243 replies to this topic

[Butane9000]

So I finally sat down to play.

On one of my Orions I run a AC2+AC5 that I used for suppressing fire and annoyance. With the change in AC2's I barely notice a difference in the fire rate between the two weapons. I might as well switch to an UAC5 or AC10 with the tonnage.

On the bright side of weapon balance. The new HSR missile detection is working. Out of 12-20 volleys so far only one hasn't registered correctly.

[Expired]

Blue Drache, on 16 April 2014 - 04:27 AM, said:

Reread what I wrote ... "It was about being a distraction"

So impacting bullets and Screenshake aren't distracting ?

Blue Drache, on 16 April 2014 - 04:27 AM, said:

In my experience, LRM boats will see the red lamp damage indicator and move to hide. That puts their heads down. It distracts them. It silences their guns. That means less incoming damage. If the sniper looks at me, GREAT! I welcome it! I'm good at hiding and shooting between his laser bursts. Meanwhile, I've called out his position and the rest of my lance is flanking while I keep his attention.

To me, a sniper has some nice Gauss-Cannons or ER-PPC's - They are usually a good answer to an AC2-User.

[Stormravin]

I don't often post unless I feel strongly about a change and this is one that I feel strongly about.

I used to run my Cent with one AC/2. It was a suppression weapon and it worked well for this role. I did not use the AC/2 because I was expecting to kill anything with it.

With the fire rate and distance decrease it no longer serves that support and suppression role. I am now not sure what role that weapon would serve in this game anymore. I have had to drop it and replace it with an AC/10 or UAC/5.

I honestly did not feel that my UAC/5 Victor played any different with the AC/5 nerf and will keep that the same. However, as I mentioned above, with the nerf of the AC/2 I see no reason for anyone to use it.

I would like to ask that the AC/2 be revisited. I would not have minded a damage nerf to it (as I don't use it to kill) as much as I have been bothered by the range and rate nerf.

[Sarru]

Blue Drache, on 16 April 2014 - 04:27 AM, said:

In my experience, LRM boats will see the red lamp damage indicator and move to hide. That puts their heads down.

As you know, LRM-boat can deal damage even with "head down", from behind a cover. And no, you supressive fire is not so supressive, i go to cover not because you long-range tickling, but because there are no target i can hit with my 1000-meter range LRMs, and there are no reason to stand under fire. Imballistic is deadly threat for LRM-boat, but not from over 1 km range.

[Xavier]

I just have a couple general observations before I comment on the AC2:
1) I do believe that I heard Paul recenly state in a video post that he thought that the game was realtively well balanced. Then why are we still nerfing if you feel its balanced?
2) I think weapon rebalancing is taking up way to much of your creative time and testing cycles when you could be giving us meaningful additions to the game. I would love to know how long you spent debating/testing the weapon rebalances. Could you have used this time to more effectively test/deliver the new 3/3/3/3 concept or maybe fix a few more bugs for hit detection?
3) I feel like weapon rebalancing is just a ploy to make the community feel like stuff is getting done and justice is being delivered when in reality nothing is getting done and you are slowly alienating more and more of your playerbase.

Just a couple of my general musings, as far as the AC2 Nerf goes

I think the range hack was a little excessive I think a range some where around the ERLL range would be adaquate. As far as the DPS rate goes I would lessen the heat penalty just slightly to bring the DPS value just above that of the AC5. although when you look at DPS value per ton the AC2 still has an advantage but it does require you to hit 3 shots for every 1 of the AC5 shots to gain this DPS per ton advantage. and to be honest I am not even sure that DPS is a good metric to focus on for rebalancing purposes. I would say that DPS per ton, or something like time equivalent exposure for a set damage value: example how long must you stay exposed to deal 20 damage for each weapon. something along these lines may be a more acurate measure of a weapons effectiveness.

Just thinking out loud: I personally focus on DPS per ton

Edited by SLDF Xavier, 18 April 2014 - 05:45 AM.

[MountainCopper]

To me, this large nerf to the AC2 only seems justified if they are further nerfs planned for other Auto-Cannons. More precisely for the AC5 and UAC5.
In direct comparison to these two, the AC2 now is just worse in every aspect. To take away range and DPS at the same time seems to be a bit much, so we might currently be "between patches"?

Also, this then might be a chance to introduce a difference between the AC5 and the UAC5 in terms of e.g. heat as distinguishing factor.


Regards.

Edited by GoldenFleece, 16 April 2014 - 05:36 AM.

[Gyrok]

The issue we see here is the fact that DPS weapons require you to expose yourself to the enemy, *where they can shoot at you also*, and they are getting nerfed????

Meanwhile, the weapons that still do 15-20 pinpoint damage cannot be nerfed any harder and are *still* superior in every way.

Jump sniping will; not be fixed by messing with AC2 or AC5 or UAC5...those weapons are honestly fine they way they were. The issue with jump sniping and fixing it would be that you have to address LARGE PINPOINT ALPHA strikes.

All these nerfs you keep bringing in trying to fix "symptoms" are only ruining OTHER perfectly valid game play types. The irony is, the harder you try to nerf jump sniping, the more you force everyone to run to it because the large pinpoint alpha mechanics are those in your last bastion that are the PAINFULLY obvious outstanding problem, and yet you refuse to address them.

DPS Weapons are not good for jump sniping regardless of what anyone told you. Jump snipers cannot be in the air long enough to get off more than 1 volley typically, they would be exposed far too long.

(This is coming from a player who has had to become a jump sniper because all my brawler mechs and weapons are now mostly nerfed into the ground).

Additionally, the nerfs to the victor and highlander only made them MORE suited to jump sniping where ZERO mobility is required outside of a crap ton of JJs anyway.

So, any of you who ever hope to have brawling see the light of day ever again, please hope they un*#&$ the victor and the weapons they nerfed (outside of LRMs,).

[Magna Canus]

Two words: Star Citizen.

[BARBAR0SSA]

All they had to do was remove the ridiculous screen shake and crazy amount of smoke from AC2, that was the annoying part was having this machine gun type fire making it difficult to return fire. Also there should have been way more drop off at range, no dead eye shots, a real good arc to them once past 1200m

That Said I ran a dual AC2 +1 AC 5 last night and it mowed down people pretty damn good.

[Randomm]

AC2 needs one fix, the same fix it has needed since Ghost Heat was introduced. With the change in rate of fire, it is now possible to keep from overheating when firing three AC2 in combination - slowing down fire saves heat, who knew . The "feature" that still needs fixing, if you chain the 3AC2s you can overheat in seconds.... not if you chainfire within one group, but, if you set-up three fire groups and manually chain fire, ghost heat calculations go wild and you are hotter than a roman candle.

Please fix

[Onlystolen]

PGi weapon balancing in a nut shell

[Ngamok]

Soulscour, on 15 April 2014 - 12:22 PM, said:

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.

I don't get this. You were using the UAC/5+AC/2 build and not because the AC/2s range got nerfed you are going AC/5+PPC? Or am I reading this wrong. Because other than the range nerf, the UAC/5+AC/2 build still works fine.

[Ngamok]

Abivard, on 15 April 2014 - 12:39 PM, said:

I take it you enjoyed having the Ballistic range Exploit?

So much QQ when Exploiters lose their Exploits and crutches.

Now fix the rest of the ballistic Exploits please.

I wouldn't call it an exploit rather than a bad design choice to give ballistics a 3X range to start with.

[Ngamok]

Flying Blind, on 15 April 2014 - 03:17 PM, said:

Instead of putting the AC2 back where it was just reduce all autocannons to the same range multiplier (x2 right?) and then the AC2 will feel right and the rest of the AC's will be a little less dominant

Could you imagine the forum range if they did that? QQ my AC/20s are now pointless. You nerfed the AC/10s, why? LRMs are OP cause my AC/5s can't out snipe them. Gauss is king. AC/2s are DOA waste of space. I say bring on 2X range for Ballistics.

[Ngamok]

Khobai, on 15 April 2014 - 06:30 PM, said:

I agree the max ranges need to be reduced from x3 to x2 (although maybe try x2.5 first). The AC5s optimum range should also be reduced from 620 to 540 to help give the AC2 a stronger role as the longest ranged autocannon

These are the stats the autocannons should have:
AC20 = 270m/540m and (5 dps, 6 heat)
AC10 = 450m/900m and (4 dps, 3 heat)
AC5 = 540m/1080m (reduced from 620 to 540) and (3 dps, 1.5 heat)
AC2 = 720m/1440m and (3 dps, 0.6 heat)

That would eliminate most of the range overlap between autocannons and give each autocannon their own range niche where they dominate. The heat for all autocannons has also been normalized.

I would go as far to say that AC/5 heat I would give it a 2 and the AC/2 a 1 instead of making them so cool so boaters benefit with really low heat. But the ranges I fully agree with. Do away with 3X range.

[Smokeyjedi]

Kmieciu, on 15 April 2014 - 10:54 PM, said:

Hey Paul, I'm not even mad about the AC2 change. They were useless since the introduction of ghost heat. Now they serve as a great noob indicator.

You see an enemy armed with AC2 = easy kill.
You see a teammate using AC2s = leave him alone, he'll probably get swarmed and die anyway.

LOL ur method of thinking is gimped......... Ac2 means buddy probably had a nasty bad game rig that could actually allow him to see 2600M+ and he probably could cut you down before you see him with your med environment settings......... but now that they have taken care of that, the low end pc users get a free level playing field.

[Pz_DC]

Typed so long to get it al wiped.. in few words - we lost our las sniping weapon. And now there are 3 weapons, that need buff/tveak - ac20, gauss, ac2.

P.S. Instead tweakweak weapons PGI nerf good ones. Go, "balance" lasers next...

P.P.S. was playing VTR-S with 2xAC2, 2xML, 3xSSRM2. Now its absolutely dead - ac5 based loadouts are much more effective. Even with XLs...

Edited by MGA121285, 16 April 2014 - 09:54 AM.

[tayhimself]

Ngamok, on 16 April 2014 - 08:51 AM, said:

I don't get this. You were using the UAC/5+AC/2 build and not because the AC/2s range got nerfed you are going AC/5+PPC? Or am I reading this wrong. Because other than the range nerf, the UAC/5+AC/2 build still works fine.

It still works "fine" depending on your definition of the word, but it doesn't really have a dps advantage over the trip AC5 + dual PPC build that it used to. The vastly different speeds of the 2 autocannons also hurts it a bit.

[Jonathan Paine]

Expired, on 16 April 2014 - 03:35 AM, said:

So many people are whining about the Range-Nerf - but why?
You guys are talking like you've been used to shoot on 1440+ Range? Seems like delivering 1 Dmg over high range was so much important to you
What the hell....

You'd run three or four AC2s and deliver 3-4 points of damage every 0.52 seconds to the (ERPPC/Gauss) Sniper at 1440 range. Dance around a little so the guassapult couldn't nail you. As for PPC mechs and lrms, you'd rather be around 1000 meters. On any non-cold map, you would mostly die quickly at shorter ranges.

Even before the range nerf, it was debatable if the AC2 made any sense compared to the AC5s since the ability for a mech to dissipate heat over time is extremely limited. For me, for some mechs, the AC2's ability to deliver bursts of damage at extreme range made them worth it. Not as much anymore.

Edited by Jonathan Paine, 16 April 2014 - 12:10 PM.

[Mechteric]

Jonathan Paine, on 16 April 2014 - 12:10 PM, said:

You'd run three or four AC2s and deliver 3-4 points of damage every 0.52 seconds to the (ERPPC/Gauss) Sniper at 1440 range. Dance around a little so the guassapult couldn't nail you. As for PPC mechs and lrms, you'd rather be around 1000 meters. On any non-cold map, you would mostly die quickly at shorter ranges.

Even before the range nerf, it was debatable if the AC2 made any sense compared to the AC5s since the ability for a mech to dissipate heat over time is extremely limited. For me, for some mechs, the AC2's ability to deliver bursts of damage at extreme range made them worth it. Not as much anymore.

Completely agree, the tradeoff of the AC2's range and DPS was the extreme ranges. Now I can agree its DPS shouldn't have been that much better than the AC5 to begin with, but if they aren't going to address its heat issues (Ghost Heat included!), then it should still be able to outrange an AC5 by a decent amount, though it doesn't have to go back to where it was pre-nerf.