356 replies to this topic

[FupDup]

Dark Radiance, on 28 May 2014 - 04:27 PM, said:

Paul, can you give us any update on Flamers? There was something mentioned about buffs or at least balance changes to them back when the Ember came out but no changes have been made. Do you think they're performing up to par after all?

As extra ammo in favor of a Flamer buff, here is a funny video I made a while ago with the weapon:

[L e x]

I like most of this, but:

• I still think the time between Air/Arty strikes is too low(IMO)
  
• You could increase the damage per missile to 2.5 on SRMs; they still couldn't be used seriously until they registered more reliably.

Edited by Lex420, 28 May 2014 - 04:34 PM.

[Destructicus]

Adiuvo, on 28 May 2014 - 04:25 PM, said:

The autocannon changes lessen the damage a jumpsniper does to you at range, which makes it easier to close on them...

If you're closing you shouldn't be in a position where you can shoot them to begin with unless you're using JJs as well. You should be behind cover.

sure, but it's not always that easy
The scenario you present implies there is always a steady stream of cover between me and poptart, but it's not that simple.

[Imperius]

Paul Inouye, on 28 May 2014 - 04:14 PM, said:

I've seen this thrown around a few times now so let me respond to it.

There are a total of 9 different builds of MWO on my machine... all at varying stages of completion of new features.

In 7 of these specialized builds, I can turn on specific debug tools that allow me to see exactly what's happening in the game simulation which is something you will never be able to determine in production (live build). I can also dynamically tune things as the game is running in these builds which is also something that is impossible to do on the live servers.

I do play the game, just not on production where I don't have the tools that let me see exactly what's going on in the game engine. Plus I do randomly play now and then on production and I do spectate players quite a bit when I'm not at work.

And remember, PGI is not a huge company where I sit in my office isolated from the team and just messing about doing this or that. I'm very hands on with the dev team and don't have a lot of time to head up features and play the game during the average workday.

How i read and interpreted this post. I play the game with 9 different levels of fun. You guys play the lowest level of fun and I do not dare play that because I do not enjoy it.

Just remember Paul if you aren't playing the build (live "production") we are how can you share our frustrations with things like Poptarts?

Yes I'm being a pessimist about the topic but after I see the hundreds of cries and just read the game chat about these things to the point of some people are now team killing pop-tarts in there own crusade to nerf/stop this bad game breaking meta.

Edited by Imperius, 28 May 2014 - 04:40 PM.

[Jman5]

Hey Paul, I appreciate the post and the "why" of the changes. It makes it easier for us to understand where you're coming from.

I'm really excited to hear about the range upgrades for small lasers. I'm probably one of the few people who bring them for competitive play (they've got good dps/ton dammit!) and their low range make them really tricky to use effectively.

One reminder: make sure that when you implement the range changes that you also adjust the weapon modules to correspond with the new values. The weapon modules are supposed to scale with these effect, but it's slipped through the cracks with past range extension buffs.

[Monky]

I will never understand the dev team's approach to pulse lasers.

In a few updates, we'll have a 2 ton clone of a medium laser! Hooray!

Guys, you need to give these weapons functional niches rather than try to cram them into identical holes.

AS AN EXAMPLE;
Pulse lasers already have a shorter beam time than normal lasers. Why not capitalize on this and shorten it FURTHER, allowing higher effective accuracy and less spread as a benefit compared to the higher burn time but lighter lasers? This is a good direction to move in and once it was chosen as an initial feature of pulse lasers it helped keep them from being completely useless in pub matches. Take it in that direction and you have a unique and functional alternative to the normal lasers that might even be viable in competitive matches. Keep going with what you're doing, and you're making a 2 ton medium laser.

Edited by Monky, 28 May 2014 - 04:38 PM.

[Adiuvo]

Destructicus, on 28 May 2014 - 04:32 PM, said:

sure, but it's not always that easy
The scenario you present implies there is always a steady stream of cover between me and poptart, but it's not that simple.

Right, but it's still hurting them far more than you. They're doing less damage to you, much less in the beginning of a fight compared to how it is now.

[Ultimax]

I think these are actually good changes overall, although I'm a bit surprised that the Large Pulse Laser didn't get some improvement.

[Koniving]

Praetor Knight, on 28 May 2014 - 04:27 PM, said:

Also, any chance a small tweak could be added for MG's?

Currently standing at 80-100 m, they can light up multiple sections of a stationary mech in Testing Grounds, if that could be tighter or just allow the beam hit the reticule, that would be awesome!

Thank you!

Agreed. Though if possible I'd prefer their cone of fire to be removed. In genuine seriousness, the big near-instant kill weapon of choice (a pair of AC/20s) which isn't even supposed to be single shot front-loaded damage are not getting a cone.... nor is anything else. But the overall 2nd weakest weapon in the game has had a cone since closed beta? Worse, only said 2nd weakest weapon got a cone?

[Destructicus]

Adiuvo, on 28 May 2014 - 04:37 PM, said:

Right, but it's still hurting them far more than you. They're doing less damage to you, much less in the beginning of a fight compared to how it is now.

I can dig this
The thing is I feel it was unneccecary
Would it not have been easier to keep reticule shake the entire time a mech is in the air?
To stop people from firing super accurate while falling and all that jazz?

[Ultimax]

Koniving, on 28 May 2014 - 04:39 PM, said:

Agreed. Though if possible I'd prefer their cone of fire to be removed. In genuine seriousness, the big near-instant kill weapon of choice (a pair of AC/20s) which isn't even supposed to be single shot front-loaded damage are not getting a cone.... nor is anything else. But the overall 2nd weakest weapon in the game has had a cone since closed beta? Worse, only said 2nd weakest weapon got a cone?

My guess is that they are a cone because they are hitscan, and not a projectile.

Actually, they are the only 0 heat hitscan weapon in the game.

[Koniks]

Most of these changes seem good and well thought out. With the reduced range for ACs, projectile speed should be slightly increased. SRMs should also see a speed increase, at least until hit registration is completely fixed.

LPLs could still use some help like the other lasers. And I agree that MGs could use help.

[Wildstreak]

Paul,

Pulse Lasers: Have you ever considered trying a method similar to what MechWarriior 2 Mercenaries did as seen in this walkthrough? The specific section:

Quote

PULSE LASERS: Pulse Lasers fire two Laser beams, each one capable of dealing
amounts of damage equal to the ER Lasers' ones. However, if the first beam
hits, the second won't allocate damage (this represents the to-hit bonus of the
board game).

In MWO Terms, they fire like a UAC double shot without the jamming effect to simulate the TT hit bonus.

LRMs: Since there have been some comments about Indirect Fire, how about using the MW2 means of letting players make their own arc as described on this page. The specific section:

Quote

Let the targeting reticle sit near an enemy for a moment and when it turns red, it means you've got a lock. After a lock is achieved, you can twist your torso in a different direction, allowing you to fire at enemies over cliffs and around buildings.

This would make LRMs more of a skill based weapon.

[Forte]

Imperius, on 28 May 2014 - 04:34 PM, said:

How i read and interpreted this post. I play the game with 9 different levels of fun. You guys play the lowest level of fun and I do not dare play that because I do not enjoy it.

Just remember Paul if you aren't playing the build (live "production") we are how can you share our frustrations with things like Poptarts?

Yes I'm being a pessimist about the topic but after I see the hundreds of cries and just read the game chat about these things to the point of some people are now team killing pop-tarts in there own crusade to nerf/stop this bad game breaking meta.

I get your position, and hopefully he'll read it and understand yours. I wouldn't go so far as to say he has 9 levels of fun tho. I've done minor levels of modding with Skyrim and Fallout, sometimes it can be joyous other times tedious as you look for that little thing that is throwing off your data points (unless you want a .22lr SMG that shoots mini nukes, that **** is glorious). The disconnect between what we think the devs do, what they actually do, and why they think we want vs actual wants seems pretty thick at the moment. It would be nice if we had a council of players for each weight class (as a lot of people specialize) that could give their feed back in a group setting and then present it to the devs. More focused than the CSM from EVE, and closer to the Advocates in Age of Conan. I think the easier and smaller circle back and forth would help tremendously.

[That Guy]

regarding Arty and Air strikes:
I feel the biggest problem with these consumables is the cool down time between activating them. i feel that the current damage levels are enough to encourage people to get out of the way, but currently the smoke from a strkie barely settles before the next one is on the way. the time between use should be drastically increased, as fighting against a premade group all syncing thier arty strikes is very annoying, and more problematic than the individual damage levels.

keep damage levels the same, but increase the time between strikes to 45-60 seconds. force arty a support role, and not a primary means of attack

if the cooldown time remains the same I am almost certain the damage levels should be dropped further to account for thier rapid deployment

oh and wile it is realistic to have a 230mm arty shell landing on a mech canopy one shot it, the splash damage to the head is far too high.

thanks for the update

[MisterPlanetarian]

Awesome.

[Monky]

Merchant, on 28 May 2014 - 04:45 PM, said:

Paul,

Pulse Lasers: Have you ever considered trying a method similar to what MechWarriior 2 Mercenaries did as seen in this walkthrough? The specific section:



In MWO Terms, they fire like a UAC double shot without the jamming effect to simulate the TT hit bonus.

As an alternative, they could make it fire 2 or 3 times with a 0.1 second time between beams but have each beam deal half/one third the total damage. This way you get full damage overall, pulsing effect, and still some DOT effect making them highly accurate versions of lasers compared to what we have now. The rework of the firing would also improve server stress as 2 or 3 damage ticks is a lot easier to track than 20.

[Reno Blade]

I think the AC nerf normalization is not a "fix" for the meta snipers or poptarts.
It's to correct the inbalance between ACs and Lasers.
Imho a step in the right direction.

Now the ACs need burstfire like clan UACs and the PPC needs some delay/splash and we are set.

[Gyrok]

Nikolai Lubkiewicz, on 28 May 2014 - 02:41 PM, said:

Greetings MechWarriors!

Please leave us your feedback on the following Command Chair update from Paul!

Needs to be dropped to 30 damage per shell, that way one round will not cockpit a mech...surely that is not too much to ask.

[Deathlike]

Let me just quote parts of the original statement so nothing gets fudged in my commentary:

Quote

First off... AutoCannons. All AutoCannons have had their fall off range reduced in the same manner as the AC/2. Instead of having triple the max range, all AutoCannons are now double. This is going to bring AutoCannons into brawling ranges and also slightly affect the PPC/AC combination at long range.
AC/5 and UAC/5 have had their max range reduced from 1700m to 1240m
AC/10 has had its max range reduced from 1350m to 900m
AC/20 has had its max range reduced from 810m to 540m

Does that actually mean the AC5+UAC5 have the same optimal range? It is not made clear (since, they ARE actually different)

AC5 has an optimal range of 620m.
UAC5 has an optimal range of 600m.

Small difference (and ultimately negligible), but is worth pointing out.

Quote

SRMs are next. While investigating further fixes within this weapon system, we realized that the spread on all SRMs were set to 6 meters. This means the spread on an SRM/2 is just as wide as an SRM/6. This has been updated to make bit more sense and naturally increases the viability of all SRM systems.
SRM/2 has had its spread reduced from 6.0m to 4.8m
SRM/4 has had its spread reduced from 6.0m to 5.2m
SRM/6 has had its spread reduced from 6.0m to 5.7m

For the record, this info was posted like 9-12 months ago when the SRM spread changed (and was minutely tweaked somewhere after). The fact that it was never touched since then is appalling. I think it was Tennex or someone that had a Marik tag had mentioned this at that time. Nothing was made of it then.

Quote

ALL SRMs have also recieved a 0.15 damage increase. This is to help average out DPS when missiles hit and miss due to Host State Rewind issues.
SRMs damage increased from 2.0 per missile to 2.15 per missile.

Is it fair to say you are reneging on that nerf that you promised 7+ months ago to change it from 2.0 to 1.5 per SRM missile?

Quote

It was also found out by the community that the impulse on the SRM/4 was out of line with the other SRM systems. These have all been reduced to the SRM/4 value.
SRM/2 has had its impulse (screen shake) reduced from 0.192 to 0.11
SRM/4 has no changes made to impulse.
SRM/6 has had its impulse (screen shake) reduced from 0.192 to 0.11

For your reference, this impulse changed HAPPENED DURING THE PHOENIX PACK RELEASE. HOW DID YOU MISS IT ALTOGETHER?

Reference:
http://mwomercs.com/...49-15-oct-2013/

Quote

Impact shake when being hit by the following weapons has been reduced:
AC/5, SRM/4,SSRM/2, LB10-X

It was no accident... you simply forgot.

Quote

Laser systems are next. To make the Small Lasers (SL and SPL) a little more viable in the brawl area, they have had their ranges increased slightly. The small lasers are now able to engage just outside the minimum range on a PPC.
Small Laser has had its range increased to 100m up from 90m and its maximum range increased from 180m to 200m.
Small Pulse Laser has had its range increased to 100m up from 90m and its maximum range increased from 180m to 200m.

Negligible boost. 120m is needed IMO.

Quote

The Medium Pulse laser was also investigated and to bring it in line with the ML and taking into the account the doubling of tonnage, the base heat generated has been reduced slightly and the range has been increased slightly.
Medium Pulse Laser has had its range increased from 200m to 220m and its max range increased from 400 to 440m.
Medium Pulse Laser has had its heat reduced from 5.0 to 4.6

I'll look into the weapon, but I cannot guarantee that's enough.

Where's LPL in all of this? It's still too hot.

Quote

Last on this list is Air Strike and Artillery Strike. The intention of these has always been an area denile system for getting enemies to not camp in a single spot. It is working but the amount of damage is still a bit high and even noted in the current tournament as being a little over powered. The following changes have been made:
Air Strikes have had the spacing between shells increased by 20%. This is around 8-9 meters.
Artillery Strikes have had their area of effect increased from 60m to 75m (spacing out the shells more).
Both Air Strikes and Artillery Strikes have had their base damage reduced from 40/shell to 35/shell.

You really need to actually INCREASE the time between airstrikes/arty, from 10 to AT LEAST 15 to 20 seconds. That is part of the problem. Once you launch the attack in 4 seconds, the next volley can be launched 6 seconds AFTER the arty/airstrike touches down. That is what makes the attack VERY annoying.

Plus, you didn't eliminate arty headshots, as 33 pts of max head armor (18 external, 15 internal) is still going to get "lucky" arty kills.

The most important bit:

Quote

I've seen this thrown around a few times now so let me respond to it.
There are a total of 9 different builds of MWO on my machine... all at varying stages of completion of new features.
In 7 of these specialized builds, I can turn on specific debug tools that allow me to see exactly what's happening in the game simulation which is something you will never be able to determine in production (live build). I can also dynamically tune things as the game is running in these builds which is also something that is impossible to do on the live servers.
I do play the game, just not on production where I don't have the tools that let me see exactly what's going on in the game engine. Plus I do randomly play now and then on production and I do spectate players quite a bit when I'm not at work.
And remember, PGI is not a huge company where I sit in my office isolated from the team and just messing about doing this or that. I'm very hands on with the dev team and don't have a lot of time to head up features and play the game during the average workday.

I hate to tell you this, but even IF you made working AI/bots to play against, THERE IS NOTHING LIKE ACTUALLY PLAYING IN A LIVE GAME. #s are meaningless if you can't put it together in context WITH ACTUAL LIVE PLAYERS. Watching someone not know how to lock with LRMs is VASTLY different from the guys that run PPCS+ACs in a "meta mech". There's something to be said for "being a part of live play". There's no "alternative" to that. That is why LIVE TESTING must be done instead of "theorymech" with numbers. It simply doesn't work.