518 replies to this topic

[Kjudoon]

From what I understand, the narc does not have a 'radius of effect'. It knocks out ECM from the mech that it hit IF it has ECM. If there is no ECM on that mech, it acts as a 'crybaby' leaving it unable to be hidden by ECM or terrain for the entire 30 seconds. If you shoot a mech without ECM, the NARC will not cancel any other ECM that is not installed on that hit mech.

Does that make sense?

So to knock out 3 ECM mechs, you have to shoot all three ECM mechs separately. Three NARCs in 1 mech won't do the trick, nor will it extend the time.

[no one]

Okay, lately I've been testing SRMs a lot and I ended up with a deciding to try using a NARC to measure their damage based on a bit of info from the MWO wiki. Specifically;

• "Falls" off after 35points of missile damage hits the affected 'Mech

So I start firing the SRM at fired I noticed that the NARC pops off after I hit the 'Mech in question 4 times. For the math challenged, that's 2 missiles * 2damage * 4hits = 16 damage. So my question becomes. . .

Zah?

So I load up LRMs and run the same test. 3 LRM 5 volleys do 16.5 damage. . . but that doesn't knock the NARC out. Four LRM five volleys at 22 damage does knock it off.

So. . . How exactly is missile damage being applied? I ask because SRMs seem to be a bit underwhelming at the moment.

It's not just because they move at less than half the speed of the slowest auto cannon, or because they've got a lower damage per missile than streaks, or because they're one of the only weapons that retains the tabletop ammo per ton count, or because they're completely dumb-fire, or because they frequently do odd damage numbers . . .
Sorry, I forgot where I was going with this.

Edited by no one, 10 March 2014 - 09:59 PM.

[aniviron]

no one, on 10 March 2014 - 09:58 PM, said:

Okay, lately I've been testing SRMs a lot and I ended up with a deciding to try using a NARC to measure their damage based on a bit of info from the MWO wiki. Specifically;

• "Falls" off after 35points of missile damage hits the affected 'Mech

So I start firing the SRM at fired I noticed that the NARC pops off after I hit the 'Mech in question 4 times. For the math challenged, that's 2 missiles * 2damage * 4hits = 16 damage. So my question becomes. . .


Zah?

So I load up LRMs and run the same test. 3 LRM 5 volleys do 16.5 damage. . . but that doesn't knock the NARC out. Four LRM five volleys at 22 damage does knock it off.

So. . . How exactly is missile damage being applied? I ask because SRMs seem to be a bit underwhelming at the moment.

It's not just because they move at less than half the speed of the slowest auto cannon, or because they've got a lower damage per missile than streaks, or because they're one of the only weapons that retains the tabletop ammo per ton count, or because they're completely dumb-fire, or because they frequently do odd damage numbers . . .
Sorry, I forgot where I was going with this.

Wow, that IS weird. I got the same results in the testing ground, and also can confirm that 35 points of medium laser do not remove the beacon, but the instant any damage hits after that it is removed. SRMs seem to be the only weapon that causes problems with the NARC falling off early.

[Chronojam]

No One that's fascinating, your numbers are indeed accurate. Are SRMs even worse than we thought?

[Deathlike]

aniviron, on 11 March 2014 - 09:05 AM, said:

Wow, that IS weird. I got the same results in the testing ground, and also can confirm that 35 points of medium laser do not remove the beacon, but the instant any damage hits after that it is removed. SRMs seem to be the only weapon that causes problems with the NARC falling off early.

SRMs are OP!

Why oh why are they the problem child... never to be fixed or addressed after the Splatcat nerf of 2013?

[Cimarb]

Are you sure the SRMs are hitting where you think they are? It's 35 damage in that section, not to the mech in general, so if any of that damage is spreading, it will not count towards knocking the NARC off.

[Wintersdark]

Deathlike, on 11 March 2014 - 09:11 AM, said:

SRMs are OP!

Why oh why are they the problem child... never to be fixed or addressed after the Splatcat nerf of 2013?

I still remember the poll "Should we buff SRM's back to 2.0 damage? This will make them OP later!"

... I'm still waiting for "later"

[no one]

Cimarb, on 11 March 2014 - 11:08 AM, said:

Are you sure the SRMs are hitting where you think they are? It's 35 damage in that section, not to the mech in general, so if any of that damage is spreading, it will not count towards knocking the NARC off.

That would make sense, and I wish that were true, but right now you can shoot a narc into a 'Mechs left foot and then tickle his right arm with SRM fire and the NARC beacon will vanish. Also it apparently registers 8 SRMs or 8-10 LRMs as doing enough damage to knock off a NARC, so I suspect the game has some sort of disconnect between actual and reported damage values. Unfortunately, outside of taking my word for this or waiting for Wintersdark to make a video showcasing the hilarity, you'll just have to try it out for yourself in the training grounds.

Edited by no one, 11 March 2014 - 02:27 PM.

[Paul Inouye]

Nothing to see here.. move along....

[FupDup]

Paul Inouye, on 11 March 2014 - 03:34 PM, said:

Good news everybody!



After getting a confirmed set of repro steps, the bug has been found. The fix has been put into a build and all things working out, you can expect the fix on the April 1st patch. (No this is not an April Fool's joke )

HE HAS RETURNED!

Edited by FupDup, 11 March 2014 - 03:37 PM.

[Paul Inouye]

Now let me post the right info in the right thread... The NARC update is in the current build planned for the March 18th patch. It has been tested and is working as intended.

[Lyoto Machida]

Paul Inouye, on 11 March 2014 - 03:42 PM, said:

Now let me post the right info in the right thread... The NARC update is in the current build planned for the March 18th patch. It has been tested and is working as intended.

Finally...looking forward to trying it out.

[no one]

Paul Inouye, on 11 March 2014 - 03:38 PM, said:

No this is not an April Fool's joke

I wouldn't call that one just yet, old bean. You're still talking about the NARC, after all.

Paul Inouye, on 11 March 2014 - 03:42 PM, said:

Now let me post * snip * tested and is working as intended.

Excellent, thanks for the update. If you have any free time to debate the finer points of weapon balance or game play with us here on the forums, please do. We have so many ideas. So many beautiful, terrible ideas.

Edited by no one, 11 March 2014 - 05:23 PM.

[Gorgo7]

NICE!!

[Krigherren]

Awesome. This should change things up a bit. I'm deeply saddened by the amount of ignorance and ridiculously selfish comments coming from the player-base. People whining about NARCs taking up a missile slot, seriously? It's a damned rocket. What kind of logic are you going by that tells you it should function differently? Sure, it could be lighter, perhaps more ammo per-ton, faster projectiles, etc., but some of the complaints are just plain... senseless, truly. It becomes readily apparent that many of the whiners have neither thoroughly play-tested a game, nor have any development experience what-so-ever. Personal attacks, taking things out of context, constantly barraging the developers and publishers with insults and QQing about how the game doesn't function the way THEY want it to. It's pretty pathetic and does well to show the integrity of these individuals.

Yeah, I'm not exactly thrilled with the condition of the game as is with as long as it's been in development and how much money has been put into it, but I'm not going to lower myself to an astonishingly low level of maturity as many others consistently have and continue to do.

Expressing your discontent about the content of the game is important, input is absolutely crucial to development. However, going off like an imbecile, ranting about this, that and the other while filling that TL:DR with as many insults as possible.. it does f-all to help with the games development and generally derails any topic that could have potentially been very beneficial.

I love MW just as much as anyone else, but seriously? This isn't MW2, 3, or 4, and it sure as hell wasn't intended to be just like them. Development is trial-and-error and they aren't custom tailoring the game just to suit YOU, the single individual.

I don't have to explain how changes can be brought about via communication with the community, but leave the personal attacks and other childish garbage in your crib. If you want change, express it, add details regarding your concern, share with us what changes you think would benefit the game, but do so like a respectable human being instead of a toddler throwing a temper tantrum.
Bashing the devs helps not at all.
Just plain whining without providing any real context regarding the issue helps not at all.

And devs.. community mods, etc.. don't even bother replying to folks like that, it doesn't do us any good, nor does it do you any good. Sure, you're addressing them, but what comes out of it? Stick to your guns.

That goes to the community, too. Don't fall in with the trendy whine-fest that has failed to provide us with any sort of progress, but instead, make your point, reinforce it, stand by it until it is changed. Do so in a respectful manner that includes any and all information that would be useful and I can almost guarantee you'll get better results than you would from just spewing on about how the devs are crap because the game has issues or how they've failed to meet deadlines, etc., etc. all that non-sense.

The development team may not be triple-A top of the line super-devs, but the community here can be pretty damned rancid, too.

I'm on the side of the community regarding most things, but the way many go about expressing their discontent.. just.. wow.

[Revorn]

Paul Inouye, on 11 March 2014 - 03:42 PM, said:

Now let me post the right info in the right thread... The NARC update is in the current build planned for the March 18th patch. It has been tested and is working as intended.

Well thanks for the Update, even as we know, that "working as intended" can mean surprisingly Things.

[Lyoto Machida]

Krigherren, on 12 March 2014 - 09:47 AM, said:

Awesome. This should change things up a bit. I'm deeply saddened by the amount of ignorance and ridiculously selfish comments coming from the player-base. People whining about NARCs taking up a missile slot, seriously? It's a damned rocket. What kind of logic are you going by that tells you it should function differently? Sure, it could be lighter, perhaps more ammo per-ton, faster projectiles, etc., but some of the complaints are just plain... senseless, truly. It becomes readily apparent that many of the whiners have neither thoroughly play-tested a game, nor have any development experience what-so-ever. Personal attacks, taking things out of context, constantly barraging the developers and publishers with insults and QQing about how the game doesn't function the way THEY want it to. It's pretty pathetic and does well to show the integrity of these individuals.

Yeah, I'm not exactly thrilled with the condition of the game as is with as long as it's been in development and how much money has been put into it, but I'm not going to lower myself to an astonishingly low level of maturity as many others consistently have and continue to do.

Expressing your discontent about the content of the game is important, input is absolutely crucial to development. However, going off like an imbecile, ranting about this, that and the other while filling that TL:DR with as many insults as possible.. it does f-all to help with the games development and generally derails any topic that could have potentially been very beneficial.

I love MW just as much as anyone else, but seriously? This isn't MW2, 3, or 4, and it sure as hell wasn't intended to be just like them. Development is trial-and-error and they aren't custom tailoring the game just to suit YOU, the single individual.

I don't have to explain how changes can be brought about via communication with the community, but leave the personal attacks and other childish garbage in your crib. If you want change, express it, add details regarding your concern, share with us what changes you think would benefit the game, but do so like a respectable human being instead of a toddler throwing a temper tantrum.
Bashing the devs helps not at all.
Just plain whining without providing any real context regarding the issue helps not at all.

And devs.. community mods, etc.. don't even bother replying to folks like that, it doesn't do us any good, nor does it do you any good. Sure, you're addressing them, but what comes out of it? Stick to your guns.

That goes to the community, too. Don't fall in with the trendy whine-fest that has failed to provide us with any sort of progress, but instead, make your point, reinforce it, stand by it until it is changed. Do so in a respectful manner that includes any and all information that would be useful and I can almost guarantee you'll get better results than you would from just spewing on about how the devs are crap because the game has issues or how they've failed to meet deadlines, etc., etc. all that non-sense.

The development team may not be triple-A top of the line super-devs, but the community here can be pretty damned rancid, too.

I'm on the side of the community regarding most things, but the way many go about expressing their discontent.. just.. wow.

Hahaha...when pages and pages of great suggestions get ignored and the devs decide to something ridiculous (like ECM), discontent grows...especially when there is no communication for long periods of time. PPCs were OP for the longest time...now its ACs. Deadlines get set and consistently missed...people aren't as naive as they were in Closed Beta. This isn't some random game like Hawken with no history behind it.

[Krigherren]

Lyoto Machida, on 12 March 2014 - 01:11 PM, said:

Hahaha...when pages and pages of great suggestions get ignored and the devs decide to something ridiculous (like ECM), discontent grows...especially when there is no communication for long periods of time. PPCs were OP for the longest time...now its ACs. Deadlines get set and consistently missed...people aren't as naive as they were in Closed Beta. This isn't some random game like Hawken with no history behind it.

How are you so sure they're being ignored? Just because they aren't in development currently doesn't mean they're ignoring the suggestion. Of course there are tons of suggestions, both good and terrible, every topic sprinkled with a dash of rage, and that's fantastic. I'm sure they'd love to, and we'd love for them to be able to, but this isn't a huge dev' team and it's just not realistic nor really a good idea. We've all experienced how trying to shove loads of big changes into the game at once can effect it negatively. We all want this, this, this and we want it ASAP. All without breaking the game and fixing what's already broken or unviable in some way, all that the same time. More often than not while demanding that the devs are being insulted, people aren't really seeming all that grateful for what IS being put out, and there's some folks who seem almost impossible to please, doing more complaining on the forum than making actual suggestions or talking about the game.

I've been around for a bit on the forums but I don't often post due to the amount of negativity that often radiates from most topics. A good handful, at least. Maybe I just don't browse enough of the forums to find where there's more optimistic folks about. A good example of that is this very topic, a simple post about something somewhat small that could later become something bigger. I like the change. It's a start, and I can only hope that it won't somehow break something else. If it does, I'll find a topic/make one regarding the brokenness, include the details such as sys' specs, any error messages, etc. and leave it at that.

There are a lot of good people in this community, but there's also a lot of sillies that can't seem to grasp the previously mentioned concept and just continue to provide us with weak posts littered with insult. Is it really so difficult to express your dislike for something without having to attack them personally? There are a lot of aspects of the game that are meh, in my opinion, yet I don't feel this urge to insult the devs or anyone who disagrees with my opinion. Developing a game isn't exactly easy, and their target audience most certainly isn't a room full of people who are all agreeable and easy to satisfy.

[DocBach]

Paul, can you clarify if hitting an ECM carrier with Narc takes down the whole bubble like if it was hit by a PPC, or does it just make the specific 'Mech that is hit with a Narc targetable regardless if its inside an ECM field?

Edited by DocBach, 12 March 2014 - 04:18 PM.

[Reno Blade]

Do we get a new game mode called "tag, you're it!" with narc?

DocBach, on 12 March 2014 - 04:17 PM, said:

Paul, can you clarify if hitting an ECM carrier with Narc takes down the whole bubble like if it was hit by a PPC, or does it just make the specific 'Mech that is hit with a Narc targetable regardless if its inside an ECM field?

From the Feb project update: http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__3120506

Quote

NARC - Will disable ECM on a 'Mech with ECM equipped for it's duration. Will not be knocked off by damage. Will be deactivated at the end of its time cycle (currently 30 seconds/may be tuned longer).

I guess if the narc gets the same EMP effect as PPCs, disableing ECM on the ecm mech would remove the whole bubble.