Jump to content

- - - - -

August 8Th Weapon Balance Update And Hotfix - Feedback


367 replies to this topic

#21 TercieI

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Littlest Helper
  • Littlest Helper
  • 8,163 posts
  • LocationThe Far Country

Posted 08 August 2014 - 03:44 PM

View PostDeathlike, on 08 August 2014 - 03:42 PM, said:

Seriously, this ERLL should have been gradual nerfing.... not a multi-faceted nerf.


As with all nerfs/buffs. Small, incremental, frequent...

#22 Daneiel

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 490 posts
  • LocationSheridan

Posted 08 August 2014 - 03:46 PM

PGI still don't get it !!!! To nerf heavies and assaults they killing the light and mediums - 2 seconds burn time is death for these mechs . PGI ask your self - why you have so much more people playing with heavy and assaults and not enough with mediums and lights ? Every single nerf focused on the big boys hit twice hard on the medium and lights !!!!
If your problem is the Timber wolf , Dire wolf and Warhawk , try to do it as personal quirks for these mechs , not stomping the mechs which needed to be the backbone of the game !

#23 Sandpit

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 17,419 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationArkansas

Posted 08 August 2014 - 03:48 PM

View PostSandpit, on 08 August 2014 - 03:47 PM, said:

i called it 12:30 last night lol

PGI's not nearly as slick as he thinks he is and there's already people cheering him for "listening to the community feedback" They knew dam well taht the CERLL nerf was way too drastic. That's specifically why he left it out of Paul's feedback thread and launched it today as a "surprise" because he also knew that he'd get praised by the sheep because it looked like they actually listened to them

Now everyone (or at least a good chunk who were only concerned about the CERLL because the PPC doesn't affect them personally) will go back to "normal" noise levels and the PPC nerf stays. It's not hard to figure out what he did, how he did it, and why.

that's all this is and was.
#stillignored #disingenuous

#24 CHH Badkarma

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 831 posts

Posted 08 August 2014 - 03:49 PM

View PostNikolai Lubkiewicz, on 08 August 2014 - 03:20 PM, said:

Please let us know what you think of the latest news regarding today's weapon balance changes!


to little, to late.
wonder how the pendulum will swing next?

#25 DEN_Ninja

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blade
  • The Blade
  • 1,097 posts
  • LocationCrossing, Draconis March

Posted 08 August 2014 - 03:51 PM

View PostKelenas, on 08 August 2014 - 03:31 PM, said:

Hey, I know this guy. Long time no see.
And thanks PGI, maybe this'll quell a little of the rage that's been around all day. Also this means I can put my 4 ermedium, 3 erlarge timberwolf back together.


-shrug- The forums are like toxic waste dumps. The more I stay away the less I have to digest and sigh at.

#26 MischiefSC

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Benefactor
  • The Benefactor
  • 16,697 posts

Posted 08 August 2014 - 03:51 PM

- DIRECT ATTACKS ON PEOPLE -

Don't do it. I get the desire to blame Paul or what have you but nobody here knows him. It's not cool and it devalues your argument.

I complained like everyone else about the last round of nerfs, especially the ghost heat one. I complain about PGI on several topics and I've got no issue being vocal about it; I'm a consumer, I'm paying for something and I want my opinion heard.

Directly insulting someone like that though just isn't cool or fair or right. It's also not productive. I could do one of my usual rants about the psychology and brain chemistry and crap involved in how that gets responded to but I've got to think everyone here is bright enough to realize that at some level.

Don't do that. Get rid of the whole 'fire so and so' or 'this person is terrible'. It is at its core an ad hominem and not a real argument on a point. The ghost heat nerf was not good. It got argued against and debated on its own merits and, happy day, got rolled back. We knew Clans were on the OP side of things and nerfs were coming and the PPC nerf was over-due 6-12 months ago.

Argue a point and a topic, don't attack people. Whatever business decisions PGI makes regarding its staff are none of our concern unless one of them starts spouting hate-speech or otherwise becomes an issue for society at large. And no, being part of balance decisions you don't like in a computer game does not qualify.

Again. Trying to blame a specific person or direct your dislike at someone by name is effectively an ad hominem approach to voicing your frustration with changes in the game. It's bad and we've got enough drama without taking up the flag of logical fallacies. Argue the point, not the person. Otherwise your arguments are devalued by the method you use to present them.

#27 Herr Vorragend

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 583 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 08 August 2014 - 03:52 PM

This leaves the awful fire-mechanic of the gauss. Please roll that back, too.

Daneiel is right. The beam duration is still far too long.

Holy crap, you opened too much cans at the same time. Chaotic engineering, too much messed up. MWO was overall more fun in winter 2k13 :D

#28 keith

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 1,272 posts

Posted 08 August 2014 - 03:53 PM

so y are not things done in small changes? burn time in .25 sec patches? then some heat. then gather data per patch.

#29 Sandpit

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 17,419 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationArkansas

Posted 08 August 2014 - 03:55 PM

View PostMischiefSC, on 08 August 2014 - 03:51 PM, said:



Don't do it. I get the desire to blame Paul or what have you but nobody here knows him. It's not cool and it devalues your argument.

Personal attacks = bad

"Blaming" Paul for these nerfs and hotfixes = accountability.

HE posted the threads
HE asked for feedback
HE ignored it
HE concocted this hotfix
HE did this so HE does need to be held accountable for it.

That doesn't mean discuss him on a personal level but HE is the lead designer and heading this up, so yes HE in particularly, needs to be held accountable. That doesnt' mean attack him though, but that also doesn't mean he's not to blame

#30 Punkass

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 212 posts

Posted 08 August 2014 - 03:56 PM

Now the real question is: How many of the customers that you've lost over the past 24 hours still give a s***?

#31 darkkterror

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 814 posts

Posted 08 August 2014 - 03:57 PM

View PostDeathlike, on 08 August 2014 - 03:42 PM, said:

I swear, the "competitive scene" that Paul looked to for feedback seemed like the following:
1) Secret Squirrels (do these people still exist?)


Posted Image

#32 Deathlike

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Littlest Helper
  • Littlest Helper
  • 29,240 posts
  • Location#NOToTaterBalance #BadBalanceOverlordIsBad

Posted 08 August 2014 - 03:59 PM

View Postkeith, on 08 August 2014 - 03:53 PM, said:

so y are not things done in small changes? burn time in .25 sec patches? then some heat. then gather data per patch.


This would require understanding "telemetry"... that word that PGI uses, but doesn't quite know what that means.

Instead of continuous testing over weeks (or at least one week), the itchy trigger finger on the "save" button for notepad or whatever text editor to modify the XML data has to get stuff all done in one swoop! Why bother testing yourself when the masses are perfect candidates for a massive change that ISN'T a mechanics change... just numbers on an XML file.

#33 MechB Kotare

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 720 posts
  • LocationHuntress

Posted 08 August 2014 - 03:59 PM

View PostMischiefSC, on 08 August 2014 - 03:42 PM, said:

I'm pleasantly surprised with the rollback of the ghost heat changes on the CERLL.

I get the PPC nerf. I understand how it's going to upset some people but I get it. PPCs needed the hammer and hard. Maybe it can be dialed up some if it's just not viable but people get shot by AC10s, they'll get shot by PPCs too.

As to the change in burn time on the CERLL, I'd rather see it get damage down to 10 and the associated heat bump to 9, along with a range reduction to exactly match the ISERLL. The 30% burn rate increase is going to hit lighter mechs who counted on it for a primary weapon. Brawling heavies and assaults (Timbers, Warhawks) won't notice it nearly so much. Neither will Warhawk/Dire Wolf snipers; they'll have longer time on target. The hit and move mechs like lights and mediums though will find themselves restricted to LRMs for long range or CERMLs for short/mid range.


Anything really. make 10 damage. nerf Optimal range to 800m and max range accordingly. But 2sec beam duration makes it still useless.

#34 Perihelion Jack

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Death Star
  • 60 posts

Posted 08 August 2014 - 03:59 PM

This is classic PGI...

Dev 1: "Hey guys, those clan ERs seem too strong."
Dev 2: " Let's play with the numbers and see if we can fix it. We can do that ourselves, without having any meetings."
Dev 1: "OK, (changes numbers at random) Done. Now let's hot fix it into the game."
Dev 2: " Oh, I got inspired to change some other stuff too while I was in the bathroom. It'll be great."
-Patch-
Community: "AAARGH! RAGE!"
Dev 1: "It looks like the players don't like our changes."
Dev 2: "You still pay attention to those guys?"
Dev 1: "No, but it was all over my twitter account."
Dev 2: "Wow, that is a lot of feedback. Maybe we should change it back."
Dev 1: "Yeah, but what should we roll back?"
Dev 2: *Throws dart, blindfolded* "There. We'll fix that."
Dev 1: "There, I changed it back. Maybe I should write a post about this."
Dev 2: "OK, but make us look good..."
Dev 1: "...um, I'll try..."

Meanwhile, Minesweeper has had a huge influx of players the likes of which have not been seen since the early days of Windows 95.

I can even remember the last patch that didn't need to be hot-fixed or rolled back because it broke the game outright, or created a situation where the players had major technical issues. Everyone in the building there should be embarrassed and ashamed to be a part of this debacle, from Russ the boss to Rosie the cleaning lady. The reason the "Now Hiring" sign has never been removed is probably that the local McDonald's is also hiring, and people with dignity and pride in their work would rather have a job there; or that all of the people with technical expertise in your area have already applied, then been told who they were working for, and quit without a second thought.

I'll bet that the bums in your area have moved further away from your building to ask for money, for fear of being associated with you. At least, when I give the crackhead some money, I know I'm helping that guy catch a buzz. I am beginning to feel like giving PGI/IGP my money is less effective (and certainly less rewarding) than that.

Just plain amateur.

Edited by Aphelion Dax, 08 August 2014 - 04:04 PM.


#35 Captain Quirk

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Wrath
  • Wrath
  • 27 posts
  • LocationOhio

Posted 08 August 2014 - 03:59 PM

Back Peddling Ensues

#36 Lexx

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Clamps
  • The Clamps
  • 740 posts
  • LocationSlung below a mech's arm shooting nothing but dirt

Posted 08 August 2014 - 04:00 PM

View PostStaggerCheck, on 08 August 2014 - 03:25 PM, said:

Russ, Niko... anyone... I was getting a widget warning of possible heat spikes larger than normal while 1 Clan ER Large Laser and 1 Clan Large Pulse Laser were mounted. In the testing grounds, the combination would indeed produce a heat spike in the neighborhood of 33% on my Summoner. Not sure if they were intentionally tied together or not.


The IS large pulse laser causes ghost heat when fired with either the large laser or the er large laser. why would it be any different for the clans?

IMO the pulse lasers should be separate entities when it comes to ghost heat, because aren't they already penalized enough with the extra tonnage and shorter range?

But alas, they cause ghost heat when fired together with any of the other large lasers.

#37 Bartholomew bartholomew

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Urban Commando
  • Urban Commando
  • 1,250 posts
  • LocationInner sphere drop point

Posted 08 August 2014 - 04:00 PM

View Postkeith, on 08 August 2014 - 03:53 PM, said:

so y are not things done in small changes? burn time in .25 sec patches? then some heat. then gather data per patch.

It was a knee jerk to the clan stompfest.

Still should not have happened.

There are so many other ways to balance that have been suggested. And I think it is time to look it all over and do a total balance overhaul. With a very hard look at what mechs got destroyed in various nerfhammer episodes and why. And then possibly use quirks to keep it from happening again.

#38 Revis Volek

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 7,247 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationBack in the Pilots chair

Posted 08 August 2014 - 04:01 PM

Well HOORAY!

Thank for listening guys and gals!

I am very pleased with the change...but the beam duration still seems a bit out of "balance" with the other lasers. Playing with my Adder and Stormcrow I now have to expose myself for over 6 seconds to do full damage if I fire both laser at once double it if I want to chain fire.....

This is going to be devastaing to my ability to support my team from mid range or closer as IS and even Clan A/C and IS Lasers are going to be significatly higer in DPS, recylce time, duration, etc. Now I must leave my team, in a teamwork game, for survivbility purposes while still using my weapon in the only role it has. Which is range Sniper/Harraser...this is a semi-viable role in SOLO play but when I am with my group this is not the case. This build is a burden on a slower non-IS Mechs in group play because you are one away from the team, two not able to get back or jockey position as easily unless you have jump jets you are almost a lost mech. If you get some Damage it's a bonus but you cannot help the team if it goes to brawl as effectivly and even then you will have to keep your distance since you are sacrificing you torso twist ability to put down full damage because of the INSANE beam duration.

Still want to see how it runs in live matches more over the weekend, but I hope Russ, Paul and Niko continue to work on this to find a happy medium for us all.

And enough with the asking for refunds and throwing you toys in the dirt. The men and women of PGI seem to want to work on this with us so lets put our adult hats on and get to work Mechwarriors! Just because they rolled out a heavy nerf doesnt mean they didnt think it was the best thing for the game. I dont know many people who go to work and screw each other into more work on purpose. Then again i dont know Paul..... :D.

Thanks for the hard work!

#39 Lukoi Banacek

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • WC 2018 Top 12 Qualifier
  • WC 2018 Top 12 Qualifier
  • 4,353 posts

Posted 08 August 2014 - 04:02 PM

Burn time at two seconds still incredibly harmful.

PGI I appreciate the rollback but its still not a good solution for this problem you think exists.

Pinpoint damage (IS AC and all PPC) is still the most pressing problem, especially when combined with still effective JJ combinations.

Desynching Gauss from PPC helped withe a niche problem (great) of secondary import.

ERLL with increased heat will help reduce the near heat neutrality problem you feel is compromising balance but the 2-second burn means players are heavily penalized against item number one here....it is not necessary or helpful to balance. Nor would it be balancing to increase IS lasers to compensate. They are not the problem. FLD ballistics are the crux of balance in the game.

Test ERLL with the increased but the original burn time ffs.

You introduce too many variable shifts at once and then cannot see the forest for the trees. I appreciate you listening to some of our feedback.

Here is some OFT repeated advice from these forums. Stop with the massive pendulum swings and stop with the significant vector changes in packages. Less is more.

Slow is smooth. Smooth is fast.

#40 Punkass

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 212 posts

Posted 08 August 2014 - 04:03 PM

You know, for all the talk of having mature and constructive dialog with the devs, it really is sad that the forums have to turn into a river of flame to get some sort of response from the devs. Just sad, because it shouldn't have to be that way. Next time, read your feedback threads. Seriously, read them. They contain useful information about how people feel about your proposed changes.





16 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 16 guests, 0 anonymous users