243 replies to this topic

[Kusunoki Masashige]

I just ran my fav mech in a match... sad its now useless and needs a complete retool. Looks like i will be pulling AC/2 & 5's from all my builds and going with AC/10 since they are only 200 slower and pack more of a wallop. Poor move PGI....

[Mordin Ashe]

Great, I am happy with this change. Now they should limit that huge range of AC/5 and UAC/5 and ballistics would be pretty balanced.
Now, throw rocks on me :-)

[Khobai]

Quote

Use PPCs mixed with larger ACs like the "real" man Paul wants us all to be.

Thats what it seems like. Its like Paul wants us to use ERLL, PPC, Streaks, ML, AC20 and nothing else.

[Kusunoki Masashige]

** Rock... thow** pfft

[Desintegrator]

After they nerfed the Gauss, then the AC20 and AC10, the rest of the AC's was much to overpowered. Therefore they need definitely need to nerf it. But who cares ??
->Use your LRM 60 Highlander or Stalker as the weeks before and everything will be fine !

[Soulscour]

I didn't see a lot of players using it compared to every other weapon. This made no sense. I will be changing my banshee 3e build to what everyone else uses now.

[Kaeb Odellas]

Yeah, I don't get it. Grouped AC2s were certainly dangerous pre-patch, if a little hot, but never so far as to be overpowered. Now they have worse range, lower DPS than the AC5, generate over twice the heat, all while requiring constant facing to maintain damage.

What was the point of all this?

[-Halcyon-]

I wonder how my CTF-IM "chainsaw" build will perform now...

Honestly firing at extreme range barely did any damage and just wasted the limited precious ammo pool the IM can carry, so the drop just forces people to hold fire until enemy mechs come into their killing zone.
Imo the AC5 is a brawling weapon, not a sniping one.

With the insane amount of jamming the UAC5's do, I don't think the slight cooldown increase will affect much in battle.

[Cattra Kell]

Pretty much no changes here - I didn't really engage with AC2's beyond 1500 to begin with

[Khobai]

Quote

I didn't see a lot of players using it compared to every other weapon. This made no sense. I will be changing my banshee 3e build to what everyone else uses now.

Which is all the more reason to BUFF them not nerf them.

Quote

What was the point of all this?

The point was to normalize autocannons. I was completely on board with lowering AC2 dps to 3. Because it was a bit silly for the AC2 to have the same dps as the AC10. Where paul lost me is when he decreased the range of the AC2? WHY? The AC2 is supposed to have long range. Also why was the AC2s heat not reduced?

Quote

Pretty much no changes here - I didn't really engage with AC2's beyond 1500 to begin with

The change is that the AC2 is now outright worse than the AC5. There is no reason to use it ever. At least before the AC2 had a very niche role. Now its just useless.

Edited by Khobai, 15 April 2014 - 12:33 PM.

[Mykaelous Wolf]

PGI developer meeting when balancing rock paper scissors:
Firs week: "Everyone is always using rock in RPS. We need to make it so people use scissors and paper. Let's make rock not break scissors."
Next week: "Everyone is using scissors now, lets make it so paper also beats scissors."
Next week: "Everyone is using paper shit, lets make paper not beat rock."
and around ad around we go.

[TygerLily]

Cattra Kell, on 15 April 2014 - 12:25 PM, said:

Pretty much no changes here - I didn't really engage with AC2's beyond 1500 to begin with

One time on my deployment a buddy of mine was ranting and raving about how long it to for the gate guards to check IDs...when we got up there, they checked only my ID and let my buddy through with me. "They don't even check the IDs," he said.

"It's almost as if they cant do anything right..." I said.

[Abivard]

Why was the AC2 the only ballistics weapon whose range was brought into alignment with the energy weapons max range?

Will we get to see the other Ballistics weapons have their range adjusted to conform or will they continue to have that OUTRAGEOUS 3 X Max range bonus?

The more a player depends on exploits the harder they QQ when the exploits are removed.

[Ecrof]

Halcyon201, on 15 April 2014 - 12:24 PM, said:

I wonder how my CTF-IM "chainsaw" build will perform now...

Honestly firing at extreme range barely did any damage and just wasted the limited precious ammo pool the IM can carry, so the drop just forces people to hold fire until enemy mechs come into their killing zone.
Imo the AC5 is a brawling weapon, not a sniping one.

With the insane amount of jamming the UAC5's do, I don't think the slight cooldown increase will affect much in battle.

2 AC5 + 2 PPCs = sniping weapon

[Kusunoki Masashige]

PDI design team... needs to play more tabletop and then pull heads out of each other tail ends

Abivard, on 15 April 2014 - 12:29 PM, said:

Why was the AC2 the only ballistics weapon whose range was brought into alignment with the energy weapons max range?

Will we get to see the other Ballistics weapons have their range adjusted to conform or will they continue to have that OUTRAGEOUS 3 X Max range bonus?

The more a player depends on exploits the harder they QQ when the exploits are removed.

AC 2 should have one of the longest ranges in the game. Look at tabletop specs start your basis there PGI

[Mister Blastman]

Kaeb Odellas, on 15 April 2014 - 12:23 PM, said:

Yeah, I don't get it. Grouped AC2s were certainly dangerous pre-patch, if a little hot, but never so far as to be overpowered. Now they have worse range, lower DPS than the AC5, generate over twice the heat, all while requiring constant facing to maintain damage.

What was the point of all this?

What is the point in Paul? Why is he here?

AC2s should be left alone and LBX should be buffed to 1.4 pts damage.

Edited by Mister Blastman, 15 April 2014 - 12:31 PM.

[tayhimself]

Cattra Kell, on 15 April 2014 - 12:25 PM, said:

Pretty much no changes here - I didn't really engage with AC2's beyond 1500 to begin with

Did you not notice the repeatedly pointed out problem with the higher heat, lower alpha, reduced group-ability due to ghost heat, and equivalent range compared to the AC/5.

Edit - cleaned up hostile & foul language.

Edited by tayhimself, 15 April 2014 - 12:36 PM.

[Cattra Kell]

Khobai, on 15 April 2014 - 12:26 PM, said:

The change is that the AC2 is now outright worse than the AC5. There is no reason to use it ever.

They are still 2 tons lighter, travel 2x faster, fire 2.7x the rate of the AC5 and only take up 1 slot compared to 4.
Most people who run AC2's run over 3 of them - if you are running under that you are not in an optimal build - compared to the AC5 which only ran 2 on most variants (exception being the Banshee) - as such the optimal AC2 builds are still fine

[tayhimself]

Khobai, on 15 April 2014 - 12:26 PM, said:

Which is all the more reason to BUFF them not nerf them.

In your rage at this monumentally boneheaded decision, you missed the sarcasm in the posts you replied to.

[Lord Perversor]

Well i run a couple of matches the New RoF makes the Ac/2 a bit more manageable on heat issues and ammo last longer, but that's pretty much it all.

Still ghost heat it's the biggest contender to stop Ac/2 from providing something useful to a fight (a more constant barrage of dmg for fire supression)