1263 replies to this topic

[Khan Hallis]

This thread looks like it is going as expected.

So many ideas for fixes...

and yet as so many people that have played BattleTech/MechWarrior games for over 20 years have already stated, the REAL fix is to use the game balance that was originally in the game that got it off table top and into the electronic arena all along. Heat, damage, range (including minimums), mass, ammo quantities...all balanced. A heat scale that impacted targetting, ammo explosions, 'mech movement, and ultimately shut downs all balanced.

And yet PGI can't bring itself to admit their fixes are NOT working, and they are losing their player base.
No, instead they constantly add more and more oddball bandaid fixes to specific situations without addressing the underlying problems. They are constantly still trying to "balance" weapons that should have been balanced almost from the start of open beta.

Cash grabs are getting more extreme, need I cite the most recent "all or nothing" hero mech sale. ALL of them on sale at the same time? Is something wrong that they use a shotgun approach trying to get more sales? I've not spent any real world money on this game since the initial "Clan Invasion" announcement in December last year. I don't really have a reason to regret that decision.

This game was very promising when first announced.
But has been almost constantly disappointing in so many areas.
Sad.

The real question is when is this leperous company finally going to fall apart in front of us?
not a matter of "if" from what I'm seeing, simply a question of "when" (how soon).

Edited by Khan Hallis, 01 August 2014 - 07:38 AM.

[MattEdge]

I feel like it is sort of weird that you guys (PGI) would work on a new, complex, complicated 3 stage active system, get it all ready to go, put it in the game, set it to off, and then ask the community what they want. That or a super slow ppc?

I'm not sure which is the option you are wanting everyone to pick because they're both so weird, but it feels a bit manipulative to me.

My vote is no to both, sorry about all the work you had to put in. The only weapon system that is annoying right now is c-erlls, and even those I can live with under the current rule-set.

[Gas Guzzler]

I don't support either option BUT..

I'm confused as to why they are limiting to 2. Why not go middle of the road and limit to 3 PPC/Gauss (2 PPC - 1 Gauss intact), but that eliminates the pesky 50-60 pt alpha DW builds. You could even make it so when charging 2 gauss you can't fire any PPCs until shortly after you fire (to eliminate the 2 Gauss - 1 PPC build), but when charging 1 Gauss you could still fire 2 PPCs...

The fact of the matter is, the 2 ERPPC - 1 Gauss build is balanced by being weak in short range situations. I'm sure some people say "NO, I get beat by that build close range all the time!" Sorry, I have nothing to say to that crowd. It will always be outclassed in short range by say the SRM heavy T-Wolf builds, for instance. So push them.

Obviously if you go up against of group with that build where every one of them has exceptional aim then you will get torn up trying to push them unless your team plays it very well... but that is just your team getting outplayed, not an OP build.

[Hungry Hungry Hobo]

I say buff other weapons to balance this.

Take off or set back the restrictions for ghost heat?

[Alcon]

I find it funny that PGI implemented 3rd person, because there are players out there that could not grasp the torso twist concept and they wanted to make the game accessible to everyone. This is the same group that expects these players to grasp with ghost heat, the Gauss power up mechanic and now one of these two concepts?

Anyways - the problem has always been the pin point accuracy, even back in closed beta. The reason for the armor point boost. Just make it so that the odds of hitting the same location the farther the target is out gets harder. Ghost Heat and the Gauss power can be removed and these two ideas left turned off.

[Koniks]

R5D4, on 30 July 2014 - 08:40 PM, said:

Well the good news is the Dev team appears to have read Homeless Bills suggestion (as evidenced here)
The bad news is it seems to be dismissed without full understanding of what is being purposed; ot at least that's how I interpret the response that was received.

Sigh...

It's more like that they're deciding for legal reasons they can't include any player's suggestions as is.

[Alexandrix]

You are just going to keep going around and around in circles slapping a band aid here and there as long you don't face the real problems here.

Let's just drop the annoying charge mechanics,ghost heats,over complicated goofy crap....and step up to the plate for a swing at the core of the issue.Each weapon in and of itself is more or less fine(well,the ppc/gauss and LRM's could use a longer recharge imo).The problems start to arise when you combine lots of weapons that are already pretty good into one big ass SUPER MEGA WEAPON with one mouse click.


-instant pinpoint convergence
-heat scale (detriments and cap/dissipation)
-No reticle sway or CoF even while moving full speed or in the air('cept when jj's are on)

These are issues.


Core issues need to be addressed.Not symptoms.

Edited by Alexandrix, 31 July 2014 - 10:22 AM.

[Livewyr]

That is something I think they should definitely have:

Reticule Sway according to speed. Something mechanical that is entirely manageable without being prone to divine RNG intervention!

Heck my cockpit is bouncing up and down, why not have a little play in the reticule.. (still PP because of the silliness that would ensure trying to change it, but at least you would not be sniping 1000 meters at 100 kph...)

[FupDup]

Livewyr, on 31 July 2014 - 10:28 AM, said:

That is something I think they should definitely have:

Reticule Sway according to speed. Something mechanical that is entirely manageable without being prone to divine RNG intervention!

Heck my cockpit is bouncing up and down, why not have a little play in the reticule.. (still PP because of the silliness that would ensure trying to change it, but at least you would not be sniping 1000 meters at 100 kph...)

I don't think that would have much of an effect on the "exploitative" builds in question, which are almost always heavy and assault mechs. The Dire Whale in particular, with its infamous 50-point alpha build, doesn't move that fast to begin with...

[Alexandrix]

FupDup, on 31 July 2014 - 10:29 AM, said:

I don't think that would have much of an effect on the "exploitative" builds in question, which are almost always heavy and assault mechs. The Dire Whale in particular, with its infamous 50-point alpha build, doesn't move that fast to begin with...

It'd probably have to be based off of throttle setting instead of ground speed.Otherwise,as you say,big mechs would have it much easier than small fast mechs.

[FupDup]

Alexandrix, on 31 July 2014 - 10:32 AM, said:

It'd probably have to be based off of throttle setting instead of ground speed.Otherwise,as you say,big mechs would have it much easier than small fast mechs.

That still doesn't completely fix the issue. A Banshee moving at 70% throttle isn't taking as big of a risk as a Locust moving at 70% throttle, because the Banshee is already a big and fairly slow target anyways.

[Yokaiko]

Livewyr, on 31 July 2014 - 10:28 AM, said:

That is something I think they should definitely have:

Reticule Sway according to speed. Something mechanical that is entirely manageable without being prone to divine RNG intervention!

Heck my cockpit is bouncing up and down, why not have a little play in the reticule.. (still PP because of the silliness that would ensure trying to change it, but at least you would not be sniping 1000 meters at 100 kph...)

Boy just what I said yesterday, cone of fire.

....but you didn't want to buff light mechs.

[Bishop Steiner]

Nikolai Lubkiewicz, on 29 July 2014 - 10:53 AM, said:

Greetings MechWarriors!

Please let us know which of Paul's ideas to balance PPC+Gauss you would prefer to see in-game!

Paul?

No. Just no to snail pace PPCs. Horrible idea. The first one mentioned is likely overly convoluted, as are most of the fixes hear (or overly simple, and addressing the wrong "issues"), but would be 100x preferable to the PPC slowdown.

[Mitsuragi]

The lore attributed great strain in the energy systems of mechs to fire a single gauss rifle. Why don't we limit it to just that? If you fire a gauss rifle you cannot fire any other weapons for 0.5 seconds. In this way you could chain fire gauss rifles. This also solves the problem of gauss + PPC.

[Blalok]

How about an idea from left field:

As an average-ish player who has a few mechs with PPC or gauss mounted, but more often is on the receiving end of the combo, the thing I find most frustrating is not the huge instant damage taken, but the way gauss and PPC hits frequently fail to show evidence of the hit, either by cockpit shake or the paperdoll, until the final hit. Why not just bring back Betty's 'warning: targeted' message and decrease the time before the targeting computer automatically selects the target in your reticle so we get a heads-up? More skilled players will still find a way around it, but it increases the challenge somewhat without altering any mechanics.

[ToxinTractor]

Mitsuragi, on 31 July 2014 - 11:51 AM, said:

The lore attributed great strain in the energy systems of mechs to fire a single gauss rifle. Why don't we limit it to just that? If you fire a gauss rifle you cannot fire any other weapons for 0.5 seconds. In this way you could chain fire gauss rifles. This also solves the problem of gauss + PPC.

I actually like this idea. Maybe while we charge the gauss rifle the lights of the mech will flicker?

[RetroActive]

How about none of the above? Gauss + PPC are fine as is. The perceived "problem" was fixed when you made jump jets suck.

What about the 2 Gauss + 2 PPC Dire Wolf? It's SUPPOSED to be devastating, it's a freaking Daishi. There are drawbacks to driving this whale that make up for its devastating fire power.

[Shuruga]

I would be against both PPC speed reduction or a complicated firing delay mechanism for the following reasons.

1. The speed reduction will make it much more difficult to hit a moving target, based on the typical ranges (er)PPCs are used.

The slower the weapon speed, the nearer you will actually need to move towards your target for still being able to hit with acceptable probability (based on player skill, not game mechanics). This will defeat the primary purpose of this weapon, as it was designed for long-range use. Playability will suffer.

Based on some of the proposed speeds of the previous posts, I would like to remind of the speed and range reduction of (in particular) the AC/20s. As a personal conclusion, I removed it from all my mechs due to unplayability and exchanged it for the "next best thing". I am sure you could observe such trends in weapons usage also generally with game statistics.

2. A complicated firing delay will make PPC/Gauss combinations unusable in terms of ergonomics. I want to know, when I can fire my weapons - reliably. It simply does not make sense, why every other weapon compared to the next should have a different firing mechanic, this is the 31st century, come on.

Anyway, I expect that if you carry out either one of the suggestions, players will simply switch to other weapons systems. You once again will remove diversity from the game. I fear that after many more of these changes we will all arrive at mediocre-playing mechs, with no single advantage or unique selling points. In essence, a boring game, where the difference in mechs is only in the name (Just my pessimistic outlook, after the recent JJ and modules changes, a bleak future seems ahead).

A good solution was already proposed in some of the posts: The PPC should have spread damage, whereas the Gauss rifle pin-point damage. Or tinker with convergence, or "randomness" of the hit locations, but (please) none of the first two suggestions. I am thinking along the lines "AC" versus "LBX-AC".

I even have one more suggestion: Place a button for game selection by which players can select "Table-Top rules compatibility" for their matches. All problems solved.

Kind regards
Shuruga

[ParaOrdnance]

I think that I understand why you want to do this, but I do have two observations that need to be brought into the light here.

First and foremost I am concerned about nerfing anything at this point. When direct fire weapons were steadily nerfed and then lrms buffed (around april I think) we lost a ton of players and I feel that the game nearly died. I certainly didn't enjoy play as much. In general the introduction of the clans have brought us partially out of this. However with the introduction of new competition in the form of star citizen and the like it becomes ever more important to watch out with the constant nerfing of direct fire weapons. Once again and with emphasis the nerfing of direct fire weapons NEARLY KILLED THIS GAME.

Secondly there's the point of the meta gamer, which is apparently what you are going after here. In general these guys are always going to find the weapons platform that allows them to do the most damage while at the same time taking the least damage. This is natural and should be seen as a natural byproduct of competition. The elo system that you have should keep these guys away from your less skilled players, and I really feel that this is where the modification should be. If you don't keep the meta away from the newbs then you are forever going to be chasing your tail on this. Six months from now it's going to be "you need to nerf ac5/3ppc timberwolves!" or something of the like.

So the real solution is to keep the meta away from the newbs and low elo players as much as possible. I feel that aggressive development here is going to do you more long run good than anything that I have seen proposed thus far. Also in order to show fairness between the high and low elo players I suggest that every nerf to direct fire come with a similar nerf to indirect fire weapons. "You can have your lack of 2xppc 2xgauss dire wolves but you also get a 35% bump to ams effectiveness" or something of the like. This will allow the high elo guys to think that you at least kind of care about them.

In short and to wrap this up I feel that if you do not balance your nerf/buff of the low and high elo players and instead continue to pander to the least common denominator at the expense of the experienced player you will once again break this game. Tread lightly friends...

[Madok Pryde]

I personally like the idea of limitations on the number of high pinpoint damage weapons fired at once.
In my opinion, limiting 2ppc or 1 pock gauss is the way to go. It keps the "meta" player from instability some noob.
Steps in the right direction, obviously will need some tweeking, but a start.

Edited by Madok Pryde, 31 July 2014 - 02:25 PM.