18 replies to this topic

[EgoSlayer]

Victory to the forum feedback - we are getting one of our wishes:
http://mwomercs.com/...ule-slot-system

And there was much rejoicing...

[Darian DelFord]

Still think it needs to be more "General" Mech Module Oriented. With the exception of Arti/Air the weapon modules are largely a piece of crap. But at least its a step in the right direction.

[Roland]

The real lesson pgi needs to learn is not that people don't want weapons modules.

It's that the weapons modules they made are garbage. Make them non trash, and people might not be so enraged at the prospect of having to take them.

[Deathlike]

Roland, on 21 July 2014 - 04:23 PM, said:

The real lesson pgi needs to learn is not that people don't want weapons modules.

It's that the weapons modules they made are garbage. Make them non trash, and people might not be so enraged at the prospect of having to take them.

Have you tried the Flamer module? Buffs range by 1m for 1 level!

[Roland]

Deathlike, on 21 July 2014 - 04:33 PM, said:

Have you tried the Flamer module? Buffs range by 1m for 1 level!

You aren't even joking, are you?

[Deathlike]

Roland, on 21 July 2014 - 04:35 PM, said:

You aren't even joking, are you?

I was just informed of this today, so.. I suggest you take a trip of smurfy's to confirm this disaster.

[Deathlike]

If you want a Small Laser or Small Pulse Laser module, it's 2m for 1 level!

Just brilliant!

[Khobai]

Quote

The real lesson pgi needs to learn is not that people don't want weapons modules.

The actual thing no one wants is artillery and airstrike spam every single game because every mech has two consumable slots.


As for weapon modules, no one wants the level 2 weapon modules. I imagine the level 5 weapon modules will be strong enough to justify their use.

[Ph30nix]

good now if they just knock the consumable module slot down to only 1 it will be just fine.

[Khobai]

1 consumable slot doesnt solve the problem of artillery spam though. If artillery is better than every other consumable then every mech will still spam artillery whenever they can.

A damage nerf to artillery/airstrike to put them on the same level as coolant/UAV is the only real solution. If they were balanced properly then it wouldnt matter if a mech could carry both artillery and airstrike. They were pretty useless at 20 damage so I think somewhere between 25-30 damage would be ideal. 35 hits too hard and still one-shots mechs if it hits them in the head.

I also think the UAV consumable should give you two UAVs per match instead of just one. More UAVs getting used would only be a good thing.

Edited by Khobai, 21 July 2014 - 05:29 PM.

[Asmudius Heng]

Nothing changes with this in any great deal.

It is just a disappointing way to force weapons modules on players and to buy more consumables as a cbill sink.

The community was only listened to to modify a terrible part of a bad system not look into the entire system itself.

[Ultimax]

Khobai, on 21 July 2014 - 05:20 PM, said:

As for weapon modules, no one wants the level 2 weapon modules. I imagine the level 5 weapon modules will be strong enough to justify their use.

Are you saying that by L5 we might get...10 whole meters??

[Davers]

I know PGI is very wary of putting in real powerful modules, but what is the point of having levels and 'end game content' that is nearly useless?

[Deathlike]

Khobai, on 21 July 2014 - 05:24 PM, said:

1 consumable slot doesnt solve the problem of artillery spam though. If artillery is better than every other consumable then every mech will still spam artillery whenever they can.

A damage nerf to artillery/airstrike to put them on the same level as coolant/UAV is the only real solution. If they were balanced properly then it wouldnt matter if a mech could carry both artillery and airstrike. They were pretty useless at 20 damage so I think somewhere between 25-30 damage would be ideal. 35 hits too hard and still one-shots mechs if it hits them in the head.

I also think the UAV consumable should give you two UAVs per match instead of just one. More UAVs getting used would only be a good thing.

It was never @ 20 damage. It was initially debuted @ 10 damage per shell, then quadbuffed (40 damage per shell) upon the release of the Phoenix Pack. It was only then semi-recently nerfed to 35 a month or so back.

Davers, on 21 July 2014 - 05:48 PM, said:

I know PGI is very wary of putting in real powerful modules, but what is the point of having levels and 'end game content' that is nearly useless?

NuPaul keeps his job?

[Khobai]

Quote

Are you saying that by L5 we might get...10 whole meters??

Well in the example they gave in the command chair the L5 medium laser weapon module increases medium laser range by 19m. So thats a 7% range increase. Thats about the same range increase the clan targeting computer gives. If they lowered IS medium laser heat down to 3 heat like they need to it wouldnt be so bad.

Quote

It was never @ 20 damage

Youre right it was increased from 10 all the way to 40. I remember thinking how knee jerkish that was at the time to not even try it at 20-25 first. Regardless 35 is too high, especially if spamming it is still going to be allowed. The damage needs to be lowered to 20-25 to bring them more in line with the other consumables. Artillery/Airstrike should not always be the best consumables to take all the time.

Edited by Khobai, 21 July 2014 - 06:39 PM.

[Mystere]

Khobai, on 21 July 2014 - 05:24 PM, said:

1 consumable slot doesnt solve the problem of artillery spam though. If artillery is better than every other consumable then every mech will still spam artillery whenever they can.

A damage nerf to artillery/airstrike to put them on the same level as coolant/UAV is the only real solution. If they were balanced properly then it wouldnt matter if a mech could carry both artillery and airstrike. They were pretty useless at 20 damage so I think somewhere between 25-30 damage would be ideal. 35 hits too hard and still one-shots mechs if it hits them in the head.

I also think the UAV consumable should give you two UAVs per match instead of just one. More UAVs getting used would only be a good thing.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, buff the bad game elements, not nerf the good ones.

Khobai, on 21 July 2014 - 06:31 PM, said:

Youre right it was increased from 10 all the way to 40. I remember thinking how knee jerkish that was at the time to not even try it at 20-25 first. Regardless 35 is too high, especially if spamming it is still going to be allowed. The damage needs to be lowered to 20-25.

The rationale, I think anyway, for lowering damage to 35 from 40 -- in addition to expanding the area of effect -- is to keep the threat of dying to an artillery or air strike still a real possibility, but at a reduced probability. Why else would they keep it above 33 even though the wailing about the deaths was already deafening?

Edited by Mystere, 21 July 2014 - 06:46 PM.

[Khobai]

Quote

I've said it before and I'll say it again, buff the bad game elements, not nerf the good ones.

theres nothing good about artillery killing mechs in one hit.

[AlmightyAeng]

Khobai, on 21 July 2014 - 05:20 PM, said:

The actual thing no one wants is artillery and airstrike spam every single game because every mech has two consumable slots.


As for weapon modules, no one wants the level 2 weapon modules. I imagine the level 5 weapon modules will be strong enough to justify their use.

I would actually prefer a -5 level weapon module; one that reduces the range of my PPC's considerably, but makes them generate far less heat. SNUB PPC 4LIFE!

*sarcasm alert*

[Zerberus]

Darian DelFord, on 21 July 2014 - 04:15 PM, said:

Still think it needs to be more "General" Mech Module Oriented. With the exception of Arti/Air the weapon modules are largely a piece of crap. But at least its a step in the right direction.

Fail. Arty and air are not weapon modules, they are consumables, which occupy another slot entirely.