40 replies to this topic

[Doctor Proctor]

DEMAX51, on 12 January 2014 - 07:13 PM, said:

A reduction in projectile speed to what are supposed to be mid-to-close range weapons is barely a nerf. Put your pitchforks and torches away.

Yeah, ironically, I think I hit better with AC/20 post "nerf". I mainly use it in my HBK-4G where I didn't have a lot of ammo to waste on 5 or 600 meter shots anyway, so I was almost always using it within the optimal range. 600m/s vs 800m/s doesn't make a huge different at 250 meters, but it sure makes a big difference at 500m, which is where I saw a LOT of PPC/AC and AC/40 builds using theirs. At that range the AC/20 still does more damage than an AC/10, and was still relatively easy to lead with.

This change should make people focus more on using either a higher velocity weapon at longer ranges (AC/5's and AC/10's) or closing more with their AC/20's, which is basically the intended role of that weapon system.

[Kali Rinpoche]

I'm not too thrilled about the AC 20 nerf. While I own three Jags, including the FB, I have never once put dual AC20's on them. Yes, I have see a proliferation of them lately, but I see more of the 2 PPC ac10 meta again. The ac20 is what allows brawler Cataphract builds to be successful and with the draconian velocity reduction they are not as effective at medium to long range. (of the weapon) If they would simply return the gauss to its former state and put the charge up timer on PPC's I think meta builds wouldn't be so annoyingly common. The only nice thing about the 2 AC20 or 2 PPC AC10 builds is that my missile boats are now effective again.

Edited by Kali Rinpoche, 14 January 2014 - 08:30 AM.

[nightsniper]

Not for nothing but nerfing the AC 20 and leaving the LRM boats only hitting center torso from extreme range is not balancing the play here. If you mean what you say in the Vlog then balance and move on to the other problems just dropped 3 times and light players all three times and got crocked 3 times by heavier mechs and more mechs on the other side last time 2 empty slots and 1 disconnect.

[Floodinator]

Smittiferous, on 13 January 2014 - 01:22 AM, said:

Can't speak for the AC/20 however, i don't really use them (wont fit on the majority of mechs i own).

Really? No Mech that fits an AC20... It even fits in my CDA-3M


The nerfs on the AC20 and AC10, I don't really feel them, well sometimes on a closerange light, but on 270 nah.

Edited by Floodina0t, 15 January 2014 - 09:02 AM.

[990Dreams]

Pssh.

I was using a Quad/AC5 Jager before the AC/20 nerf.

(no joke)

Thing is, nerfing the AC/5 or AC/2 is dumb. They should go fast. The AC/10 and 20 made sense.

(maybe they can lower the damage lol)

Edited by DavidHurricane, 15 January 2014 - 09:38 AM.

[DEMAX51]

nightsniper, on 15 January 2014 - 06:45 AM, said:

Not for nothing but nerfing the AC 20 and leaving the LRM boats only hitting center torso from extreme range is not balancing the play here. If you mean what you say in the Vlog then balance and move on to the other problems just dropped 3 times and light players all three times and got crocked 3 times by heavier mechs and more mechs on the other side last time 2 empty slots and 1 disconnect.

When I see somebody complain about LRMs being too powerful, I immediately know they have no idea what they're talking about.

[Doctor Proctor]

DEMAX51, on 15 January 2014 - 10:15 AM, said:

When I see somebody complain about LRMs being too powerful, I immediately know they have no idea what they're talking about.

Yeah, I wish my LRM's went for the CT more. So frustrating to pelt a slow Atlas with a couple hundred missiles only to get "Component Destruction" as I leg him. When I'm using Artemis and TAG no less!

[Helsbane]

I already posted this once, but as my stance on the matter has yet to change (unlikely), I feel it is the appropriate response here as well...

PGI won't be happy until all weapons suck equally. That way there will be no meta, no single combo of weapons that shines above the others. Of course, in doing so, they will kick what's left of their foundation out from under the game, and it will die with nothing more than a whimper.

They've never listened to the feedback of the beta testers or playerbase, instead choosing the worst, most convoluted, bass-ackwards, nonsensical route they could possibly take. At this point, I honestly believe they're trolling us. PGI hates the Mechwarrior IP with a mad passion, and MWO is their attempt to bury it once and for all. If they can make it suck badly enough, then no other game company will want anything to do with it, and it will go away, never to be seen again.

"Helsbane, you're crazy. No company in their right mind would ever do such a thing!"

I agree. No company in the right mind would, but lets face it, PGI is far from stable. Every decision they make, EVERY-LAST-ONE, is the one that makes the playerbase wonder what the f**k they were thinking. Ghost heat, weapon balancing, hit reg, basic lobbies, slope detection vs. map design.... The absolute wrong direction at each and every choice along the way.

If my theory isn't true, and they really aren't trolling us, then this makes them the most incompetent bunch of dipshits every to belly up to a keyboard. Even a blind squirrel finds a nut occasionally. PGI is a blind, deaf, mute, squirrel with all four limbs amputated.

PGI should never have attempted a MW title. They bit off waaaaaaaaay more than they could ever hope to chew, and are now choking on it (provided of course, they really are trying. I'm still a believer in the troll theory...). Given their track record with other projects, they should have rung Hasbro and gone with something like "My Little Pony: Adventures in Grooming". They'd still f**k it up, but that would be fine. At least the MW fanbase wouldn't have been dragged through PGI's little slice of hell for two years.

[Solis Obscuri]

Odd, I'm still seeing more AC/40 Jagers than AC/5 boats.

And they're still more dangerous.

[nightsniper]

Now wait a minute LRMS are hitting the center torso far more then the should yes the damage is spread slightly but the center torso is taking the majority of the fire and from long range. I do it in my Catapult all the time.

But the comment was in relation to the nerfing of the big AC's and to comment on the devs feeling they needed to do it. If you play the table top or any of the other games ( and I know most do) then the AC20 was the tops and most feared. While at range the Gauss was equally feared. This guass because of lag and all the other funny things that happen you might as well shot with your eyes closed. The chance of arming or legging at range is just not their on anything but a light.

It seems to me and this is my point that the attempt as so aptly put above this comment is they are watering everything down to "balance the play" sort of like an arcade game when they were popular along a boardwalk. Drop or quarters in boys and see if your the top score in 5 mins.

I was hoping MWO was going for the MW5 game we all hoped for with mission play a good story line and eventually Planetary play where factions square off. So far it is just, the check is in the mail, from what I am seeing and hearing. Not to be all bad this certainly has come a long way from it melting down my south bridge heat sink a year ago and the mech artwork is superior. Would be nice to see a normal landscape instead of playing in the Grand Canyon or the Canadian Rockies. Sort of like a roller coaster ride in a light mech.

Anyway

Solis Obscuri, on 15 January 2014 - 11:48 AM, said:

Odd, I'm still seeing more AC/40 Jagers than AC/5 boats.

And they're still more dangerous.

What is an AC 40??? double Ac 20????
Did not know you could do that

[Kmieciu]

nightsniper, on 15 January 2014 - 02:40 PM, said:

What is an AC 40??? double Ac 20????
Did not know you could do that

You've just invalidated everything you've ever written on this forum...

Edited by Kmieciu, 16 January 2014 - 06:39 AM.

[Doctor Proctor]

Kmieciu, on 16 January 2014 - 06:39 AM, said:

nightsniper, on 15 January 2014 - 02:40 PM, said:

What is an AC 40??? double Ac 20????
Did not know you could do that

You've just invalidated everything you've ever written on this forum...

A little harsh, but yeah, if you didn't know you could do an AC/40 then that basically invalidates everything you're saying about the AC/20 "nerf".

Also, as for LRM's hitting the CT, that only happens if a mech is standing still. Moving mechs though? Hits get spread everywhere and tend to end up impacting the legs a lot. Chain fired LRM5's are like core drills though, but they can be practically invalidated by some AMS (Personally, I think that the smaller launchers need a larger spread to prevent exactly that. My Trolltaro is waaaaay more effective than it has any right to be.) unless you group fire them all together. This is why you might 8 AC wielding mechs in a match (most running AC/5 and UAC/5 nowadays) whereas you'll only see one or two missile boats.

Lastly, if you have a bad connection you have a bad connection, but Gauss sucking as a sniping weapon? LOL. I've had so many components shot off by dual Gauss snipers at 800+m it's not even funny. I've also been wrecked by dual Gauss builds in close combat...so much for the charge up mechanic invalidating that. To be fair though, I see less Gauss usage in close combat since they introduced that, but good players can easily overcome the timing issues. Especially those that run dual Guass, since then both weapons utilize the charge up mechanic and you don't have issues trying to mix weapons with different firing mechanics.

You did know that you can dual Gauss too, BTW. Right?

[nightsniper]

A little harsh, but yeah, if you didn't know you could do an AC/40 then that basically invalidates everything you're saying about the AC/20 "nerf".


How is not Knowing the AC 40 was short for Double AC20 and invalidation. For one I have not tried every mech and the ones I have now 9 of my own and maybe another half dozen trial mechs none can take a double AC20. I like AC's they have a place and a role here in Battletech but I do prefer a more balanced mech using a combination of weapon types.
Knowing and realizing a nerf is effecting the game play as before does not require an exclusive look at one item. Certainly if you have to be that focused, well .... Regarding the LRM issue the point brought up about chain firing 5's and 10's is precisely the point I was making and on my screen trying to move once the rain of death starts is nearly impossible. Maybe this is a glitch that I missed reading about in the volumes of notes on this forum. No I don't think it is my computer I am running a PC with and AMD 8 core processor on a gigabyte 990FX mother board with 32 gig of ram and crossfire ATI Radeon 7750 2gig cards on a 75/35 hard wired Fiberoptic connection. I will say ion the month or so have been back trying to get up to speed I have noticed with the last patch more stuttering in the play and rubber banding not sure what that is all about also the ping has gone up from the 30's to the 80's and most in the game on launch well into the 100-150 range. But the point is the attempt to achieve "balance " as the Dev's call it is altering the game into something well outside of the battletech play of the past.

Edited by nightsniper, 16 January 2014 - 08:44 AM.

[Doctor Proctor]

nightsniper, on 16 January 2014 - 08:43 AM, said:

A little harsh, but yeah, if you didn't know you could do an AC/40 then that basically invalidates everything you're saying about the AC/20 "nerf".


How is not Knowing the AC 40 was short for Double AC20 and invalidation. For one I have not tried every mech and the ones I have now 9 of my own and maybe another half dozen trial mechs none can take a double AC20. I like AC's they have a place and a role here in Battletech but I do prefer a more balanced mech using a combination of weapon types.
Knowing and realizing a nerf is effecting the game play as before does not require an exclusive look at one item. Certainly if you have to be that focused, well .... Regarding the LRM issue the point brought up about chain firing 5's and 10's is precisely the point I was making and on my screen trying to move once the rain of death starts is nearly impossible. Maybe this is a glitch that I missed reading about in the volumes of notes on this forum. No I don't think it is my computer I am running a PC with and AMD 8 core processor on a gigabyte 990FX mother board with 32 gig of ram and crossfire ATI Radeon 7750 2gig cards on a 75/35 hard wired Fiberoptic connection. I will say ion the month or so have been back trying to get up to speed I have noticed with the last patch more stuttering in the play and rubber banding not sure what that is all about also the ping has gone up from the 30's to the 80's and most in the game on launch well into the 100-150 range. But the point is the attempt to achieve "balance " as the Dev's call it is altering the game into something well outside of the battletech play of the past.

No, it's not that you don't have mechs capable of using the AC/40 build (there's only a couple very specific ones that can mount it anyway) or that you prefer a mixed loadout that invalidated some of what you were saying, it was that you didn't know it existed. In other words, you have not seen entire lances of AC/40 Jagers completely roll an enemy team by instantly coring Atlases in a single salvo. Or been "sniped" by an AC/40 at 500m, because even at that range he's still doing more damage than your pathetic LL and ML weapons that you're trying to fight him with (and completely out of range of SRM's and SSRM's, which many brawlers carry). AC/40 builds are extremely powerful and while there are some easy counters to them, they wield an extremely high pinpoint alpha that is very efficient at coring and stripping mechs once they get close.

Their shots were slowed down in order to return the AC/20 to more of a close range weapon, since now it would be more difficult to track targets at ranges of 500m with your shells going at the new, slower speed. The AC/10 change was a little odd, but perhaps was done to try to delink it from some of the other weapons systems it was mixed with in high alpha builds (namely PPC's and other AC's) to make it more difficult to get multiple weapons systems to land on the same panel at the same time.

Also, I run this game on a laptop with GeForce GT540M with 1GB VRAM and a 2.2GHz Core i7 at about 30-40fps with a typical ping of 40, and I can snipe just fine (don't use Gauss personally, but I do it with other weapons like AC/2 and PPC). I don't get the stutter and rubber banding that you're talking about though, so either there's something wrong with the components in your super duper amazing computer, or it's a bad connection (which is what I originally said). Just because your DL/UL speed is high doesn't mean you don't have latency and ping issues on your line.

[DEMAX51]

nightsniper, on 16 January 2014 - 08:43 AM, said:

A little harsh, but yeah, if you didn't know you could do an AC/40 then that basically invalidates everything you're saying about the AC/20 "nerf".


How is not Knowing the AC 40 was short for Double AC20 and invalidation. For one I have not tried every mech and the ones I have now 9 of my own and maybe another half dozen trial mechs none can take a double AC20. I like AC's they have a place and a role here in Battletech but I do prefer a more balanced mech using a combination of weapon types.
Knowing and realizing a nerf is effecting the game play as before does not require an exclusive look at one item. Certainly if you have to be that focused, well .... Regarding the LRM issue the point brought up about chain firing 5's and 10's is precisely the point I was making and on my screen trying to move once the rain of death starts is nearly impossible. Maybe this is a glitch that I missed reading about in the volumes of notes on this forum. No I don't think it is my computer I am running a PC with and AMD 8 core processor on a gigabyte 990FX mother board with 32 gig of ram and crossfire ATI Radeon 7750 2gig cards on a 75/35 hard wired Fiberoptic connection. I will say ion the month or so have been back trying to get up to speed I have noticed with the last patch more stuttering in the play and rubber banding not sure what that is all about also the ping has gone up from the 30's to the 80's and most in the game on launch well into the 100-150 range. But the point is the attempt to achieve "balance " as the Dev's call it is altering the game into something well outside of the battletech play of the past.

Just one note: this game doesn't make use of all 8 of your cores, only four, and it also doesn't utilize Crossfire yet, so you're only using one of those 7750s when you're playing MWO.

[PictishWolf]

The problem, as I see it, is that certain builds are OP in certain scenarios. If a pilot can get the 2xAC20 mech in optimum range and not get focused, it is a devastating loadout. If using 3 or 4 AC5s, at their optimum range, they can be devastating. If using a bunch of MGs at close-ish range along with pulse lasers, they can be devastating. If your team has multiple LRM boats with a good ECM spotter light mech, they can be devastating. None of these indicate a need to nerf. They actually are working as intended.

The problem with the gauss is that it is mostly ineffective now for their stated purpose: a sniper weapon not for brawling. Snipers don't wait to chamber the next round until right before shooting. If they're in position, they're locked and loaded, ready to pull the trigger. Missing opportunities to shoot because the gun wasn't loaded probably doesn't happen to good snipers IRL.

PPCs have always been a devastating weapon, in canon, in previous games, etc. I think the convergence/targeting system limitations option is the best and most intuitive fix. It just makes sense that if you fire multiple weapons, it would task the targeting system.

[nightsniper]

Ok so what your saying is that since I rely on one AC20 on my highlander or my blackjack that I can not comment on the fact that the nerfed my build?

Well I think that suggest something about the discussion that is seriously flawed on your part. Historically the AC 20 was one of the most feared weapons as was the gauss in the hands of a sniper. In my opinion regardless of the AC40 issue nerfing and delaying either is basically neutering the weapons from what they were in the past and through the Lore and I strongly object to it. I would suggest that balancing does not mean changing the game to achieve an end that is contrary to History. If they want to just create an arcade game then I will put away my wallet and you can show me where I put my quarters in.

[Cade Windstalker]

Foster Bondroff, on 12 January 2014 - 11:20 PM, said:

Yeah spin the nerf wheel, round and round and round it goes, yet nothing is well in MWO land. How many more rounds it needs, till its realized, that they are actually spinning the wrong wheel?



In full mod 12vs12? If yes. I bow to your superior skills at the controls.
But honestly i doubt it. In PUG yes, in 12vs12 hardly. But PUG doesnt count, cause in PUGs everything can shine. I have made 3025 stock mechs shine in PUG drops, but based on that i would never argue they are balanced or any good for full mod 12vs12 game.


Do not understand me wrong, i am absolutly in favor of variety, but in my opinion PGI is following the wrong road in this regard. They mess around with weapons stats, while the problem lies much deeper.

Especially with the low farming pace, i see this as a real threat to new player aquisition. In the current meta it is far to easy to spent money and resources on the "wrong" mechs in terms of battlefield effectiveness.

What i see in MWO since almost a year now is what keeped me away from playing earlier MW titles online. A very limited number of viable chassis with an even more limited number of viable loadouts.

Its not the game or the "broken" promisses that keep me here. It's the 331st and most notable two guys from the german community that organize exellent tournaments and league games. Its there effort not that of the devs that holds up a little candle of hope.

I personally and most of the 331st as far as i can say don't like to play cheese. If its needed, we can and we do very well in it. Do we like it? No! Pure boredom.

And so i can only appeal: Leave this road. Stop spinning this wheel! It has and will only result in a different kind of cheese for the time being.

So, being somewhat new to MWO but old to Mechwarrior and games in general I'm not quite sure what you're after here. Community stuff asside what wheel would you prefer they be spinning? The buff wheel? They could, I supposed, systematically buff all weapons until they're all really powerful but that's just going to make mechs feel squishy and lead to a whole mess of other problems.

If reducing damage and weapon effectiveness at range is going to lead to a new "cheese" build, inevitably, as you claim, then what makes you think anything else isn't going to have the same end result? It's not that I think this is a realistic view it's that this seems to be the implication of what you're saying and that it *doesn't* make sense.

I certainly agree that I'd like to see more chassis and build combinations made viable but I don't think complete avoidance of weapon nerfs, especially when a given weapon is massively over-used, is the answer.

[nightsniper]

OK so many in the community have anger management issues maybe that is what attracts them to the game. The issues of nerfing and buffing are something many games have faced and dealt with. The real issue as I have seen it is the hope and promise that we were going to see a new generation of the old game. For some this goes back to the board game we learned on in the 80's. Fact is in this void many here returned to the mini's and board game and have become use to the record sheets and balancing the mechs based on the rules found their in. Little nerfing and buffing has taken place over the 30+ years since the original game came out. Yes new rules but not changes old rules in the the sense of what we see here in the automates game.

In a true continuation of Mech warfare one could have expected a graphically enhanced FPS with RP of the board game. Where some configs out dueled other configs based on a fictional character. So as the thread was begun the issue of AC's seemed to be settled int he game even capitalized on. The AC20 and Gauss were feared weapons in the hands of any pilot but they were rare and converted. In this Arcade version of metal warfare to bring balance to these 15 mins of fame shoot'em ups they have determined to create balance by bringing Energy, Ballistic, and Missile weapons into parity. This has resulted in hyping up and distorting down members of each group. Further the changes were not initial but slowly over time with out offering evidence of the need to the group large.

I for one cut my teeth on the board game back in 1983 and have continued to play it with each new set of rules I thought I knew a lot about load out and mech strategy but this game has scrapped that and now a new learning curve. The fact is PGI and it's partners are moving away from what was anticipated to something they feel is more marketable from a monetary point of view. If we want a mech game to play we have to let them follow their business model and scrap any preconceived notions of what play should have been like and accept what they have put forward.

Try watching the Vlog posted last week and listen very carefully to the words and phrases they use " Balance ",' "programming limits" , "scale" and "pictures versus program-ability" it is all their right from the people putting the product on the screen. The engine presents some obstacles right now, as does time and man power. So that said we can take the good with the bad and realize that Mech Warrior is just changing and enjoy it or go back to your board game and remain a purist.

[C E Dwyer]

Foster Bondroff, on 10 January 2014 - 05:55 AM, said:

Not quite true. The gauss nerf per that funny completely unintuitive charge has broken the gauss on a much deeper level than any other weapon. So gauss currently is way out of the circle. I guess its needs two to three more go around until the gauss even with the charge will be usefull again.

Not seeing this, gauss is back after the ac10 nerf using it myself very well.