950 replies to this topic

[WonderSparks]

Hmm... Another ludicrous "solution" to a "problem"...
What is all of this supposed to even do? Sure, PPCs become harder to use at range, makes sense with the accuracy loss in TT. Although your reasoning about PPCs (and especially ER PPCs) not being very long-ranged weapons is just insane, I do believe this weapon system was supposed to be specifically for long-ranged engagements.
And then the poor ER Large Laser. Those changes do not seem terribly warranted to me, as, in my experience, the C-ER LL was not particularly cool-running, despite my frequent use of "overly heat sinked" loadouts (most of my 'Mechs have a heat management between 1.5 and 2).

All in all, it just seems like you may have thought too little about these changes.
I do not know how they will work out, however, but if things turn out as sour as some seem to believe they will... I suppose you will have your answers to why.

[Thorqemada]

ERPPC:
Imho the ERPPC is the Energy Weapon with the longest range and probably a Weapon for Midrange to Longrange - Problem is that the ERPPC is good at any range and delivers 10 PPFLD multiplied by the amount the Weapon Carrier shots.
The Projctile Speed Change will desynch it from the Gauss which is good.

Charge Mechanic:
When the Players broadly do not like the Charge Mechanic (i understand that you miss the charge up shot very oftten at Bad Pingers, low Performance Computers and high Combat Action Situations bcs it is hard to use, easy to miss it ouside of a smooth running MWO + cool blood Sniping Situation.
Work instead with Cooldowns and control the number of simutaneously fired (ER)PPC + Gauss.

CERLL:
Fieldtest will Show the effects of the Change - as usual Players be expected to find ways to do as much damage as possible at the lowest risk.

Happy Weekend

Edited by Thorqemada, 07 August 2014 - 10:16 PM.

[Deshay]

So sad. Give me my money back!

[Sug]

I am excited for these changes.

[Ren Kurogane]

C-ERLL = C-ER Laser Pointer now?

2secs duration (mhm...)
9.0 base heat (mhm...)
12 HS multiplier (uhh...)
firing 2 or more will incur HS penalty (lol?)

well...will try to adapt and change , just bring the next shitstorm, please

[Stonewall211]

Catering to the idiots who think clans are op I see. PPC nerf? Fine, but the clan erlarge lasers were just fine the way they were!

Edited by joshownage, 07 August 2014 - 09:38 PM.

[Xavier]

[Igor Kozyrev]

• C-ERLL beam duration increased from 1.5 -> 2.0 seconds.
  
• C-ERLL base heat value increased from 8.5 -> 9.0.
  
• C-ERLL minimum heat penalty (number of weapons fired simultaneously that will trigger Heat Scale) decreased from 3 -> 2. This means you can fire 1 for free, but firing 2 or more will incur the Heat Scale penalty.
  
• C-ERLL heat penalty (Heat Scale multiplier) increased from 3.0 -> 12.0.

I have two letters for that. F and U. F U

Edited by Igor Kozyrev, 07 August 2014 - 09:35 PM.

[Mister Blastman]

Roadbeer, on 07 August 2014 - 09:25 PM, said:

This thread.

Is like watching a train wreck
In slow motion
that's on my DVR
and the cable is out.

It's hypnotic how this just keeps happening.

You called?

[MauttyKoray]

As an IS mech pilot, I feel the 2 C ER Large heat penalty is OVER COMPENSATING for the balance. I own both Timber Wolfs and Summoners, so I will try out C ER Large penalty play personally, but I feel that a penalty for firing 2 C ER Large is an imbalance and should not take place. AT MINIMUM 3 C ER Large should be required to trigger ghost heat, though again I will have to play with C ER Large builds on Timber Wolf and Summoner builds over SEVERAL DAYS to make an accurate judgement.

This 1 C ER Large Laser penalty reduction would also theoretically be a HUGE 12v10 ISvsClan CW IMBALANCE if implemented. Remember that most of your playerbase are Battletech/Mechwarrior veterans who understand that clan tech was SUPPOSED to be superior and rely on the fact that IS lances are 4 mechs and Clan stars are 5 mechs.

[Tiger Shark]

So the only two clan mechs I play often, PPC+2ML KitFox, and 2LL+5ML Stormcrow will be really tough to play now. This also breaks a lot of stock load outs.
Tying convergence and reticle shake to mech speed instead of perfect pinpoint damage, or the energy meter solution is better than the continuous cycle of adding more and more ghost heat. I can't really remember which weapons has which ghost heat limits anymore.
Solving the underlying pinpoint issue will make this game viable in the long term and not kill the BattleTech Mech Warrior IP.

[Sandpit]

as I posted in another thread

Sandpit, on 07 August 2014 - 09:29 PM, said:

This is actually how this will all play out.

The clan erll nerf will either get adjusted or removed completely to more "acceptable" limits. There will be just enough good will made from the gesture that most will forget all about the PPC nerf

that's how this is going to wind up playing out. Then everything will settle to "acceptable" noise levels in the community. I just don't see how Paul can ignore 50+ pages of feedback (all of which was negative regarding BOTH of his suggestions) that offered about at LEAST 3 different VIABLE solutions that everyone WAS fairly positive about. I can safely say for the first time I'm glad I didn't get a clan pack.
Not because of the nerf but because that would have meant I handed Paul part of my paycheck...

[ulziel]

so this is the change that is coming what I'm now wondering is what will occur for Community Warfare. Is this needed to make it 12v10 ISvsClans games more balanced. Who is testing this or is it from the 12v12 matches. Those are not the whole meta of the game as pug drops are where it really excels. When wll some of the needless nerfing to systems end.. I can see a charge or of timer cool down for the PPC and Gauss system. What bothers me is your just hosing mechs that come stock with the ppc or CERLL. This is short sided and just makes me sad.
Test this on the Test Servers for people to give input back to you before changes role out that effect 100% of the player base.

[Fire and Salt]

Archon, on 07 August 2014 - 08:54 PM, said:

On top of that, the CER LL was ABSOLUTELY FINE and DID NOT NEED TO BE FIXED. Just like the AC2. This sucks.

I'm pretty sure I know whats going on.

PGI nerfed the ERLL and the AC2 for the exact same reason.

Its because they are looking at the damage output of the weapon, (or mechs using the weapon), and are determining that the weapon is too powerful.

The disconnect is that, of course, this game is not about damaging mechs - its about destroying them.

Damage output does not equal effectiveness, if that damage is spread out all over the enemy mech.

This is why the AC2 was nerfed un-necessarily, and it is also why the ERLL is getting a much heaver nerf than needed.



Maybe you need to be looking at KILLS instead of DAMAGE done?

[Sandpit]

kyrdragon, on 07 August 2014 - 09:35 PM, said:

I know this post is going to get utterly lost in the sea of rage on this thread. But I have to say something.

What about the Adder? This is my favorite mech, and its already difficult to play. It can only mount 4 weapons at the most. With the nerf to PPCs the already extremely hot stock prime build which cannot stand off against anything in 1v1 combat is going to suffer a lot. And with the 1.5s beam duration on ER-LLs, it already gets the mech vaporized by pinpoint damage, 2s is going to be a joke. The mech cannot even boat medium lasers if it wanted to, because as I stated it can only mount 4 weapons(unless you consider the flamer a weapon), and its very slow for enguaging in close range combat with short-range weapons.

I'm not a meta player, I play for fun, not to win. I play with usually ballanced setups. But do you know what these changes are basically telling me to do? Roll meta. Just to have fun. I don't want to spam gauss. Or spam LRM-50. I want to have fun.

That being said, my constructive suggestions:
Link PPC cooldown with Gauss, give PPCs the Gauss cooldown rate in this case, when PPCs or Gauss is fired, the other weapon type cycles at 50% of the normal Gauss cooldown speed.

Lasers? Just reduce the damage instead of obliterating the weapon. This one doesn't need to be so complicated, seriously.

that's exactly what several of us told him in the feedback thread. Nerfing a weapon based on boating only makes those who DON'T boat it useless. Yet, here we are with exactly that.

All the ones wanting to dismiss our feedback as "QQ" well ya know what? Had you participated in the feedback and gave an even bigger voice to it, we might not have this now. So the next time you accuse someone of "QQing" at least read enough to determine whether or not they're trying to give some sort of solution and alternative.

[Gaussfather]

Instead of all this nerfing of weapons, just slow down the game to 10% speed so we have time to avoid all the shots... kind of like what they do in Matrix but with Mechs... but but, maybe for balance only slow down the Clan mechs to 20% normal speed! Yeah that's the ticket!

BTW I can understand Clan lasers are supposed to better than IS... fine... what has ruined the game in my mind is the AMOUNT OF LRM's Clan Mechs can carry/shoot, and the stupid module changes... now every game its just about avoiding artillary and bombing strikes and LURM WARFARE... how little skill does it take to launch LRMs and Arti-strikes compared to direct fire weapons like PPCs? Nerf those please and leave the direct fire weapons alone. At least you have to focus to use those... PGI... I never rode the bandwagon about you being arrogant developers who don't listen to your CLIENTS, but lately I'm having to agree with the people who started playing the game in BETA...

You are basically riding on the goodwill of a franchise you didn't create. In the meantime you seem really good at disappointing a core audience who want the game to succeed and be fun for us to play... why is that??? Maybe the organizational culture needs some shaking up??? Maybe you don't know how to really run a stakeholder inclusive process? It requires more than letting us know shortly in advance about what you want to do... it requires LISTENING and taking on our suggestions about how the game should evolve...

Edited by Jman88, 07 August 2014 - 09:47 PM.

[BLOOD WOLF]

Jman88, on 07 August 2014 - 09:46 PM, said:

Instead of all this nerfing of weapons, just slow down the game to 10% speed so we have time to avoid all the shots... kind of like what they do in Matrix but with Mechs... but but, maybe for balance only slow down the Clan mechs to 20% normal speed! Yeah that's the ticket!

BTW I can understand Clan lasers are supposed to better than IS... fine... what has ruined the game in my mind is the AMOUNT OF LRM's Clan Mechs can carry/shoot, and the stupid module changes... now every game its just about avoiding artillary and bombing strikes and LURM WARFARE... how little skill does it take to launch LRMs and Arti-strikes compared to direct fire weapons like PPCs? Nerf those please and leave the direct fire weapons alone. At least you have to focus to use those... PGI... I never rode the bandwagon about being arrogant developers who don't listen to your CLIENTS, but lately I'm having to agree with the people who started playing the game in BETA...

You are basically riding on the goodwill of a franchise you didn't create. In the meantime you seem really good at dissappointing a core audience who want the game to succeed and be fun for us to play... why is that??? Maybe the organizational culture needs some shaking up??? Maybe you don't know how to really run a stakeholder inclusive process? It requires more than letting us know shortly in advance about what you want to do... it requires LISTENING and taking on our suggestions about how the game should evolve...

A little unfair. Why is it when they listen, they are praised. Then they go an nerf something and all of a sudden they are not listening?

does 5+groups ring a bell

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 07 August 2014 - 09:49 PM.

[Sandpit]

BLOOD WOLF, on 07 August 2014 - 09:47 PM, said:

A little unfair

not really and just don't dude. don't even start. Paul made a bad decision and he's getting called on it. don't derail this by trying to turn this into a personal argument about your opinion on his opinion.

this has nothing to do with them being praised for listening. this has to do with Paul making a bad decision regarding a nerf in spite of FIFTY PLUS pages of feedback from his community that HE ASKED FOR and then completely ignored.

Edited by Sandpit, 07 August 2014 - 09:51 PM.

[Augustus Martelus II]

I don t have other words for this....

[Texas Merc]