356 replies to this topic

[Svidro]

Would have preferred doubling the number of impacts on arty and halving the damage of each to prevent gibbing, rather than just a spread and minor damage nerf. It could have been combined with an increased duration as well, to better act as area denial, and given a good reason to increase the cooldown between uses.

[YueFei]

I like the fact that these are smaller incremental changes. Keep doing this every month or so and the game gets closer to being balanced much faster.

[Lynx7725]

My opinion:

Overall the effort appears to be encourage close-in fighting/ brawling. IMO this is good as my PUG experience is more of people trying to plink with distance fire and generally failing to do much damage at around 600m (while I rain LRMs in return... Not an even trade. At All.)

This would likely encourage people to cover out of cover and attack close in. Which sits fine with me. I don't need to dig them out now... coupled with the inevitable "NO LOS NO LOCK" module, I think basically it'll just become a more close-in game than current, which IMO isn't terrible.

Specifics: Rather than the current approach, pulse lasers might benefit more from having less burn time, or just switching to a MG-like burst effect. Actually, the Burst effect might be more visually interesting.

Damage from arty/ airstrike might need to reduce to 30/hit due to headshots. 35 is still headshot country. If you're in the zone to receive a headshot from arty, you're likely to eat another few rounds too, so 30 per hit should be enough to worry people.

Qn: So does that Hangman icon on loading mean Paul is watching us?

[Santos Villalobos]

Will we see any tweaks to ghost heat? It seems a lot of players are unsatisfied with its current state.

[Onmyoudo]

I'm not going to comment on the changes themselves but this is the kind of weapons update we should be seeing every two weeks. If these changes don't work as intended the next patch or the one after should be tweaking them again.

[ToxinTractor]

Love the changes guys!

Those lazer changes defiantly made me incredibly hard.

Now for those AC changes.. I LIKE EM! However I suppose we get to see how it changes those meta builds. However.. I am slightly worried that AC5s and UAC5s might reach a tad too far. Its not a lot of damage but hell. I like the idea of making victor drivers cry >.>

[Mad Dog Morgan]

Flamers still need some serious buffs to make up for their weight, range, and heat output.

Edited by Vaskadar, 28 May 2014 - 11:36 PM.

[xe N on]

The AC-nerf is a good thing. Everything else is a step into the right direction but imho too less, escpacially SRMs and pulse lasers need a much larger boost.

Lasers are way too hot compared to ACs and even after ther AC-nerf ACs will still dominate. The best way to break dominance of the ACs is to increase the heat of ACs drastically and introduce ghost heat for AC5 and AC10 when equipping more then 2.

In fact, I won't feel any impact on my 2xAC5 2xPPC jump sniper DS because I seldom engage targets in more then 1000 m distance with my Autocannons.

[DerMaulwurf]

I like the changes. Only thing missing is a bit more explaining on why balance was changed in these ways and not in others. On most issues I can guess that, but having the devs say so explicitly would further improve communication.

xe N on, on 28 May 2014 - 11:59 PM, said:

[...]

In fact, I won't feel any impact on my 2xAC5 2xPPC jump sniper DS because I seldom engage targets in more then 1000 m distance with my Autocannons.

Yes, you will, because damage will drop off steeper for targets beyond 620 meters. Meaning that you will do (slightly) less damage to targets at 800m. Not a big change, but larger than zero.

[Shikata nai]

Funny how people think this will affect Jumpsniperbuilds more than Brawlbuilds. The Brawling damage will be getting in far later when you need to engage without much cover. Yes the AC damage of those Jumpsnipers will get lower too but not the PPC damage. Even if i'm wrong and it hurts brawlers less than Jumpsnipers... PPC Gauss meta here I (we) come

[krolmir]

I agree AC Nerf helps brawlers, makes the AC PPC combo less affective overall. Will be interesting to see how game play changes on maps like, alpine, that will be be the final judge. Digging all the pulse laser changes, but wish large pulse could've got another 25m. Really hope SRM's get right. So many chassis' depend on than as a punch weapons, and artillery's nerfing was well warranted.

[SmokinDave73]

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.

If this is truly the case how can you justify nerfing the AC/10 and AC/20 max ranges when all this will do is make the A/C 5 PPC meta even stronger against brawlers that want to take AC 20s combined with medium lasers for example. I completely agree that the AC 5 and UAC 5 needed a nerf because it was to effective combined with PPC's in the current meta. 2 AC 5 2 PPC meta builds are going to be even more powerful against load outs that use AC 10s and AC 20s is that really what you want??
If so this game is going to be even worse than it currently is. This is just another case of you indirectly making the ac5 PPC poptart meta even stronger than it already is.

This is just plain stupid please do not change maxium ranges of the AC/10 and AC/20...

[EvilCow]

Positive changes overall, probably the SRMs would have needed some more damage, 2.5 like SSRMs for example.

I would have considered a different change for artillery: half damage per shot (40->20) but doubled shots (10->20), lower damage but better saturation, I would keep the increased area.
The change of airstrikes is right as-is IMO.

Could the developers consider a small improvement for LBX10 now? something like damage 10->12/14 would give it an edge in brawling situations, it is what they did in MW4 and worked nicely.

[SirSlaughter]

The proposed tweaks are not bad after all

You should REALLY re-think about the implementation of hardpoint size to create REAL ROLES on the battlefield...

... but I see that even the missile tubes limit is going to disappear

Edited by SirSlaughter, 29 May 2014 - 12:50 AM.

[The Amazing Atomic Spaniel]

The changes look sort-of-OK to me. They'll help, but they aren't addressing the root of the problem.

The problem with Acs isn't really their range, it's that batteries of ACs and PPCs fired together all give pin-point damage because of instant convergence. Reducing the range a bit will only result in the same sort of alpha-strike gameplay, but at slightly shorter ranges. The fundamental problem remains that of instant, 100% effective, convergence.

Paul - why can't you just re-introduce a finite-time weapons convergence? I believe it was present in earlier versions of the game. It would fix so many problems at a stroke. If there's a fundamental problem with it (maybe too difficult to do with HSR?), just tell us and we can stop going on about it.

What's frustrating for players like me is that I am sure you know all this.

[Motörhead]

Good change on anything, but the AC10 and AC20, that needed to stay as they were.

[BOWMANGR]

No, no, no, no, NO. You people are doing it wrong. You are not supposed to write good things in here. These forums exist for endless whining and QQ'ing.

I read the changes, I really liked them and then I came here to read all the ridiculous things people are going to whine about and most of you are saying that these changes are good? This is lame. Where are the exaggerated opinions? The entitled game balance meisters? Where is the AC40 Jagernoob whine squad?

I am disappoint...

Edited by BOWMANGR, 29 May 2014 - 01:10 AM.

[JohnnyWayne]

The arti changes seem more like a buff than a nerf. It is already hard enough to flee the current one, thats just makes it even harder. The damage reduce is too little if you ask me.

I'd totally revamp the arti consumables. Make arti longer on a far wider range that it denys area but give people the chance to flee the area. That means 15-20 seconds until it kicks in, a field wide warning and mark on the map / battlegrid that shows the target area (srsly this is the future and we have enough tecnical equpment in a mech to run a fusion reactor..), wide area denial (Battlefield any1?) and Damage to 20 - 25 / shell. Duration 1 minute, limited to 2-3 players per team.

Airstrike is ok I guess. 30-35 damage, a small spread, warning would be also nice and it should show in what direction it hits.

This would also create diversity between the two.


Your changes seem more like a buff to arty and a nerf to heavier mechs. Especially ones without jumpjets. Another topic you didn't even touch.

[Eglar]

Wow,

I liked almost all those changes this 2014. See how it goes, a few more tweaks and we might be there!


Also:

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.

Wow, you responded! While people were saying that "Devs don't play their game" and throwing around with "why Paul still has his job", there was only silence from you guys. Don't alienate yourselves, fight back!

[Onmyoudo]

Eglar, on 29 May 2014 - 02:35 AM, said:

Don't alienate yourselves, fight back!

Yeah, Niko just did this and it hasn't ended so well. Be careful what you wish for.