198 replies to this topic

[Mcgral18]

blackicmenace, on 29 May 2014 - 03:41 PM, said:

I agree the heat system is broken. Fix heat and autocannons are fine.

We don't have Auto Cannons, we have Rifles.

Clans will have Auto Cannons, kind of. Closer than anything else PGI has implemented as ACs.

[IraqiWalker]

Deacon412, on 29 May 2014 - 01:24 AM, said:

pin point damage across the map.....again my hunch build has 14 rounds of ac/20 that can hardly snipe any thing with the projectile speed and ammo i have.
this nerf directly hurts my hunch build. not any thing else.

You're using the wrong weapon. The AC 20 is a short range weapon. Either use it that way, or switch to a longer ranged weapon. The nerf isn't hurting your hunchie build. You are. That hunchie is designed as a short range mech. Using it's weapons so ineffectively is bad for it. If you switch to an AC 10 you will actually be dealing just as much if not more damage at the ranges you are using. You'll also mount more ammo, and more heatsinks and weapons.

SLDF DeathlyEyes, on 29 May 2014 - 08:17 AM, said:

The nerf is totally uncalled for. There was no reason to do it. The AC20 and AC10 were not problems to begin with. This nerf further reduces their effectiveness. Here is a nice visualization of what is actually being done.



AC20/10 weren't issues at range with PPC syncing anymore because of the change to velocity. They weren't issues on their own because they are clearly not the best weapon. Nerfing the AC5 won't result in any change because the PPC and AC5 share the same optimal range.

You might want to read this, because you've clearly missed a few things:

Strum Wealh, on 28 May 2014 - 04:13 PM, said:

The "why" is to bring the ACs more in-line with other weapons and to bring each AC in-line with the others.

With the 3x maximum-over-effective ranges,

• the AC/20 is dealing 10 units of damage out to 540 meters while the AC/10 is dealing 10 units of damage out to only 450 meters
  
• the AC/20 is dealing 5 units of damage out to ~675 meters while the AC/5 is dealing 5 units of damage out to only 620 meters (after having its optimal range increased from the canonical 540 meters)
  
• the AC/20 is dealing 2 units of damage out to ~756 meters while the AC/2 is dealing 2 units of damage out to only 720 meters
  
• the AC/10 is dealing 5 units of damage out to 900 meters while the AC/5 is dealing 5 units of damage out to only 620 meters (after having its optimal range increased from the canonical 540 meters)
  
• the AC/10 is dealing 2 units of damage out to ~1170 meters while the AC/2 is dealing 2 units of damage out to only 720 meters
  
• the AC/5 is dealing 2 units of damage out to ~1364 meters while the AC/2 is dealing 2 units of damage out to only 720 meters

The AC/20 should not be outperforming the AC/10 so far beyond the latter's optimal range, the AC/10 should not be outperforming the AC/5 so far beyond the latter's optimal range, and AC/5 should not be outperforming the AC/2 so far beyond the latter's optimal range.

blackicmenace, on 29 May 2014 - 03:41 PM, said:

I agree the heat system is broken. Fix heat and autocannons are fine.

Autocannons are as broken as (if not more than) the heat system

Mcgral18, on 29 May 2014 - 03:43 PM, said:

We don't have Auto Cannons, we have Rifles.

Clans will have Auto Cannons, kind of. Closer than anything else PGI has implemented as ACs.

Thank you. That's exactly true. We also have suped-up rifles. The most powerful rife in TT dealt 9 damage, which got reduced to 6 against modern armor (armor that isn't primitive, made after 2200 basically)

R Razor, on 29 May 2014 - 09:41 AM, said:

Good, maybe they'll learn to play other mechs in other styles of combat instead of the hide and seek garbage they play now.

Their style of play is valid, tactically sound, and can be easily countered.

[Bhael Fire]

Cimarb, on 28 May 2014 - 01:34 PM, said:

(Oh, and God does care - just not always according to your personal schedule)

Just like Paul.

That was partly the point of my facetious post. Paul has a plan.

For you and me. I have come to accept this fact.

It's just that opinions are like ****** cavities; somebody is alway trying to stuff burritos in them.

[IraqiWalker]

Bhael Fire, on 29 May 2014 - 08:43 PM, said:

It's just that opinions are like ****** cavities; somebody is alway trying to stuff burritos in them.

I'm going to frame this somewhere.

[Teufel Hunden 0351]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 29 May 2014 - 01:02 PM, said:

Notice how no one here really brought up LRMs till now, 7 pages in? That's because it's the grown ups talking about real game balance.

Go watch the Tournament Videos to understand what the game is really about.

First off, did you actually read what I wrote? Second of all did you not play in the faction tournament and see all the LRM spam? Third, give me one good reason why the overall max range of ballistic weapons needs to be nerfed, cause 1-2 points of damage per weapon at 1k is really OP?

[Nicholas Carlyle]

None of the changes Paul is putting in are bad.

It's just they really miss the point.

Like for instance Arty/Air Strikes, the damage needed to be 30-32, and they needed to increase the time between strikes. The change he put in won't change the way they are currently used and won't stop RNG head shots to fresh mechs.

The changes to AC's are fine, they should never have been 3x range. It totally makes sense. The problem? It doesn't do anything to curb the FLD gameplay that dominates the higher end of the game right now.

SRM damage needed to be upped, since putting them at 2.0 damage did a whole lot of nothing. Unfortunately, that doesn't magically fix HSR and .15 damage won't make them used more. It should have been .5 or 1 more damage.

The Small Laser changes, once again fine...but won't really change anything. Same with MPLs.

Like I said, none of the changes are bad, they just don't address the major short comings of the game and they probably mean we won't see anymore changes for 3-4 months since they will be dealing with the Clan stuff.

Teufel Hunden 0351, on 30 May 2014 - 05:02 AM, said:

First off, did you actually read what I wrote? Second of all did you not play in the faction tournament and see all the LRM spam? Third, give me one good reason why the overall max range of ballistic weapons needs to be nerfed, cause 1-2 points of damage per weapon at 1k is really OP?

Thanks for proving you don't know what you are talking about. Do you understand WHY people were using LRMs in the Faction tournament?

It wasn't because it was the fastest and most efficient way to kill someone. That's for sure.

Edited by Nicholas Carlyle, 30 May 2014 - 05:31 AM.

[Livewyr]

blackicmenace, on 29 May 2014 - 03:41 PM, said:

I agree the heat system is broken. Fix heat and autocannons are fine.

If Lasers have low weight and unlimited ammo, offset by high heat and DoT.
And ACs have high weight, limited ammo, off-set by low heat and front loaded damage

How do you justify the ACs having 3x fall-off range while the lasers have only 2x? (And then compared to LRMs having 1.6, and SRMs having *no* fall-off range.)

Edited by Livewyr, 30 May 2014 - 05:26 AM.

[Teufel Hunden 0351]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 30 May 2014 - 05:13 AM, said:

None of the changes Paul is putting in are bad.

It's just they really miss the point.

Like for instance Arty/Air Strikes, the damage needed to be 30-32, and they needed to increase the time between strikes. The change he put in won't change the way they are currently used and won't stop RNG head shots to fresh mechs.

The changes to AC's are fine, they should never have been 3x range. It totally makes sense. The problem? It doesn't do anything to curb the FLD gameplay that dominates the higher end of the game right now.

SRM damage needed to be upped, since putting them at 2.0 damage did a whole lot of nothing. Unfortunately, that doesn't magically fix HSR and .15 damage won't make them used more. It should have been .5 or 1 more damage.

The Small Laser changes, once again fine...but won't really change anything. Same with MPLs.

Like I said, none of the changes are bad, they just don't address the major short comings of the game and they probably mean we won't see anymore changes for 3-4 months since they will be dealing with the Clan stuff.



Thanks for proving you don't know what you are talking about. Do you understand WHY people were using LRMs in the tournament?

It wasn't because it was the fastest and most efficient way to kill someone. That's for sure.

I see, I "obviously" don't know what I'm talking about.

Yes I do know why people were using LRM's in the tournament, it had something to do with the easy way to pad their damage, get more assists and boost their overall score due to the points calculator.

Though your right in saying that these minor tweaks won't really affect anything and that's kind of the point. The point is why keep screwing with all these things all while ignoring the bigger problems with heat and overall balance. And why do people care so much about nerfing AC's when their damage out at 1k is minimal at best and in most all cases nothing more than wasting your ammo anyways?

People defend LRM's (like yourself) and their not being overpowered and how easy they are to avoid at long range, so why do you defend nerfing the AC's when the damage out that far is basically useless anyways?

In all honesty too, it makes no sense to me why AC's don't have a range of 1k, other than when you apply tabletop rules which do make perfect sense, but in this type of a game it makes no sense. If you know anything about real weapons and weapon systems you would know that these ballistic weapons should have much longer range to begin with.

And again, why support nerfing all the weapons rather than addressing the real problems with the gameplay balance?

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Teufel Hunden 0351, on 30 May 2014 - 05:27 AM, said:

Stuff

The reason the AC nerf is fine, is because they made Lasers 2x Range and ACs 3x Range.

There was no reason for it to be 3x Range. All they are doing is fixing something stupid that doesn't really in the end change gameplay.

Teufel Hunden 0351, on 30 May 2014 - 05:27 AM, said:

And again, why support nerfing all the weapons rather than addressing the real problems with the gameplay balance?

Where the hell have you been?

About 75% of the people in this thread in one way or another have offered/supported ideas for fixing the underlying game problems.

Better question is why the hell Paul won't listen?

Once again, it doesn't change the fact that all of these changes are fine and dandy. It's nothing major and it won't really change anything.

[Teufel Hunden 0351]

I have offered / supported ideas in various threads.

Remove ghost heat
Reset weapons to where they were before starting ghost heat
Adjust ranges on weapons to give them more overall balance, ie increase the ranges of sml lasers, med lasers and large lasers
Increase range on machine guns a bit
Increase range on flamers a bit

Start with this and see how things go, because too many factors have changed since they began nerfing everything. Granted there are still some hit detection problems and other issues however alot of the shield lag is fixed / better, there are also more variations of mechs with different loadouts that would also naturally help balance the battlefield.

I have also suggested that they should create different levels of play with different rules for different levels of players ie one game mode no nerfs, no ghost heat, one mode with no modules, reduced weapons damage.......

But realistically, so long as they keep nerfing more and more weapons and doing minor buffs here and there to try to see what can work for the day, they will never get to the root cause fixed and balance the game.

People are going to exploit anything they can, so if they can build a OP meta build they will until someone counters it with something else.... Gameplay, experience and creativity should be the factors governing gameplay balance not creating stupid ghost heat rules and constantly changing all the weapon variables. These approaches are like taking random shots in the dark and hoping to hit your target.

[LastPaladin]

R Razor, on 29 May 2014 - 12:04 PM, said:

If you meta boys didn't have your front loaded pin point damage to carry you to victory then you'd be just as average as every other player in the game and that scares the bejesus out of you apparently.

I think it's hilarious that you assume someone who doesn't agree with you 100% must be a "meta boy". You have no idea what mechs I pilot, do you?

Nicholas Carlyle, on 29 May 2014 - 01:11 PM, said:

Just noticed this post.

Why not make it a more realistic number?

Because, if it is truly irrelevant, then a one minute cooldown is just as realistic as a five second, or ten second cooldown. The fact that you think one minute is not realistic shows that, despite what you say, DPS is not irrelevant for snipers.

[Joseph Mallan]

LastPaladin, on 30 May 2014 - 07:59 AM, said:

I think it's hilarious that you assume someone who doesn't agree with you 100% must be a "meta boy". You have no idea what mechs I pilot, do you?

I have a Battlemaster-1G, (F)Atlas-D, Jenner. Stock or mostly stock. My Beemer had a single AC10 for a while and an AC20 is an Atlas's best friend. So I think I know where you are coming from since I am probably in the same place. 30 years of pin point damage is how ACs have played, changing it would feel bad. All I hear is 2-4 of any AC is bad... but single ACs? Only the AC20 gets grief.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 30 May 2014 - 08:04 AM.

[Cimarb]

Joseph Mallan, on 30 May 2014 - 08:04 AM, said:

I have a Battlemaster-1G, (F)Atlas-D, Jenner. Stock or mostly stock. My Beemer had a single AC10 for a while and an AC20 is an Atlas's best friend. So I think I know where you are coming from since I am probably in the same place. 30 years of pin point damage is how ACs have played, changing it would feel bad. All I hear is 2-4 of any AC is bad... but single ACs? Only the AC20 gets grief.

Joe, haven't saw you post in a while! Welcome back

You know I support your BFG theory, but you really can't use the "30 years of pin point damage is how ACs have played", because lasers, machine guns, and all non-missile weapons have also played that way for just as long. ACs were the only weapon systems to NOT get a duration adjustment for MWO, and while I am very happy that Clans ACs will finally be implemented correctly, I think IS ACs should be changed the same way and hope PGI will eventually do that.

Having variants that allow for your BFG as well as my Gatling gun in a balanced manner is my goal, and it is looking like that may actually be possible "soon".

[IraqiWalker]

Teufel Hunden 0351, on 30 May 2014 - 05:02 AM, said:

First off, did you actually read what I wrote? Second of all did you not play in the faction tournament and see all the LRM spam? Third, give me one good reason why the overall max range of ballistic weapons needs to be nerfed, cause 1-2 points of damage per weapon at 1k is really OP?

It's OP when they were never meant to go that far in the first place. Look, you clearly didn't read through this thread, or the the number crunching that happened here. I'd recommend going back to reading the past pages before making any passionate posts, with no calculations (or understanding of the setting) to back them up. I'm not trying to be dismissive, but you honestly seem like you walked into the middle of an argument and started chiming in, without knowing what's really going on.

Also, from reading your other posts, you really do need to take a step back and actually look up some numbers, and figure out what people are talking about here. Since you obviously don't know how ACs are supposed to function, or how LRMs should work, or how energy weapons for that matter. Notice I said "supposed" not how they work right now, but how they should work.

Also, this isn't so much a nerf, as a fix. The AC20 was outperforming every other AC within their optimal range, you could literally deal more damage within the AC5s optimal (and longer) range, with an AC 10. This is an adjustment, and it's more than ACs deserve. If I was doing the adjusting, I'd put them in line with the lasers, and have them at double range, not triple.

You talk about these ballistic weapons being advanced and should have long ranges, but you obviously don't know how they function. None of them were supposed to hit you with one shot. Even the AC20! The biggest AC 20 in BT lore (other than the Cauldron Born's AC 20) fired 4 shots in rapid succession, each dealing 5 damage. The only way for you to get a single shell that dealt 20 damage like that, is to get a NAVAL AC. You know, the ones they put on capital ships. Those ACs. The biggest of which was an AC40.

Right now, in fact, our "AC20" is actually an AC 60. because it's got triple the cycle rate it should have. As it stands right now, our ACs function like Mech Rifles (almost exitnct by 3050) but suped up (the biggest one fired a single slug that dealt 9 damage, which got reduced to 6 if the target hit used modern armor instead of primitive). With insane ranges, that they shouldn't have, to boot.

I can understand it, if the AC weapon in question was an artillery piece, but not a direct fire, medium range weapon. Right now, they are behaving as direct fire, extreme range weapons.

[Joseph Mallan]

Cimarb, on 30 May 2014 - 08:12 AM, said:

Joe, haven't saw you post in a while! Welcome back

You know I support your BFG theory, but you really can't use the "30 years of pin point damage is how ACs have played", because lasers, machine guns, and all non-missile weapons have also played that way for just as long. ACs were the only weapon systems to NOT get a duration adjustment for MWO, and while I am very happy that Clans ACs will finally be implemented correctly, I think IS ACs should be changed the same way and hope PGI will eventually do that.

Having variants that allow for your BFG as well as my Gatling gun in a balanced manner is my goal, and it is looking like that may actually be possible "soon".

True! however we have DpS Weapons(Lasers) We have RNGish weapons(Missiles) Keeping ACs solid damage is a good balance. Also I have no problem with there being Your Gatling in game so long as my hammer of the gods single slug is around.

[wanderer]

Quote

First off, did you actually read what I wrote? Second of all did you not play in the faction tournament and see all the LRM spam? Third, give me one good reason why the overall max range of ballistic weapons needs to be nerfed, cause 1-2 points of damage per weapon at 1k is really OP?

Of course. LRMs kill PUGs, but if I had a team with 3-4 ECM in it, generally your scores go straight down the toilet. While you got great scores, it was only because you got a disorganized, no-ECM team on a good map to do so. The tournament didn't take consistent builds so much as if you had the time, builds that could hit the jackpot on the PUG slot machine.

Real tournaments (ie,organized play), you didn't see a single LRM past the first round. The factional tournament is PUG life.

[IraqiWalker]

wanderer, on 30 May 2014 - 08:30 AM, said:

Real tournaments (ie,organized play), you didn't see a single LRM past the first round. The factional tournament is PUG life.

That statement is supported by the fact that 90% of competitive teams games, have no little to no LRMs in them, and usually not a single LRM boat.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

IraqiWalker, on 30 May 2014 - 08:32 AM, said:

That statement is supported by the fact that 90% of competitive teams games, have no little to no LRMs in them, and usually not a single LRM boat.

This is why I don't understand how anyone can complain about LRMs.

LRMs can be good against disorganized PUGs. They are great for abusing the rules of our Faction Tournaments.

LRMs are not good against anyone with a lick of common sense. And are down right terribad in organized play.

If you complain about LRMs, you need to look at yourself in a mirror.

[Graugger]

If you want to bring ACs to be the same level as lasers perhaps something like this would work.

AC/2 - Cooldown - .75 / Heat - 1.25 / Range - 650 / Max Range - 975 / Speed - 1050
AC/5 - Cooldown - 2 / Heat - 2.5 / Range - 500 / Max Range - 750 / Speed - 850
AC/10 - Cooldown - .3.5 / Heat - 6 / Range - 400 / Max Range - 600 / Speed - 625
AC/20 - Cooldown - 6 / Heat - 10 / Range - 250 / Max Range - 375 / Speed - 425

Still doing pinpoint damage unlike lasers but a lot more balanced range and cooldown in response to that.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

LastPaladin, on 30 May 2014 - 08:01 AM, said:

Because, if it is truly irrelevant, then a one minute cooldown is just as realistic as a five second, or ten second cooldown. The fact that you think one minute is not realistic shows that, despite what you say, DPS is not irrelevant for snipers.

DPS is still irrellevant. The problem is one minute puts it way outside the realm of other weapons in the game.

No one sits and says to themselves "How much damage can I do per second".

You do know what DPS means right? Damage Per Second.

And the concept that Lasers are a "DPS" weapon is also a flat out stupid moniker.

DPS is just a measure of damage.

Every weapon has a DPS associated with it.

And DPS is a much more useful measure when your target just stands in front of you and takes hits. Which is why it's used so often in early WoW and Everquest MMO style boss fights.

Mob stands, you stand behind it, you attack. It's very easy to see why DPS is important in that situation.

In Mechwarrior, DPS is a very irrellevant stat, unless you are up against a total derp who stands still letting you repeatedly fire into his CT.

The important number for MW:O is maximum pinpoint FLD damage per shot.

You hill hump, you peek, you poptart and fire. And then you take cover again to make sure your opponent can't return fire.

It's why weapons like the AC/2 are so bad, you have to face for long periods trying to do the damage.

So please stop extolling DPS as a measuremeant, when it really has no basis in the reality of playing this game.