299 replies to this topic

[Revener]

Bront, on 30 July 2014 - 07:36 AM, said:

Likely a feature to prevent teammate reporting.

Thats what I thought too TBH and have told other ppl that complained.
OTH though it makes it harder to report map bugs and to tell the opposing team where that last AFK/dissconected mech is standing, to prevent the game from taking longer then it have too. When you just want the mech back that is locked in the game.

[Cimarb]

xWiredx, on 30 July 2014 - 07:28 AM, said:

Unfortunately, some of us don't remember which mechs they had modules on. Going through this process with 60 mechs in the MWO UI could easily take an hour, which is an hour that shouldn't need to be spent making and saving arbitrary changes to find the modules that should have either simply been unequipped or moved to the proper type of slot as a result of the patch. It's this kind of lack of foresight and thinking that continues to irk the remaining player base.

I am in that boat, so I understand, but all you have to do is mouse click on the mech in the mechlab and then click on the "invalid" icon. It will then tell you why it is invalid, and if it says something about modules, you know that is one of the mechs to strip.

I do agree that they should have just reset/stripped all the modules to make it less of a hassle, but they did not. Regardless,it is really not nearly as big of a deal as people are making it. Making comments about "the remaining playerbase" is silly, as their playerbase is larger now than it has been in the last, despite that playerbase now being slightly different than in CB.

Bront, on 30 July 2014 - 07:36 AM, said:

Likely a feature to prevent teammate reporting.

Reporting issues, be it bad spots on the map, broken terrain, inactive players, etc. is now all much more difficult, and that removal of the F9 function is why. I have asked Russ what the purpose behind it was, or if it was even intentional, and will see what he says...

[chaas]

Bilbo, on 29 July 2014 - 12:12 PM, said:

Do you have any idea of the amount of c-bills and gxp that has been flushed down the toilet with this change. Without the slots to equip them there are many that I would never have bothered to unlock and buy in the first place.

So we're going to continue childishly whining about this. Sweet. I'll just go ahead and point out, again, that this is probably not the final form of the module system and, as the production studio, PGI gets to change things on a whim. It even says so in their EULA. Did you bother reading that document, or did you just check the box at the bottom? It really doesn't matter, but I think you see the point I'm driving at.

Can you honestly tell the class that you thoroughly tested these changes in the short amount of time between the live patch and your post, analyzed your data and determined that the change was a bad one? Of course you can't, don't be absurd. Yours is, like many here, a knee-jerk reaction to a concept you don't like: change. When you're done crying that river over there, why don't you build a bridge and get over it. At least that's constructive.

In the meantime, do something useful like flying your 'Mechs and see if there truly are negative effects. Sure, there are bound to be more consumables used. There are probably more weapons modules used too. And, more than likely, the number of 'Mech modules in use will remain relatively even with the mean use before this patch. Like you, I don't know for sure because I haven't played much since the patch. This is simply an educated guess.


At any rate, your response triggered a lot of anger because it was, like so many other posts, largely based on the negative. I don't think that's fair, we ought to give it a chance before jumping to conclusions. Sorry to single you out.

[Bilbo]

chaas, on 30 July 2014 - 10:37 AM, said:

So we're going to continue childishly whining about this. Sweet. I'll just go ahead and point out, again, that this is probably not the final form of the module system and, as the production studio, PGI gets to change things on a whim. It even says so in their EULA. Did you bother reading that document, or did you just check the box at the bottom? It really doesn't matter, but I think you see the point I'm driving at.

Can you honestly tell the class that you thoroughly tested these changes in the short amount of time between the live patch and your post, analyzed your data and determined that the change was a bad one? Of course you can't, don't be absurd. Yours is, like many here, a knee-jerk reaction to a concept you don't like: change. When you're done crying that river over there, why don't you build a bridge and get over it. At least that's constructive.

In the meantime, do something useful like flying your 'Mechs and see if there truly are negative effects. Sure, there are bound to be more consumables used. There are probably more weapons modules used too. And, more than likely, the number of 'Mech modules in use will remain relatively even with the mean use before this patch. Like you, I don't know for sure because I haven't played much since the patch. This is simply an educated guess.


At any rate, your response triggered a lot of anger because it was, like so many other posts, largely based on the negative. I don't think that's fair, we ought to give it a chance before jumping to conclusions. Sorry to single you out.

Nope, I'm over it. I have a plan for my oodles of leftover modules.

[Mudhutwarrior]

Anyone know where the modules went? I have two mechs a highlander and banshee which none of the missing modules are in inventory.

Got it support told me to strip just the modules then it shows in inventory.

Edited by Mudhutwarrior, 30 July 2014 - 12:53 PM.

[Dan Nashe]

Discarius, on 30 July 2014 - 12:18 AM, said:

soo...has anyone ran into more-than-40-combined-strikes match yet?

Yes, every single 12 man drop prior to this patch. And I would guess all of them after?

They were already the best use of slots you could put them in. The only problem is that now I can't run a suboptimal module in that spot in PuGs. There is no longer even a small advantage to not equipping them, so I don't disagree with your sentiment.

As for weapon modules:
I see those as free module slots.
E.g., here are your Options:

(1) You have 1 module slot. You can put any kind of module you want in it.
(2) You have 1 mech module slot, 1 weapon module slot.
Have you lost anything? No.

If they were balancing your mech, they would eliminate the weapon module slot. They would not if they are being sensible *replace* the weapon module with a different module type. You can have a weapon module or no module.

That's why I like this change, I might *consider* a weapon module, because it no longer costs me an air strike to do so. Suddenly they opened customization options because I now actually have a choice about modules. I really didn't before this patch anyways, so to the extent they are "all bad" (which is false, MG is pure better), I'm not really affected by the weapon module slot thing.


Be Happy the weapon modules suck. They add up to a lot of money on all your mechs, and switching modules is a pain.

While I am sad that I can't use as many mech modules anymore, and while I think the result will be people buying and using fewer modules than before, that's not really a change I care about. :-). I got use out of my modules. Of course, I was super careful buying modules because they are so expensive, so I only own one of each. AS they get buffed/nerfed, they could always come back in style.

As long as you have 2 mech module slots, I'm fine with it. If you have one, it's a problem because it kills flexibility. :-p.

TL; DR, you are not forced to use useless module slots, so they don't offend me.

[ebea51]

FALL DAMANGE BALLANCING:

I just had a game full of medium and light mechs, FULL of PPC that did nothing for 12min but popt4rd.

Up-Fire-Down
Up-Fire-Down
Up-Fire-Down
Up-Fire-Down
etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc....

None of them exceeded falling 33m/s because the terrain just wasn't that high... so NONE of them for the ENTIRE match received ANY FALL DMG.

Put it back to 30m/s for everything.

Gravity is a constant force upon mass (that acts irrelevant to weight) which dictates fall-rates.
If PGI decides to introduce planets with lower gravity, sure, drop the threshold.

But if all the planets we are playing on have the same gravity, then the fall damage threshold should be the SAME for ALL classes.

Since 1.3.307 im starting to see more and more light and medium popt4rds again...

Edited by ebea51, 30 July 2014 - 06:17 PM.

[RiotHero]

Good patch, It's nice to see the Jenner K nerfed. It was way to OP.


I'm glad I repurchased it on sale recently after more useful modules came out just to be made pointless again by this patch.

[Revener]

Fix the bloody resetting weapon groups its been like that since Beta. Nothing like an alpha strike shut down when you get attacked........ sigh

ebea51, on 30 July 2014 - 06:15 PM, said:

FALL DAMANGE BALLANCING:

I just had a game full of medium and light mechs, FULL of PPC that did nothing for 12min but popt4rd.

Up-Fire-Down
Up-Fire-Down
Up-Fire-Down
Up-Fire-Down
etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc....

None of them exceeded falling 33m/s because the terrain just wasn't that high... so NONE of them for the ENTIRE match received ANY FALL DMG.

Put it back to 30m/s for everything.

Gravity is a constant force upon mass (that acts irrelevant to weight) which dictates fall-rates.
If PGI decides to introduce planets with lower gravity, sure, drop the threshold.

But if all the planets we are playing on have the same gravity, then the fall damage threshold should be the SAME for ALL classes.

Since 1.3.307 im starting to see more and more light and medium popt4rds again...

True that fall speed is the same regardless of mass... but its easier to build legs that support 30tons falling then it is to build legs that do not buckle under 100 tons falling.

Throw a bug off the top of your roof it will survive, if you jump down you may break your legs.

Edited by Revener, 31 July 2014 - 02:53 AM.

[Frost Lord]

xWiredx, on 30 July 2014 - 07:28 AM, said:

Unfortunately, some of us don't remember which mechs they had modules on. Going through this process with 60 mechs in the MWO UI could easily take an hour, which is an hour that shouldn't need to be spent making and saving arbitrary changes to find the modules that should have either simply been unequipped or moved to the proper type of slot as a result of the patch. It's this kind of lack of foresight and thinking that continues to irk the remaining player base.

it only takes them off the ones that have two many of any kind and it puts a big invalid indicator threw it

[Frost Lord]

Revener, on 31 July 2014 - 02:41 AM, said:

Fix the bloody resetting weapon groups its been like that since Beta. Nothing like an alpha strike shut down when you get attacked........ sigh





True that fall speed is the same regardless of mass... but its easier to build legs that support 30tons falling then it is to build legs that do not buckle under 100 tons falling.

Throw a bug off the top of your roof it will survive, if you jump down you may break your legs.

they should just make it if you have jump jets you will take damage at 30 if not you can fall a reasonable distance, its not realistic but it would be fair any you would only really see the difference if you are an inexperienced jj user.

[Belorion]

Frost Lord, on 31 July 2014 - 03:15 AM, said:

they should just make it if you have jump jets you will take damage at 30 if not you can fall a reasonable distance, its not realistic but it would be fair any you would only really see the difference if you are an inexperienced jj user.

JJs are fine the way they are.

[red fury15]

устроили распродажу премиумных мехов и обрезали им слоты где логика ???

[Desintegrator]

Nice patch PGI !

After 2 years of playing and statistical observations of the servers you found out that the Awesome was NOT the most popular Mech out there. But maybe the buff is a little late now, as most of the players have sold their Awesomes 1.9 years ago.

Now the Awesome is a competitive Mech, but who cares.
I wont spend millions of Cbills again, to buy another set of three mechs...

Edited by Desintegrator, 31 July 2014 - 07:35 AM.

[Cimarb]

Desintegrator, on 31 July 2014 - 07:34 AM, said:

Nice patch PGI !

After 2 years of playing and statistical observations of the servers you found out that the Awesome was NOT the most popular Mech out there. But maybe the buff is a little late now, as most of the players have sold their Awesomes 1.9 years ago.

Now the Awesome is a competitive Mech, but who cares.
I wont spend millions of Cbills again, to buy another set of three mechs...

You do not need all three, unless you like all three. Your skill points did not get reset, so if you had it mastered, you will still have it mastered and only need to purchase the one you want.

[DAYLEET]

Im here to ***** about the fall damage. Im late to the party but none of my mech had any problem with it till i played my X5 yesterday. Theres something wrong about how it works on that mech for sure. Can't run on a slope in a straight line, can't run down a slope, can't run up a rock and back down, at 147KPH i can't everything. It's a light not a med and it feels like it's flying not running, the slightest bump sends him ballistic and since none of my lights have that problem i place the blame on a bug.

I seriously had no prob with the new fall damage with every mech i played since then, i took damage when i fell and with good reasons. On my X5 i take fall damage without falling, look into that. Hell i was going slowly reverse on a slope(Alpine I9) and once i stopped to move up again to take a pot shot i took fall damage to the legs, i wasnt falling!!!

Edited by Marvyn Dodgers, 31 July 2014 - 05:14 PM.
Language

[doodlemander]

DAYLEET, on 31 July 2014 - 07:54 AM, said:

I seriously had no prob with the new fall damage with every mech i played since then, i took damage when i fell and with good reasons. On my X5 i take fall damage without falling, look into that. Hell i was going slowly reverse on a slope(Alpine I9) and once i stopped to move up again to take a pot shot i took fall damage to the legs, i wasnt falling!!!

Interesting...
I noticed my X5 was taking a lot more leg damage in my last few games than it usually does, but I assumed it was just bad luck especially considering I should have been taking LESS damage with the changes. I'll have to watch for this mysterious no-falling fall damage next time I play.

Edited by Marvyn Dodgers, 31 July 2014 - 05:14 PM.
Language in quote

[BLOOD WOLF]

Desintegrator, on 31 July 2014 - 07:34 AM, said:

Nice patch PGI !

After 2 years of playing and statistical observations of the servers you found out that the Awesome was NOT the most popular Mech out there. But maybe the buff is a little late now, as most of the players have sold their Awesomes 1.9 years ago.

Now the Awesome is a competitive Mech, but who cares.
I wont spend millions of Cbills again, to buy another set of three mechs...

Or be like me and just buy the one which you liked most.

[Bartholomew bartholomew]

I have a question. Did the victors and battlemaster 1G get hit with another swing with the nerf bat.

I noticed that the perks have them cut down in movement rates pretty bad.

Also the centrurion have a simultanious nerf and buff to the song of the same percents on movement in their list.

And that looks weird to me.

Edited by Bartholomew bartholomew, 31 July 2014 - 01:48 PM.

[Uncle Totty]

Not sure if this has been asked yet, but is there any chance ammo will be "consumable"?