205 replies to this topic

[100 Tonne]

Niko, the cool down needs to be longer, perhaps 2 mins? I have (and many others) been hit but 5-6 arty, one after the other. If you reduce damage then they are useless, but they need to be use more sparingly than at the moment.

[MischiefSC]

Longer cooldown would help. Decrease splash a *little*. Possibly limit it to EITHER Airstrike OR Arty, not both - dropping both is 500-600 damage if you've got any sort of decent grouping among the other team.

A little longer delay between deployment and hit would be good.

You know, area denial-wise, how about we look at it the other way around? Decrease the damage per hit but increase the radius and duration. Same total damage just spread out over a bit longer time and conversely a larger area. Increase the time between deployment and arrival by 1 second or so. Increase the cooldown by 60 seconds or so - that alone will reduce the total number of drops per match.

That would keep it as a serious problem, something to avoid no question, but actually something to avoid - not just all but guaranteed damage you'll drop on anyone stupid enough to stay in a firing formation or not pilot a light mech.

[Xoxim SC]

Mcgral18, on 27 May 2014 - 05:50 PM, said:

Other ideas included needing TAG to laze the area before bombardment.

I don't use consumables personally because I think they're bullshit, but I thought a tag of sorts was already required in order to use arty? It DEFINITELY should be required to use it, similar to how it's done in Mechwarrior 3, and you should be required to HOLD the tag for a few seconds before the strike is actually called.

[Mcgral18]

Todd Lightbringer, on 27 May 2014 - 05:58 PM, said:

I don't use consumables personally because I think they're bullshit, but I thought a tag of sorts was already required in order to use arty? It DEFINITELY should be required to use it, similar to how it's done in Mechwarrior 3, and you should be required to HOLD the tag for a few seconds before the strike is actually called.

Nope, point and click, infinite range and 10 second cooldown. The longest in the game, for a 400 damage weapon.

Shells drop 4 seconds after the smoke appears.

[Dustee]

This rarely bothers me because I'm usually fast enough to not get hit when I see the smoke, but on my last match I was legged in a light mech so I went to fight a guy one on one since I was pretty much already dead but then some other guy pops out from behind a hill, marks the area I'm hobbling around in and kills me instantly with a strike while also damaging his teammate in the process. Yeah, I was gonna die anyway, but I could've at least gone down fighting someone, and I'm sure that guy I was fighting wanted the kill and his own teammate didn't care if he got hit by the strike so it's kind of unfair to him but that's just the way it is.

[Khobai]

The only problem with strikes is that theyre outright better than other modules. It defeats the entire purpose of the module system to have one module that stands out as being that much better than the rest.

A 40 damage artillery/airstrike should require two module slots. Make strikes do 20 damage if you only take the artillery/airstrike consumable. But if you take the artillery/airstrike accuracy module along with it, have it double the damage from 20 to 40. So 20 damage strikes would use up 1 slot and 40 damage strikes would use up two slots.

Not only would this balance artillery/airstrikes better with other modules but it would discourage mechs from taking both 40 damage artillery and airstrikes.

Edited by Khobai, 27 May 2014 - 06:15 PM.

[CycKath]

Considerably longer cool down please.

[Scurry]

Quick question - is there any way to tell which direction an airstrike is going to go?

Because more than once I've juked away from an airstrike plume to have the misfortune to head straight into its line - often resulting in a headshot.

[Spr1ggan]

In my opinion strikes should be devastating to whatever they hit. However they should not be able to be used as frequently as they are. I would like to see an increased cooldown period to begin with. And maybe tie them to the command console or require a tag laser.

[A banana in the tailpipe]

Nikolai Lubkiewicz, on 27 May 2014 - 05:48 PM, said:

On one hand, arty and air strikes are designed to provide temporary area of denial effect on the enemy. On the other hand, the raising concerns regarding whether or not they are OP warrant investigation. And indeed, calling in a danger close strike on oneself in a last ditch effort to hurt the enemy is a legitimate and darn cool tactic...

With such purposes and examples in mind though, the question is, what changes would you like to see to improve these systems rather than outright nerf or destroy them?

I've seen a neat one so far about more warning, are there other ways in particular that it disturbs gameplay or seems to make things unfair?

I'd like to see them tied to the command module. With just damaging strikes limited to command mechs that would supposedly cut down on their frequency of use to justify keeping the current damage and cool down intact. Instead of 12 strikes per match we'd only see 4-6 unless a team wanted to severely gimp themselves. There's still the issue of head shots, but I've already made a suggestion for it.

Edited by lockwoodx, 27 May 2014 - 08:11 PM.

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

Nikolai Lubkiewicz, on 27 May 2014 - 05:48 PM, said:

I've seen a neat one so far about more warning, are there other ways in particular that it disturbs gameplay or seems to make things unfair?

First off ... they should not cause a head shot, ever ... there have been more apologies issued in competitive play in the past few months due to getting insta-killed by arty or air strikes. (After the typed-chat apology, we laugh in comms, and take advantage of the lucky kill, but we still feel a little bad that someone died due to nearly pure luck.)

Second ... regarding the warning, how is the call strike - smoke - blast timed with server-client authentication? I don't recall how much time is supposed to elapse between seeing smoke and the explosions, but on the receiving end, it seems like there is less notification for those of us with moderately high ping.

Nikolai Lubkiewicz, on 27 May 2014 - 05:48 PM, said:

With such purposes and examples in mind though, the question is, what changes would you like to see to improve these systems rather than outright nerf or destroy them?

Implement all of these, and they're probably nerfed into uselessness (which, really, wouldn't be a terrible thing), so pick and choose ...
- The canister should not "appear" by pure magic ... I would like to see them travel similarly to a NARC beacon, launched from the 'mech that called the strike, and visible to all.
- The smoke and/or canister should be visible in all vision modes ... In real life, smoke grenades are hot, and the fire in the canister that produces the smoke casts light.
- Bonus points if you combine both of the above suggestions, and the projectile launched from the 'mech calling the strike is already smoking, and casting a small (but bright) red light, and radiating heat ... leaving a faint trail of red smoke back to the source.
- The cooldown is too quick ... I'm not sure where the right balance is, maybe a 50% increase?
- Each 'mech should only be able to carry one strike ... either air or arty, but not both. (One possible exception: You should be able to deploy air or arty strikes (or UAVs for that matter) using the battle grid and a command console.)
- The damage for a direct hit could be reduced to about 30 so that no single, full health component (except maybe light 'mech limbs) could be completely destroyed in one hit ... to compensate, possibly increase splash radius and the overall area affected by the strike (hit more 'mechs for less damage per 'mech).
- For those of us with high ping ... the blasts shouldn't begin until at after smoke is confirmed in all clients.

Edited by Kageru Ikazuchi, 27 May 2014 - 08:59 PM.

[RangerGee412]

I'm ok with strikes, just give it a longer cool down. Some games it seems like its non stop.

What I would really love to have is a smoke barrage. That would be more useful. Smoke them out and rush them

Edited by RangerGee412, 27 May 2014 - 07:17 PM.

[Bhael Fire]

Nikolai Lubkiewicz, on 27 May 2014 - 05:48 PM, said:

On the other hand, the raising concerns regarding whether or not they are OP warrant investigation.

If strikes become any easier to avoid or if they do less damage, I simply won't have a need to purchase them any more (as there would be better uses of a module slot). As it is, they are almost stupidly easy to avoid and unless you are standing absolutely still when they hit you, you're likely to walk away with nothing more than being in the yellow zone.


It's my opinion that these modules are exactly where they need to be. Perhaps you guys should make a module that counters strikes instead of nerfing them directly? That way, those that have problems avoiding them can invest in some protection against them...at the expense of taking up a module slot (hey we ALL have to make sacrifices in this game).

[Gas Guzzler]

Bhael Fire, on 27 May 2014 - 07:37 AM, said:

But that's the trade-off, huh?

Being greedy for kills at the expense of paying attention to your surroundings will get you dead. And that's the whole point of strikes; to keep you paying attention and to keep you moving instead of camping with tunnel vision on your target.

Everything has a price...and strikes are there to enforce that law.

"You haven't beaten me. You've sacrificed sure footing for a killing stroke."

[Ultimax]

Nikolai Lubkiewicz, on 27 May 2014 - 05:48 PM, said:

On one hand, arty and air strikes are designed to provide temporary area of denial effect on the enemy. On the other hand, the raising concerns regarding whether or not they are OP warrant investigation. And indeed, calling in a danger close strike on oneself in a last ditch effort to hurt the enemy is a legitimate and darn cool tactic...

With such purposes and examples in mind though, the question is, what changes would you like to see to improve these systems rather than outright nerf or destroy them?

I've seen a neat one so far about more warning, are there other ways in particular that it disturbs gameplay or seems to make things unfair?

Hi Niko,

I think the opportunity cost of usage is simply too low.

Infinite range, requires a single click - if you can see it, you can place an Arty/Air strike there - placement deviation seems to be minimal if any.

Takes up 0 weight on your build, uses a module slot but many other modules are borderline irrelevant and do not have the ability to single-handedly turn the tide in any particular engagement the way that Arty/Air Strikes do. (Build economy slot competition issue)


That being said, I think the primary issue is the cooldown between uses from multiple users (or perhaps, there should even be a cap on number of uses per team, at least for PUG matches).

A single arty/air strike isn't really an issue, but when you see competitive teams or even some PUG matches where there are 12+ arty/air strikes being dropped - it's clear there is an issue with the level of output being gained by something so easy to use.

Edited by Ultimatum X, 27 May 2014 - 07:39 PM.

[Bhael Fire]

Ultimatum X, on 27 May 2014 - 07:38 PM, said:

A single arty/air strike isn't really an issue, but when you see competitive teams or even some PUG matches where there are 12+ arty/air strikes being dropped - it's clear there is an issue with the level of output being gained by something so easy to use.

This is why the answer is to provide counter-modules for modules like Artillery Strike and Air Strike instead of nerfing them directly. If one feels the need to sacrifice a module slot and c-bills/MC for an offensive advantage, and if another player desires defense against that offense then they should both be able to take modules that virtually cancel each other out.

This will lead to much more interesting matches and a balance in the Force.

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

Bhael Fire, on 27 May 2014 - 08:00 PM, said:

This is why the answer is to provide counter-modules for modules like Artillery Strike and Air Strike instead of nerfing them directly. If one feels the need to sacrifice a module slot and c-bills/MC for an offensive advantage, and if another player desires defense against that offense then they should both be able to take modules that virtually cancel each other out.

This will lead to much more interesting matches and a balance in the Force.

Right now, it takes skill and situational awareness to avoid strike damage ... even still, several representatives from some of the top competitive teams have stated in one way or another that strikes are too powerful. There are several War Room episodes and /r/outreach threads about this, in addition to the commentary from the ongoing team tourney.

Adding a module to replace or augment skill is not the answer, a moderate nerf make more sense.

Nikolai Lubkiewicz, on 27 May 2014 - 05:48 PM, said:

@Niko ... forget everything I said ... just ask +SJR+'s Siriothrax

[Bhael Fire]

Kageru Ikazuchi, on 27 May 2014 - 08:33 PM, said:

Adding a module to replace or augment skill is not the answer, a moderate nerf make more sense.

Nope.

Sorry. Nerfing them, even a moderate one, will simply make them less valuable; No matter how it's done. Very low skill players will continue to ***** about them being too powerful if they are even remotely useful and high skill players will find something more effective to use with their module slots. Lose/lose.

Offering a hard counter to them at the expense of module slot is the only logical way to balance them while still allowing PGI to make money off them (indirectly and directly). This also provides a certain level of uncertainty when choosing a strike module, not knowing if the enemy is sporting a hard counter. This is how game balance is achieved.

[Ardney]

Nikolai Lubkiewicz, on 27 May 2014 - 05:48 PM, said:

With such purposes and examples in mind though, the question is, what changes would you like to see to improve these systems rather than outright nerf or destroy them?

I've seen a neat one so far about more warning, are there other ways in particular that it disturbs gameplay or seems to make things unfair?

No, warnings are not a cool idea. After ECM, "Warning Targeted" (thankfully reverted), and Wallha..er...Seismic Module, you'd think PGI would realize that removing the ability and/or necessity for players to respond to visual cues degrades the quality of the game.

If people are moaning about the frequency of strikes then start with the global cooldown. Can't remember off the top of my head if that cooldown starts when the strike is called or when it finishes, but it should be the latter and then if that is deemed too frequent increase in intervals of 10 seconds until it's in a good spot.

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

Bhael Fire, on 27 May 2014 - 08:51 PM, said:

... This also provides a certain level of uncertainty when choosing a strike module, not knowing if the enemy is sporting a hard counter. This is how game balance is achieved.

Game balance should be acheived by making numerous choices equally viable, not by one module countering another.

Right now, no other module has the chance to significantly impact the outcome of a match by one-shot killing or crippling a 'mech with a lucky hit, so there is no choice. The only decision to make regarding modules, unless you're trying to earn C-Bills, is do I bring one or two strikes? and if only one, air or arty?