367 replies to this topic

[Sandpit]

ENS Puskin, on 08 August 2014 - 05:41 PM, said:

No dude each coin has 2 sides otherwise it would become one sided party.

no dude, your idea of "good balance" is just nerfing what you hate.

ENS Puskin, on 08 August 2014 - 05:34 PM, said:

Yes i like that becuase i hate Clanners. This is what the universe need!

Simbacca, on 08 August 2014 - 05:50 PM, said:

I have been advocating that a long time.

PPC/ER PPC + Gauss/AC cannot fire within 2 (or 1) seconds of each other. This solves the poptart issue while keeping it a viable tactic, and deals with the massive Alpha Strike issue without affecting overall mech firepower.

What we need now is to restore the Jump Jets...

so clunky trigger mechanics that really make no sense and aren't needed are better than...

Reno Blade, on 07 August 2014 - 02:19 PM, said:

So it is closer to a Flight sim with missile lock (or actual MWO LRM) just not the lock but the convergence.

Sounds a bit like in "Engarde" when Justin Allard tried to lock onto the Rifleman, but the woods made the targeting system unable to and he switched to manual aiming and fired without a "hard lock" of his weapons.

It would definitely help against the twitch-shooting element of these weapons, but it would not help against the power of these builds.
Of course if the convergence is depending on loadout, somehow...
Well, I don't know about the speed, but if we had the 6 reticules mentioned above converging like this, it could work.
Please excuse the bad animation.

Sandpit, on 07 August 2014 - 04:03 PM, said:

After a conversation with someone recently I knew there was a gap in understanding and communication in what I was talking about regarding "convergence".

Yes, you could adjust it for things like jumping, running, walking, standing still, and heat (which were all accounted for in to-hit modifiers in the TT game)

When standing still no modifier to the convergence speed
walking could equal + .1 second
running + .2
Jumping + .3
Heat modifier could scale. More heat = more modifier


I really honestly feel that this would fix and alleviate almost every problem with FLD and PPD without removing either of those components.

Sandpit, on 07 August 2014 - 04:34 PM, said:

beams wouldn't need to be shortened because lasers would still be pinpoint. That would be their advantage over ballistics. They're DoT but they're pinpoint accurate so no convergence delay for lasers.

Sandpit, on 07 August 2014 - 04:54 PM, said:

that's the other part of it.

If chain fired I would never have it set up where a single weapon cause recoil. Anything above the equivalent of a single AC20 though would
Examples
AC10 + AC20 = recoil causing crosshairs to jump slightly
AC10 + AC10 = no recoil
AC5+AC5+AC5 = no recoil
AC20+AC20 = recoil

it could be set to a sliding scale as well. The more you pop off at any one time the bigger the recoil. Chain fire would negate that penalty. Lasers, again, have no recoil added to them in order to offset their heat and DoT mechanics.

I think this would create more diversity in builds, alleviate FLD, make lasers more desirable, and just balance the game overall. I'm jsut tired of all these complicated mechanics when there are MUCH simpler solutions to be had

?

[MischiefSC]

CHH Badkarma, on 08 August 2014 - 05:58 PM, said:

needed it ages ago? where have you been? thats were we practically started. Screwed up hit reg nothi withstanding, slowmo PPCs, yeah who wants to lead a target by half a click just to have them side step the shot.

They work fine; just like ACs do. Have you ever shot an AC in MW:O? Are you saying that ACs don't work? Same speed as AC10s, 30% faster than AC20s with no projectile drop, slightly slower than AC5s.

They work fine.

[Sandpit]

or these?
http://mwomercs.com/...oats-and-clans/
and this
http://mwomercs.com/...age__p__2576981
?

I would be a lot more forgiving if they didn't have a ton of other options to choose from that are perfectly viable

[CHH Badkarma]

MischiefSC, on 08 August 2014 - 06:04 PM, said:

They work fine; just like ACs do. Have you ever shot an AC in MW:O? Are you saying that ACs don't work? Same speed as AC10s, 30% faster than AC20s with no projectile drop, slightly slower than AC5s.

They work fine.

forgive me forum warrior but yes I have shot A/Cs. I have been here since closed Beta, so unless you have, go pound sand. I have been dealing with this crap a lot longer than you have, tolerated more asinine nerfs and keyboard warriors like yourself. Go shovel it

Edited by CHH Badkarma, 08 August 2014 - 06:07 PM.

[Sable]

Now that the ghost heat change was taken out and my rage has been squashed i can provide a more clear headed feedback.

I do like the PPC changes, they just feel so right, Having flashbacks to to my childhood playing mechwarrior 2 energy ball PPCs. Thanks for that, it was long coming.

Clan ER Large Laser feedback. I went into the training grounds and then did a few matches with my only mech i use CERLLs on which is one of my timberwolves and the beams just seem too long burning, like awkwardly long burning. The sound effect even fades away long before the beams do. The higher heat seems fine but they just feel... awkward now. The longer burn time doesn't match up with the other weapons at all. I would be ok with a shorter range or slightly higher heat but the 2 second burn time just doesn't feel right. I understand the "more leet skills" to land all the damage where you want it but it just feels wrong. By wrong i mean it feels unnatural in comparison with the other weapons. I'd almost feel like taking Clan large pulse laser with the extra 2 tons just so they wouldn't hang out there in the air so long. Thats when you KNOW its bad.

Edited by Sable, 08 August 2014 - 06:09 PM.

[MrHumble]

Cannot say how much I hate the nerfs....

Energy ball ERPPCs? That's why they were useless in the MechWarrior games in multiplayer.

PPCs should be borderline electrical charges....not floating light...

ERLLAS are now flashlights....and flashlights that say "Here I am!! Shoot Me!!"

[MischiefSC]

CHH Badkarma, on 08 August 2014 - 06:06 PM, said:

forgive me forum warrior but yes I have shot A/Cs. I have been here since closed Beta, so unless you have, go pound sand. I have been dealing with this crap a lot longer than you have, tolerated more asinine nerfs and keyboard warriors like yourself. Go shovel it

Hey, nice ad hominem. I would too if I was trying to support an invalid point, I mean it's not like you have anything actually legit to base your point on. You even wrapped it up with 'I've been playing a couple of weeks longer than you and even though you've got ~8,000 matches in MW:O you will NEVER UNDERSTAND THE DEPTH OF MY GLORIOUS, UNQUESTIONABLE WISDOM AND INSIGHT THOSE FEW EXTRA WEEKS GIVE ME' bit.

Classic, never gets old. Thanks for that.

So, to clarify, you're wrong. The PPC nerf isn't bad - the PPC still works and works great. Been playing it on IS mechs, watching other people use it and while the speed adjustment takes getting used to for aiming they still work just like before. It's a light weight AC10 with no ammo but high heat for energy hardpoints.

PPC nerfs good. CERLL needs nerfs but not these. Moving onward then.

[Lukoi Banacek]

ENS Puskin, on 08 August 2014 - 05:41 PM, said:

No dude each coin has 2 sides otherwise it would become one sided party.

You're right, each coin has two sides. This however is a game. If you're going to speak of balance and going to try to beat on people's arguments, at least recognize how the game actually works and what pros and cons are already in place. If anyone seems to be advocating a one sided party, its you with your baseless anecdotal example and inability to note that CERLL already had a significantly longer burn time, and you want an even longer one.

Knee-jerk fixes do not help with game balance in any game and it's bad for the health of the paying, customer base PGI wants to keep around.

Not to say things had to stay as they were. These fixes are an attempt to bring balance to keep the game attractive, but these attempts were hamfisted and poorly thought out given the current optimal weapons which REMAIN IS AC.

[Jettrik Ryflix]

Let me get this straight... the clan pilots are complaining about how OP the Inner Sphere is? Because of their PPC/Gauss?

How else is a decent Inner Sphere pilot supposed to take down a Timber Wolf? Has nobody been paying attention to the full Clan team vs. full IS team statistics?

Fighting the clanners is hard enough, and with the new Particle Projectile Slugs, it just got harder.

[CHH Badkarma]

MischiefSC, on 08 August 2014 - 06:16 PM, said:

Hey, nice ad hominem. I would too if I was trying to support an invalid point, I mean it's not like you have anything actually legit to base your point on. You even wrapped it up with 'I've been playing a couple of weeks longer than you and even though you've got ~8,000 matches in MW:O you will NEVER UNDERSTAND THE DEPTH OF MY GLORIOUS, UNQUESTIONABLE WISDOM AND INSIGHT THOSE FEW EXTRA WEEKS GIVE ME' bit.

Classic, never gets old. Thanks for that.

So, to clarify, you're wrong. The PPC nerf isn't bad - the PPC still works and works great. Been playing it on IS mechs, watching other people use it and while the speed adjustment takes getting used to for aiming they still work just like before. It's a light weight AC10 with no ammo but high heat for energy hardpoints.

PPC nerfs good. CERLL needs nerfs but not these. Moving onward then.

I think you need to return the soapbox to the store you stole it from.
nice pseudo intellectual keyboard gasm there forum warrior. I am glad you like the nerf so much. Luckily my opinion of it and the vast majority of others out number yours.

You would make a wonderful member of the goonz the way you rationalize things.

End of line...

Edited by CHH Badkarma, 08 August 2014 - 06:25 PM.

[wanderer]

ENS Puskin, on 08 August 2014 - 04:19 PM, said:

Well this is not first time and also not last time. They doing mistakes becuase they are only humans so it is up to us users to let them know if we do not like something. Shame on you forum guys who replied to the feedback without actually trying new changes, shame on you!!!

You mean the replies that resulted in them changing the nerf bomb to CERLL's from "decapitate" to merely "severely reduce in power"?

Most of us were ticked because Paul's idea of changes were sweeping and didn't allow for us to see how one change worked as three were stacked on it at once.

And the biggest one on the pile, a severe ghost heat modifier, is now off (at least minimally). This makes it somewhat easier to gauge the others (heat, beam duration) when the hotfix goes in.

[SVK Puskin]

Lukoi, on 08 August 2014 - 06:18 PM, said:

You're right, each coin has two sides. This however is a game. If you're going to speak of balance and going to try to beat on people's arguments, at least recognize how the game actually works and what pros and cons are already in place. If anyone seems to be advocating a one sided party, its you with your baseless anecdotal example and inability to note that CERLL already had a significantly longer burn time, and you want an even longer one.

Knee-jerk fixes do not help with game balance in any game and it's bad for the health of the paying, customer base PGI wants to keep around.

Not to say things had to stay as they were. These fixes are an attempt to bring balance to keep the game attractive, but these attempts were hamfisted and poorly thought out given the current optimal weapons which REMAIN IS AC.

I want longer duration? Where did you get that from? I know what i want but i have never said that! I am Davion and i do not mind clan weapons balancing but i had to responde to the bitching!

[Mystere]

MischiefSC, on 08 August 2014 - 06:16 PM, said:

So, to clarify, you're wrong. The PPC nerf isn't bad - the PPC still works and works great. Been playing it on IS mechs, watching other people use it and while the speed adjustment takes getting used to for aiming they still work just like before. It's a light weight AC10 with no ammo but high heat for energy hardpoints.

But, the (ER)PPC has come full circle.

Now, imagine for a second if it wasn't touched at all since the beginning. How much time and effort would have been saved? How much progress could have been achieved?

(I was also tempted to ask how much anguish and resentment could have been avoided. But I decided not to given the nature of much of the forum denizens.)

[Sandpit]

CHH Badkarma, on 08 August 2014 - 06:06 PM, said:

go pound sand.

leave me out of this please

[SVK Puskin]

wanderer, on 08 August 2014 - 06:26 PM, said:

You mean the replies that resulted in them changing the nerf bomb to CERLL's from "decapitate" to merely "severely reduce in power"?

Most of us were ticked because Paul's idea of changes were sweeping and didn't allow for us to see how one change worked as three were stacked on it at once.

And the biggest one on the pile, a severe ghost heat modifier, is now off (at least minimally). This makes it somewhat easier to gauge the others (heat, beam duration) when the hotfix goes in.

Yes i was quoting Niko's post and i agree with.

[MischiefSC]

CHH Badkarma, on 08 August 2014 - 06:24 PM, said:

I think you need to return the soapbox to the store you stole it from.
nice pseudo intellectual keyboard gasm there forum warrior. I am glad you like the nerf so much. Luckily my opinion of it and the vast majority of others out number yours.

You would make a wonderful member of the goonz the way you rationalize things.

End of line...

Huh. Most people have said the PPC nerf is fine. Rationalize... you mean logic? That I use logic to explain stuff? Intellectual keyboardgasm.... you mean the part where I made a point, backed it up with logical arguments and pointed out that you were, absolutely, wrong?

I also like how you try to use 'forum warrior' there to imply I don't play the game when, in fact, I've got about 8k drops both in groups and pug, IS and Clan, meta and everything else along the way.

So lets make this clear - PPCs were the core of the meta weapons for about 18 months now and needed a nerf. That's not a new discussion that's been all over the forums for a long time. They got their nerf and it's due. I get that you don't like it. Okay. You don't have to.

That doesn't mean it wasn't needed and it doesn't fix a lot of issues.

[Lukoi Banacek]

ENS Puskin, on 08 August 2014 - 06:28 PM, said:

I want longer duration? Where did you get that from? I know what i want but i have never said that! I am Davion and i do not mind clan weapons balancing but i had to responde to the bitching!

Really?

Maybe....

ENS Puskin, on 08 August 2014 - 05:21 PM, said:

Stop bitching about the duration! Wtf are you thinking that you will have longer range, higher damage, less weight and slots but only higher heat? No f*ck*ng way!!!

That ring a bell? Yea, so that would imply that you agree with the 2 second duration based on your angry little rant here...which as I previously noted, completely ignores the CON to CERLL that they were already 1.5s in duration....not "only higher heat" as you say above.

No ******* way, indeed.

[CHH Badkarma]

Sandpit, on 08 August 2014 - 06:31 PM, said:

leave me out of this please

Haha, no friendly fire intended

[MischiefSC]

Mystere, on 08 August 2014 - 06:29 PM, said:

But, the (ER)PPC has come full circle.

Now, imagine for a second if it wasn't touched at all since the beginning. How much time and effort would have been saved? How much progress could have been achieved?

(I was also tempted to ask how much anguish and resentment could have been avoided. But I decided not to given the nature of much of the forum denizens.)

I agree completely - though, admittedly, the changes to hitreg are what drove so many PPC changes. I'd say it's indicative of a tendency to balance AROUND an issue instead of balancing the issue directly.

A solid convergence and heat scale fix would have resolved all of this out of the gate. That has never and likely will never happen. So we'll get a cycle of bandaids for symptoms. We completed one full cycle for PPCs! YAY FOR PROGRESS!

Next will be reducing their heat. Give it a few months. Then weapon cycle time. Then you'll get speed back. I call it 18 months to get full swing the other way.

[SVK Puskin]

Lukoi, on 08 August 2014 - 06:41 PM, said:

That ring a bell? Yea, so that would imply that you agree with the 2 second duration based on your angry little rant here...which as I previously noted, completely ignores the CON to CERLL that they were already 1.5s in duration....not "only higher heat" as you say above.

No ******* way, indeed.

Oh man but did i say that i want longer duration? No! I was only responding to the bitching about the duration becuase some players want too much. Wtf? You missed my point so i would like to end our senseless discussion becuase i expect another misunderstanding. Agree?