131 replies to this topic

[Mister Blastman]

Bilbo, on 03 June 2014 - 04:41 PM, said:

I'm running mechs in production. Where I want to be using SRM's I can usually hit the torso I'm aiming for on anything bigger than a light.

But they spread to adjacent torsos. In the past, we could have them all hammer one spot.

R Razor, on 03 June 2014 - 04:41 PM, said:

I'm not angry at all, I am just mature enough to realize that just because I think something is better because it is more fun for me it doesn't mean that it is better for the health and vitality of the game.

I detest ezmode LURM pilots and the meta crutch crowd that is incapable of winning in anything that doesn't utilize pin point FLD.....but that doesn't mean it isn't FUN for them to play. Is it the best for the game? Judging by the amount of other folks railing against it I'd hazard a guess that it isn't.........but if I thought like you then I'd probably think it was the ultimate expression of MWO because after all, it is FUN to one shot or two shot 3 or 4 mechs a match.....as long as you're the one doing it of course.

I never once have advocated one-shotting 'mechs. I'd honestly wish they would last longer. To do that requires a nerf. So, to avoid nerfing, you must buff to bring other things in line for the time being.

[Bilbo]

Mister Blastman, on 03 June 2014 - 04:54 PM, said:

But they spread to adjacent torsos. In the past, we could have them all hammer one spot.



I never once have advocated one-shotting 'mechs. I'd honestly wish they would last longer. To do that requires a nerf. So, to avoid nerfing, you must buff to bring other things in line for the time being.

Have you played them recently?

[Mister Blastman]

Bilbo, on 03 June 2014 - 04:55 PM, said:

Have you played them recently?

Yes. They are still terrible. I've even run private match duels with them. They'd bad.

[R Razor]

Mister Blastman, on 03 June 2014 - 04:54 PM, said:

I never once have advocated one-shotting 'mechs. I'd honestly wish they would last longer. To do that requires a nerf. So, to avoid nerfing, you must buff to bring other things in line for the time being.

I am pretty sure I didn't say you had said any such thing..........that being said, your logic is flawed.......how is a mech going to last longer if you give yet ANOTHER weapon a damage boost.....I mean the entire premise of your argument thus far has been that it takes SRMs too long to kill a mech....indicating that you want them to take less time to kill a mech seems to be counter intuitive to the above statement you made about lasting longer.

[Mister Blastman]

R Razor, on 03 June 2014 - 04:57 PM, said:

I am pretty sure I didn't say you had said any such thing..........that being said, your logic is flawed.......how is a mech going to last longer if you give yet ANOTHER weapon a damage boost.....I mean the entire premise of your argument thus far has been that it takes SRMs too long to kill a mech....indicating that you want them to take less time to kill a mech seems to be counter intuitive to the above statement you made about lasting longer.

It is counter-intuitive because the entire past two years from PGI has been counter-intuitive. They went from a balanced, fun game to a stinking pile of stale crap.

They write nothing but spaghetti code. Every thing that ever comes out of their mouth indicates they have no idea how to write object oriented code or use even basic functions. It is a mess!

So the best we can hope for is to cobble together a solution that is as simple as possible. In this case, it is bringing SRMs in line with the meta so they are equally effective. Is it what we want? Decreased TTK for everything?

NO

But, alas, it seems that is all PGI is capable of. We come up with absurd suggestions because of absurd decisions made by PGI. I don't see them nerfing the meta down to SRM level. So there is only one way to go--up. That is, until all the players leave.

[Eddrick]

Bilbo, on 03 June 2014 - 04:29 PM, said:

SRM's were broken when they were good. If the hit reliably, 2 damage per missile will be plenty. No need to make them super missiles again.......if they hit reliably 2 damage per is probably too much. We shall see if they ever do.

6 SRM6 at 2 damage a Missile = 72 total damage. Evenly spread 72 damage across 3 section = 24. Spread can make a big differance. 30 damage to the CT from 2 PPCs and AC(s) > 24 to the CT with 6 SRM6s.

Edited by Eddrick, 03 June 2014 - 06:11 PM.

[Mortal2None]

I use SRM's in the same way i use MG's or LBX's. Strip the armor first and go to town with SRM's or the other two depending on the mech hardpoints. Buff the SRM too much and you marginalize the LBX or grouped MG's. Strip the armor with your flavor of weapon as you close on your opponent then finish them. I believe that is the use of SRM's as intended by PGI.

[XX Sulla XX]

I like the changes. Good step in right direction.

[xMEPHISTOx]

Mister Blastman, on 03 June 2014 - 12:25 PM, said:

No. That's asking for fail.

Yes, the problem is SRMs. It is SRMs and hit detection.

IF we had SRMs like we did a year ago, even AFTER they removed splash damage (as I have illustrated in another thread and informed support--something broke), we'd be in a better place. Right now, SRMs are 60% less effective than they were post-splash nerf. They are significantly less effective than even that if you put splash back in.

Now, if we had SRMs from closed-beta... we wouldn't even be having this conversation. I'd run them all the time as I feel they could bring the hurt upon a team of meta as SRMs would be PART of the meta instead of a beaten, red-headed outcast that they are.

Very true, they were good in a time long ago. But as per the norm they were nerfed for being good as whiners whine OP, and they have svck3d ever since. Every time I hear someone cry OP I cringe, being that imo it is the real reason as to why weapons balancing is for $h1t, that and the devs continue caving in to that crowd.

Buff everything..>!!!

[Wingbreaker]

I don't know what game you were playing during Closed Beta, but all the screenshots I can find were extremely heavily balanced towards Gauss Rifles. Anything that could carry one did. Of course, you had no Gauss explosion and/or charge time for them then, so they were ezmode.

Splat catting was a thing, of course, but much like the 6PPC stalker it was a gimmick. It worked until it didnt, and high level players could just remove it from the game so damn easily. That's why the Cent-bomb came into style in the first place.

I think an issue here is a sort of pseudo nostalgia-goggles. Some people merely think of CB as 'more diverse' because they ran into a greater variety of players outside of their skill level.

[xMEPHISTOx]

Wingbreaker, on 03 June 2014 - 06:57 PM, said:

I don't know what game you were playing during Closed Beta, but all the screenshots I can find were extremely heavily balanced towards Gauss Rifles. Anything that could carry one did. Of course, you had no Gauss explosion and/or charge time for them then, so they were ezmode.

Splat catting was a thing, of course, but much like the 6PPC stalker it was a gimmick. It worked until it didnt, and high level players could just remove it from the game so damn easily. That's why the Cent-bomb came into style in the first place.

During different periods in the CB you had different 'op' weps/builds...the splat (srm) cat a1, dual gauss k2, streak boat a1, lrm's (which have no doubt seen the most 'balance' adjustments) and for a short while uac5's.

Edited by xMEPHISTOx, 03 June 2014 - 07:08 PM.

[Khobai]

Quote

I don't know what game you were playing during Closed Beta, but all the screenshots I can find were extremely heavily balanced towards Gauss Rifle

Yes but most of those builds only had 1 Gauss Rifle and carried a balanced mix of other weapons. So you might have a Gauss Rifle, some Lasers, and some SRMs or LRMs. Gauss was too good not to use back then. But it wasnt the only weapon you used. Where PPC/AC are the only weapons people use now. Big difference. Plus now the only time you see gauss is if its dual gauss or dual gauss+ppc because its synergy with other weapons has been killed.

Edited by Khobai, 03 June 2014 - 07:26 PM.

[Gas Guzzler]

Mister Blastman, on 03 June 2014 - 12:31 PM, said:

Yes, they were broken--but guess what--the game was more FUN!

We had more CHOICES!

The gameplay was more VARIED.

It was not STALE.

You could brawl. You could snipe. You could LRM (if you were a bad). You could use all sorts of things. SRMs continued to be useful into March of 2013. This was after PPCs became useful. Gauss was still aplenty. Yet SRMs could still hit hard.

And then... they got nerfed into the ground due to whining about splatcats. This was the worst thing that ever happened in this game.

So--I could care less if they bring back broken SRMs. In fact, I encourage it! Let them!

The game will become diverse again, overnight. That's good, right? A game is supposed to be fun. This would improve the fun.

I would be down with OP'd SRMs. They are so close range, SRMs + AC20 should be lights out <270m. I would take anything to stop hearing PPC/AC hatred all the time (short of making them something they are not).

Khobai, on 03 June 2014 - 12:33 PM, said:

This. Closed beta wasnt just PPCs/ACs all the time. And PPCs still havent been nerfed like they need to.

Did they do any tournaments back then? I would be interested to see if there was still a variety of builds in a competitive setting. I doubt it. One type of build will always be better then others..

[Mister Blastman]

Gas Guzzler, on 03 June 2014 - 07:26 PM, said:

I would be down with OP'd SRMs. They are so close range, SRMs + AC20 should be lights out <270m. I would take anything to stop hearing PPC/AC hatred all the time (short of making them something they are not).



Did they do any tournaments back then? I would be interested to see if there was still a variety of builds in a competitive setting. I doubt it. One type of build will always be better then others..

I won Heavy vs. the World using a Dragon that had large lasers, mediums and SRMs...

[Gas Guzzler]

Mister Blastman, on 03 June 2014 - 07:31 PM, said:

I won Heavy vs. the World using a Dragon that had large lasers, mediums and SRMs...

Cool.

That doesn't really answer my question though. I meant like what we saw in the team tournament. Winning team was made up of a common type of builds. Are you guys saying that wouldn't have been the case back then?

[Mister Blastman]

Gas Guzzler, on 03 June 2014 - 07:53 PM, said:

Cool.

That doesn't really answer my question though. I meant like what we saw in the team tournament. Winning team was made up of a common type of builds. Are you guys saying that wouldn't have been the case back then?

Teamplay saw much greater variety for sure.

[Gas Guzzler]

Well, while I didn't really play back then, or at least not seriously, I highly doubt that all weapon combinations were equal ever in this game, or any game. I mean honestly, any game that has highly different weapon types will have a meta that will give you an edge over other weapons, especially when all the maps favor long range engagements. If anything that right there is the real problem.

I wish there were less topics on this, I have spent way too much time on balance threads.

[Khobai]

Quote

Teamplay saw much greater variety for sure.

people played dragons! when was the last time you saw a dragon that wasnt a flame? and even flames are uncommon these days.

[Gas Guzzler]

Khobai, on 03 June 2014 - 08:16 PM, said:

people played dragons! when was the last time you saw a dragon that wasnt a flame? and even flames are uncommon these days.

I've seen a non-Flame dragon here and there. Sometimes with a good player that I recognize. He did fine, of course.

But yeah I run my Flame with a UAC5, LPL, and 2 MPLs and its a killing machine. I don't know what it is about it, but its fast and fun to pilot. KDR in it is >2 IIRC

Edited by Gas Guzzler, 03 June 2014 - 08:24 PM.

[Mister Dubis]

I didn't really see the need of the srm "buff." I did just fine with them usually doing anywhere from 300 dmg to 700 dmg a game in my griffin 3m