JJ's? Anything specific?

A few things come to mind. Make them weight more, perhaps make them take up more slots. I would suggest this be done only to the ones for the heavier mechs so as not to hamper the light and medium mechs that use them for mobility. If you want to target just the component of firing I would suggest forcing mechs to invest in more jump jets to effectively fire with them. Perhaps make the screen shake on the way up and the way down unless you have X number of jump jets. That's just off the top of my head.

Cimarb, on 07 January 2014 - 04:33 PM, said:

Also, Varent has talked about nerfing jump sniping many times in this (or the other) thread and how he would like to eliminate it. You guys were talking about locking arms/torsos, blocking weapon fire, etc.

Except I have said again and again I DO NOT WANT IT ELIMINATED. I simply feel that it needs to be brought down a notch. Nothing in this game deserves to be eliminated. However with the mechanics of jump sniping currently the draw backs of ballistics aren't as readily seen. Jump sniping in general also takes away from the feel of a mech game. It should be toned back a little to make it so its more rare.

[Dock Steward]

Varent, on 07 January 2014 - 05:01 PM, said:

A few things come to mind. Make them weight more, perhaps make them take up more slots. I would suggest this be done only to the ones for the heavier mechs so as not to hamper the light and medium mechs that use them for mobility. If you want to target just the component of firing I would suggest forcing mechs to invest in more jump jets to effectively fire with them. Perhaps make the screen shake on the way up and the way down unless you have X number of jump jets. That's just off the top of my head.

I personally wouldn't have a problem with those alterations. Though encouraging people to use more of them in order to get the full benefits AND having them take up more slots could be a bit much. Also, the screen shake change is the only tweak that would affect Ballistics with JJ's. And that would pretty much kill the tactic. IMHO jump sniping shouldn't be killed. Made more difficult? Maybe.

I say this as someone who has tried jump sniping a couple of times and failed miserably.

Edit: You made a ninja edit...

Edited by Dock Steward, 07 January 2014 - 05:10 PM.

[Varent]

Cimarb, on 07 January 2014 - 04:42 PM, said:

A Jager of any type is easy to kill, but 40 points of damage in one hitbox is crippling to most mechs, and we aren't talking about dueling, so the AC40 should be with a group, minimizing your chance of dealing with them before they pop you. I can't say I have ever been killed by one myself, but I'm sure I have. I have also killed a lot of opponents in one myself. I know you have never died in a match before, but your being a little full of yourself if you say they aren't a threat. Lose the ego, please.

We should do the match on this. Most of the medium mechs I run have at least 30+ armor on the legs and 28 armor on the arms. They also have around 30+ on the front torso and most on the middle. Now the armor values are doubled so take all those numbers and double them. That means that 40 damage to any of those areas is not remotely crippling but would instead take off a large chunk of armor and give you room for thought. Unless of course you are arguing it from the light pilots point of view. In wich case I would say yes it is. And it should be. A light pilot should have to worry about tangling with a mech with an ac 20 and avoid it in favor of mechs more to its flavor, If not then it should know it will have a good hard fight on its hands that it may lose. Most people complain about the ac40 jager because they get ambushed by it. In wich case yes you should die for not being more aware and playing smarter. That said, It has nothing to do with ego. Get better at the game and work hard at it. Not getting better at the game and crying foul is akin to wasting the time of everyone that has worked hard to get where they are in this game.

Dock Steward, on 07 January 2014 - 05:07 PM, said:

I personally wouldn't have a problem with those alterations. Though encouraging people to use more of them in order to get the full benefits AND having them take up more slots could be a bit much. Also, the screen shake change is the only tweak that would affect Ballistics with JJ's. And that would pretty much kill the tactic. IMHO jump sniping shouldn't be killed. Made more difficult? Maybe.

I say this as someone who has tried jump sniping a couple of times and failed miserably.

Its not as easy as people think. I hated it when I first started this game. then I learned it, got good at it and now it bores me. I enjoy brawling and playing more challenging mechs for the most part myself. That said I wouldn't say institute all those changes. I just say those are some good options of changes to jump jets to make them not as ******** when mixed with direct fire weaponary.

[Sandpit]

In regards to JJs I think more heat would be one of the better ways to balance them all the way around. In TT (yes I know it's not TT but that's still the underlying basis for MWO) you generated +1 heat for for every movement point used.
So if your mech's movement for JJs was 5 and you used 5 mvoement points with your JJs you generated 5 heat. Buffing heat generation by that much it would add an entirely new element to their use.
It wouldn't hamper lights using them for mobility but it would make you think twice about using them AND firing off weapons that also generate heat.

[Wraith05]

mania3c, on 07 January 2014 - 03:01 PM, said:

This is something what is hard to balance..

If people will be running out of ammo, they will just pack more ammo and customize mech accordingly..they will make this all the time...everytime ammo will be nerfed.. so How much you want to nerf it?

I suggested a way back that you put a max ammo capacity for weapon type. I'll use AC20 as example

1 ton of ammo gives 7 rounds. So to make it so a mech can't put more than 2 tons of AC20 on for a total of 14 shots. Enough to kill 1 or 2 mechs with well placed shots, but not enough to last a fight.

Now I know this won't remove front loaded damage. But why remove it? Just make it so that if you are using front loaded damage you can't use it the whole fight and will need to rely on other back up systems.

[Sandpit]

Wraith05, on 07 January 2014 - 05:52 PM, said:

I suggested a way back that you put a max ammo capacity for weapon type. I'll use AC20 as example

1 ton of ammo gives 7 rounds. So to make it so a mech can't put more than 2 tons of AC20 on for a total of 14 shots. Enough to kill 1 or 2 mechs with well placed shots, but not enough to last a fight.

Now I know this won't remove front loaded damage. But why remove it? Just make it so that if you are using front loaded damage you can't use it the whole fight and will need to rely on other back up systems.

Why? What's the basis?
If a player wants to sacrifice a ton and crit slot for ammo then they have the ability.

That's just not a way to balance things. That's the beauty of mech lab. It wouldn't do anything to really mitigate anything either. You're basically just putting a hard cap on how much damage a mech could do. That completely gimps every mech that runs ammo because it makes no sense to say it's just for this weapon in this case. Just my opinion but there's just too many other options that I've seen that would be better

[Wraith05]

Sandpit, on 07 January 2014 - 06:46 PM, said:

Why? What's the basis?
If a player wants to sacrifice a ton and crit slot for ammo then they have the ability.

That's just not a way to balance things. That's the beauty of mech lab. It wouldn't do anything to really mitigate anything either. You're basically just putting a hard cap on how much damage a mech could do. That completely gimps every mech that runs ammo because it makes no sense to say it's just for this weapon in this case. Just my opinion but there's just too many other options that I've seen that would be better

There is already a hardcap on what a ballistic can do based on a mechs total tonnage.

The basis?
As everyone has pointed out front loaded damage is running rampant and causes other weapons to not be used.
So you limit the use of front end weapons to promote the need/use of the other systems.

The people that want that big 1, 2 punch can still use it, but they can't do it nonstop in a round.

Edited by Wraith05, 07 January 2014 - 07:02 PM.

[Sandpit]

Wraith05, on 07 January 2014 - 06:55 PM, said:

There is a hardcap on what a ballistic can do based on a mechs total tonnage.

The basis?
As everyone has pointed out front loaded damage is running rampant and causes other weapons to not be used.
So you limit the use of front end weapons to promote the need/use of the other systems.

The people that want that big 1, 2 punch can still use it, but they can't do it nonstop in a round.

I just don't like it personally. There's been too many other suggestions I think would work better without gimping a weapon or weapon class completely

[Wraith05]

Sandpit, on 07 January 2014 - 07:02 PM, said:

I just don't like it personally. There's been too many other suggestions I think would work better without gimping a weapon or weapon class completely

it wouldn't be gimping anything completely. Being ammo based has always been a disadvantage of ballistics, but in the current meta it doesn't feel like a disadvantage because you never run out unless you accidently load the wrong type.

[Sandpit]

Wraith05, on 07 January 2014 - 07:05 PM, said:

it wouldn't be gimping anything completely. Being ammo based has always been a disadvantage of ballistics, but in the current meta it doesn't feel like a disadvantage because you never run out unless you accidently load the wrong type.

Again I just disagree. You're basically telling any mech wanting to run ballistics they can only do XX max damage in a round

[Wraith05]

Sandpit, on 07 January 2014 - 07:10 PM, said:

Again I just disagree. You're basically telling any mech wanting to run ballistics they can only do XX max damage in a round

I understand you disagree with it, but you keep making points that make me feel you don't fully understand the overall picture of what it would do.

You are only concentrating on the ballistic which yes it would mean that when running with a ballistic that THE BALLISTIC can only do X amount of damage, which btw is already the case it just isn't apparent because of the high amount of ammo you can put on. The change is just lowering that X value.

But this is how it would make it more desirable to use other systems to back up your big ballistic punch.

And you could still run a ballistic boat if you wanted, but you would have to use a combination of different ballistics.

The jagers would still be viable, but you'd have to run with more than 1 type of AC.

[Cimarb]

Varent, on 07 January 2014 - 05:04 PM, said:

Except I have said again and again I DO NOT WANT IT ELIMINATED. I simply feel that it needs to be brought down a notch. Nothing in this game deserves to be eliminated. However with the mechanics of jump sniping currently the draw backs of ballistics aren't as readily seen. Jump sniping in general also takes away from the feel of a mech game. It should be toned back a little to make it so its more rare.

It would bring it down a notch by removing front-loaded damage. That would make it possible, but no more beneficial for the shooter than the target. Jump sniping fixed by removing the issue instead of a symptom.

Varent, on 07 January 2014 - 05:11 PM, said:

We should do the match on this...<stuff>...That said, It has nothing to do with ego. Get better at the game and work hard at it. Not getting better at the game and crying foul is akin to wasting the time of everyone that has worked hard to get where they are in this game.

I'm not crying foul, but I am calling you a pompous person now. I defended you when people attacked you for using a low-ELO match to illustrate your "skill", yet you come back days later and tell me to "get better"? Dueling you would be like getting into a bloody knuckles fight with a brick wall... stupid and pointless.

Sandpit, on 07 January 2014 - 05:27 PM, said:

In regards to JJs I think more heat would be one of the better ways to balance them all the way around. In TT (yes I know it's not TT but that's still the underlying basis for MWO) you generated +1 heat for for every movement point used.
So if your mech's movement for JJs was 5 and you used 5 mvoement points with your JJs you generated 5 heat. Buffing heat generation by that much it would add an entirely new element to their use.
It wouldn't hamper lights using them for mobility but it would make you think twice about using them AND firing off weapons that also generate heat.

I support that completely. They should definitely build considerable heat, especially when simply walking builds heat.

Wraith05, on 07 January 2014 - 07:22 PM, said:

I understand you disagree with it, but you keep making points that make me feel you don't fully understand the overall picture of what it would do.

You are only concentrating on the ballistic which yes it would mean that when running with a ballistic that THE BALLISTIC can only do X amount of damage, which btw is already the case it just isn't apparent because of the high amount of ammo you can put on. The change is just lowering that X value.

But this is how it would make it more desirable to use other systems to back up your big ballistic punch.

And you could still run a ballistic boat if you wanted, but you would have to use a combination of different ballistics.

The jagers would still be viable, but you'd have to run with more than 1 type of AC.

I don't support ammo reductions, but I support them more than I do ammo caps. That is a bad idea and not grounded in any logic or lore. It doesn't fix the issue (front-loaded damage) and nerfs the ballistic weapons at the same time.