775 replies to this topic

[Janus Orworth]

Paul Inouye, on 24 March 2014 - 09:21 AM, said:

I spent a large portion of my time last week monitoring gameplay of players of all Elo ranges. There were some interesting finds to say the least in terms of how players adapted to the speed change.

Namely? Having spent enough time wading through endless webs of corporate speak from a different developer I am now able to see when someone is talking a lot while saying nothing. If you do have some valuable info to convey why not mind such an antiquated thing as manners and actually out with it?

[Antarus]

Despite the abundance of LRMs, there are definitely ways around it. It has done wonders to drive players to fight around cover. However, even with all of the LRM boats, and some stand out BLR pilots in the tourney, it seems pretty clear that they were not the primary killer in high ELO's this weekend. I don't think you need the official stats to figure out what those are.

[MischiefSC]

Going with Traug on this one.

More AMS ammo per ton.

LRM damage at 1.0 - now that they're accurate (with LRMs speed largely equals accuracy) they don't need the buff.

I'm all for 160 too; just those two things would be like a cherry on top.

[Janus Orworth]

Kjudoon, on 24 March 2014 - 10:14 AM, said:

Will AMS's buff be dialed back or will it continue to chew up even more LRMs SRMs and Streaks than it did before because of more time given to do damage? (I believe 5-6 will now be average per volley compared to 4-5)

Allow me to redirect you to this thread: http://mwomercs.com/...1-ams-feedback/

Thank you.

[Evax]

New min range should be 280m.

[Spheroid]

Please reduce tracking strength for all non-LOS targets except those NARCed. Target decay is too powerful with the current missiles.

[AlmightyAeng]

Paul Inouye, on 24 March 2014 - 09:21 AM, said:

Just to let you all know that I've been monitoring the LRM change and their performance on the battlefield.

It was important to watch the speed impact in gameplay for at least a week to see the actual change in overall gameplay.

Paul, you got a like for these two statements. Whether or not people agree with the buff/nerf of LRM's, I am VERY glad to see that with this change you took time to evaluate the changes, and are now introducing a SLIGHT change.

I'm assuming that you will then look at it for a bit, and if necessary, tweak again.

Constant small tweaks, one atta time, 1-2 weeks apart, will get you that balance we're all looking for. Thanks. Apply technique to all weapon balance, and prosper

Edited by Ghost Badger, 24 March 2014 - 10:29 AM.

[Svidro]

Janus Orworth, on 24 March 2014 - 10:16 AM, said:

Namely? Having spent enough time wading through endless webs of corporate speak from a different developer I am now able to see when someone is talking a lot while saying nothing. If you do have some valuable info to convey why not mind such an antiquated thing as manners and actually out with it?

Possibly by "not playing." Hopefully it will bring back enough people that we won't be failing to find matches at off times.

[Bigbacon]

Evax, on 24 March 2014 - 10:23 AM, said:

New min range should be 280m.

or higher....

Make the LRMs what they are "Long range" if you want to get into close range battles with a missile system, equip a different missile system. I'm talking make minimum range like 400-500m.

Make the boats gets their targets from teammates and get their defense from teammates. LRM boat should never be an offensive player which least in my little time playing, they seem to do a lot.

[DocBach]

Bigbacon, on 24 March 2014 - 10:29 AM, said:

or higher....

Make the LRMs what they are "Long range" if you want to get into close range battles with a missile system, equip a different missile system. I'm talking make minimum range like 400-500m.

Make the boats gets their targets from teammates and get their defense from teammates. LRM boat should never be an offensive player which least in my little time playing, they seem to do a lot.

LRM's should be able to perform on their own - most stock 'Mechs carried a single LRM rack and such and its nice to see missiles have new utility. However, just like the PPC/AC boats jump snipe, something should be done to mitigate the reward for low-risk playstyles. Missiles should be harder to use if you play as a troll under a bridge waiting for locks. It should reward you for exposing yourself to risk by getting your own locks.

[Mystere]

Paul Inouye, on 24 March 2014 - 09:21 AM, said:

There were some interesting finds to say the least in terms of how players adapted to the speed change.

Come on now. Don't leave us hanging on what those "interesting finds" were. A lot of inquiring minds want to know.

[Utilyan]

I think players should adapt or die.


Nerfing Lrm's just noobs who refuse to take cover and have no concept of it.


The best answer would have been release a tutorial on how to take cover. With highlighted markers of where to stand.

In fact you should kick players in the balls with "would you like a taking cover tutorial?" pop up if they die from LRMs.


The stalemate/gridlock/trenchwarfare that's when the planning and thinking starts.

Whenever you buff a weapon to be even minimally dangerous.....of course the whiner says its op after all he is finally getting killed and actually has to put in a effort to not die.

[Jonathan Paine]

Personally, I think the LRMs work well the way they are right now, good enough to give the pop-tarting meta a run for its money.

Consider this:
Implement the speed nerf Paul suggested for the LOCKED ON LRMs, slight BUFF the speed of DUMB FIRED LRMs. Slightly nerf the duration of target decay.

Projected effect: encourage people to skill shoot LRMs without a lock.

P.S.
I am also a fan of using a similar system as streaks to allocate damage from locked on lrms.

[Amsro]

Mystere, on 24 March 2014 - 10:39 AM, said:

Come on now. Don't leave us hanging on what those "interesting finds" were. A lot of inquiring minds want to know.

AKA not really interesting, might not even be anything new. Just a hook line.

This nerf buff in such short time reminds me of the MG buff/nerf. Just like the MG the LRMs will be meh again.

The real root of the problem lies much deeper then single weapon tweaks. It is a realtime how not to develop a game.

[jmurray86]

So...why not just increase the weight per ton of LRM ammo? Or just put an overall limit to the amount of ammo you can carry? The speed is a bit of an issue but 160 should be fine. It will not, however, fix the issue at hand which is an abundance of players spamming LRMs through the course of an entire match. In my mind they should have to watch the amount of ammo they are consuming.

[Amsro]

Jonathan Paine, on 24 March 2014 - 10:41 AM, said:

Personally, I think the LRMs work well the way they are right now, good enough to give the pop-tarting meta a run for its money.

Consider this:
Implement the speed nerf Paul suggested for the LOCKED ON LRMs, slight BUFF the speed of DUMB FIRED LRMs. Slightly nerf the duration of target decay.

Projected effect: encourage people to skill shoot LRMs without a lock.

P.S.
I am also a fan of using a similar system as streaks to allocate damage from locked on lrms.

I agree the QQ for lrms is unjustified, but then the balance in this game has been off the mark for more then a year now.

[Mystere]

Amsro, on 24 March 2014 - 10:43 AM, said:

AKA not really interesting, might not even be anything new. Just a hook line.

This nerf buff in such short time reminds me of the MG buff/nerf. Just like the MG the LRMs will be meh again.

The real root of the problem lies much deeper then single weapon tweaks. It is a realtime how not to develop a game.

Well, at least it can give us a clue on whether or not the incoming nerf is really warranted or it's just a reaction to the massive QQ. Think of it as an indication of whether or not we should make PGI burn in their own fat.

Edited by Mystere, 24 March 2014 - 10:47 AM.

[Appogee]

It's not the speed, it's the boating.

You nerfed the boating of other weapons like PPCs. You desynced the Gauss.

Now nerf the LRM boating and we're fine.

Varied loadouts should be encouraged vs min/maxed loadouts.

[Sandpit]

That's funny, last time I checked a week was 7 days not 6....

I also thought it kind of funny how a week's worth of data is conclusive...

Whatever, QQers have had their way with this game for a year now. Just keep handing out easy buttons I suppose. That will make "everyone happy"

Stop pandering and catering to the lowest common denominator OR (if you insist on doing this) give those who DON'T want an easy "I win" button option a way to play the game that DOESN'T cost them money simply because they're tired of PGI dumbing this game down to those unwilling to adapt. Why SHOULD they adapt to anything? Every time PGi changes something they just wail and flail on the forums until it gets changed.

[Amsro]

Appogee, on 24 March 2014 - 10:47 AM, said:

It's not the speed, it's the boating.

You nerfed the boating of other weapons like PPCs. You desynced the Gauss.

Now nerf the LRM boating and we're fine.

Varied loadouts should be encouraged vs min/maxed loadouts.

LRM boating is nerfed, but unlike close range weapons LRM's are fine in chainfire;

15+15+15+15+15+15+15+15+15+15... just keep on LOLRMing

Lower Heat Cap on the other hand would make non stop LRMing impossible. As well as benefit the entire game vs boating and alphas non stop.

Like I said they keep adding bandaids.. FIX your GAME PGI!. no amount of nerf's or buff's with the current game dynamics can have any great outcome.

Edited by Amsro, 24 March 2014 - 10:52 AM.