178 replies to this topic

[lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol]

Akula, on 27 August 2014 - 11:19 PM, said:

I think a lot of people are over dramatising the whole not posting the stat changes here. I think it's simply a fact of going into the PTS with an open mind. And saying that you wont take part in the PTS simply on the ground that the changes on the test server haven't been listed, has got to be one of the silliest things I have heard from the community as of late.

I mean really guys?

It would be an interesting experiment to see if people could really tell the difference between +'s and -'s of the function of their mechs, even if it's a .5 increase or decrease in damage, burn time or cooldown.

The problem with the whole "secret" thing, is it is usually because it's something that's going to be really epic, or something that's going to be very horrible.

It's like if a person tells a child to come over to their van because they have a secret to tell, and they won't tell them until they get inside... it raises warning flags with me. I mean come on Russ... this is a game, not some timeshare bait and switch.

[Kmieciu]

In my opinion the longer burn times on Clan lasers, burst fire UAC, ripple fire LRMs go well with the Clan XL engines. Clan mechs are twice as durable than IS XL mechs, but they have to expose themselves more to use their firepower. It even suits the lore correctly: them being all about honorable "straight up" brawl, and IS using ambushes and hit-and-run tactics.

I agree that cERLL, as well as IS/clan PPC have been overnerfed. I have seen a AC10+AC20 Jager in a game yesterday, but I did not see a mech using PPCs.

At the same time, I predict longer burn times for ERML and longer recharge for cGauss. I would really like a ripple fire effect for cSRMs, too. (Just like we had in MW2).
cMG weight advantage is pretty much irrelevant since IS mechs can boat more of them (Spider>Kit Fox, Arrow > Nova)

Edited by Kmieciu, 28 August 2014 - 12:21 AM.

[HellJumper]

o0Marduk0o, on 27 August 2014 - 11:02 PM, said:

You know, every company is doing that because it is plain stupid to pay more than you need. I guess you would pay more for the same thing just to show that you have money, do you?

or they might start doing it because they are running out of money and they need to start cutting down costs...

[Widowmaker1981]

i havent seen the numbers (duh), but if you're going to nerf clan weapons to be on a 1:1 basis with IS weapons (well, actually, worse.. burst fire ACs etc), you need to unlock the build restrictions on clan mechs (changable engine size, add or remove FF and ES, unlock the hardlocked heatsinks). If you dont do that they are just harder to use and less customisable, i.e. not worth using.

Edited by Widowmaker1981, 28 August 2014 - 12:49 AM.

[MasterBLB]

Can anyone who already peeked at PT server share what they are going to f@ck up this time?

Edited by MasterBLB, 28 August 2014 - 01:02 AM.

[Shiro Matsumoto]

Zolaz, on 27 August 2014 - 05:09 PM, said:

Looks like a nerf coming in for CERMLs.

Probably 3 seconds of burn time.

[skorpionet]

Why balance must every time mean make worse something?!

However, to use Public Test I simply need to patch already installed MWO Test environment?

[o0Marduk0o]

HellJumper, on 28 August 2014 - 12:38 AM, said:

or they might start doing it because they are running out of money and they need to start cutting down costs...

So basically changing your mobile phone provider because other companies offer better service and conditions is for you a sign of private insolvency? Keep your fingers away from business man, it can only go wrong.

[Vercinaigh]

TheMagician, on 27 August 2014 - 04:58 PM, said:

Your original promise on the clans was that they would not be superior to the IS. Keeping their weapons farther, cooler, and more damage than IS does not meet that promise, it counters it. I'm not sure what promise you are suggesting that you are still meeting. Perhaps you have other ways to make the clans less... formidable, such as making their XL similar to the IS, or giving IS the ability to use clan weapons.

It's a shame too, because you guys had the IS really well balanced against each other, and then the clans threw it all off.

+111111111111111111111111111111111111

yes, Is balance is the best it's ever been! Still not perfect, but it's very acceptable. Clans are just broken, Period, everything about them is better, it's a arms race and they lower TTK clan vs clan or not, it's boring, and I seriously hope you do some major, MAJOR reworks.

[BOWMANGR]

I fully agree with the idea of keeping the changes hidden so that people will just play along and not pre-decide if something is OP or not based on numbers alone.

ALL changes should be like that IMHO. Just inform us about ADDING changes but not the exact details. Then when it's all said and done, you can share the math behind the changes.

This is a better method to get real feedback. I would also prefer if you explained better why you discard some popular proposals from the community because as it is right now most people think that you typically ask for feedback to appear as engaging with the community in order to ignore it later and do whatever you want to do anyway. I little bit of "we didn't implement X popular proposal because Y reason" will go a long way.



P.S. As a general note, the Time To Kill needs to increase across the board. Many people play this game because it is NOT Call of Duty. Don't make the mechs too fragile. We need to see more damaged mechs that fall down fighting than fully armored mechs that just die from CT damage.

Edited by BOWMANGR, 28 August 2014 - 01:46 AM.

[grayson marik]

Koniving, on 27 August 2014 - 07:21 PM, said:

We call this severely overtaxing ghost heat.
Of course, PGI needs to stop using ghost heat and lock a 30 to 60 threshold. MW4 had 60 threshold, MW 3 had 30 threshold, MW 2 had 40 threshold, MWO's current highest with double heatsinks thresholds while still carrying 1 ER PPC (both sides) are:

Inner Sphere
Cooling Rate : 6.70 heat/sec
Heat Threshold : 114.89999999999998

Clan
Cooling Rate : 7.50 heat/sec
Heat Threshold : 123.29999999999998

Considering that lore thresholds are 30, and that in MW4, the worst balanced mechwarrior game in the history of the franchise before MWO, only went up to 60... tells us something is horrifically wrong here.

10 DHS and 20 SHS should only take 15 seconds to cool a mech down. That requires a threshold of 30. It will take 30 seconds if that's 10 DHS or 20 SHS on 60 threshold. Either way, that significantly limits how much firepower can go downrange at once and gives us a rapid time to shut down.

30 would be incredibly limiting to the point that pinpoint damage would suddenly disappear from the radar, because you could only get away with 7 ML and you'd not be able to fire again for 12 to 14 seconds unless you did chain fire! One PPC? 33.33% heat! Two ER PPCs and a Gauss, Clan or IS? BAM! Shutdown. Wait, what if you just dropped the Gauss? 2 ER PPCs? BAM! Shutdown. Wait, 2 ER Large Lasers? With the canon heat value, 80% heat.

Would ANY of this b.s. balancing be necessary? Nope. Not at all.

Ghost heat or as the proper term is, heat scale... is nothing more than a "bandaid" that tries to replicate what a 30 threshold would allow. 6 ML? Only because of 30 threshold, it's the maximum safe amount you could fire without serious risks. 2 LL? Welp... 2 LL is 16 heat lore-proper, not bad but it's still above the tabletop shutdown threshold until cooled. 2 ER LL though is in massive suicide territory. LPLs? Technically these are laser machine guns doing many shots to get X damage for X heat in X amount of time... But in MWO's form, welp 2 LPL = 20 heat just like 2 PPCs, regardless of which team you are. And they do less damage in BT than they do in MWO (9 and 10, versus 10.6 and 11.8 in MWO).

2 AC/20s? 14 heat (instead of 12 + ghost heat as in MWO). The irony? With 10 DHS or 20 SHS and 30 threshold, 2 AC/20s will in fact shut down (at the rate of 4 seconds between each use) in 8 seconds if moving while shooting. That's 3 firings of twin AC/20s OR UAC/20s, "ultra mode" or not.
With ghost heat? You shut down in 3 to 4 uses. Sound familiar?

Ghost heat tries to mimic 30 threshold without actually giving us that restriction, and so we have hundreds of loop holes that let us b.s. the system.

(Edit: Just adding since I've been pulled back here with a like).
On the Nova specifically with its massive amount of lasers...
In MWO we can fire 6 of them without ghost heat. With ghost heat before the viscious boost in Ghost Heat, we could alpha strike once and shutdown for a fraction of a second. Now we alpha strike once and bam, it's likely to explode.

With 30 threshold...
Nova Prime before cooling is applied, 1 arm would shut it down. 6 ER ML? 5 heat each. 5 * 6 = shutdown, without even moving. It would be absolutely mandatory to fire it in spurts of 2 to 3 lasers at a time, and even then it's an accident waiting to happen. As its own Sarna page and Card states: "A mech that can't possibly support its loadout."

After cooling is applied. 8 ER ML fired across 10 seconds at 5 heat each - 18 DHS cooling at 3.8 heat per second = 4 heat remaining.
Breakdown:
0 seconds (start). Fire 2 ER ML. + 10 heat (33.33%)
1 second. Cool 3.6. = 6.4
2 seconds. Cool 3.6. = 2.8 (9.33% heat) Fire 2 ER ML +10 heat (2.8 + 10 = 12.8 = 42.67%)
3 seconds. Cools 3.6. = 9.2.
4 seconds. Cools 3.6. = 5.6. Fire 2 ER ML + 10 heat (15.6 = 52% and level 1 shutdown risk and ultra minor risk of ammo explosion in proper BT.)
5 seconds. Cools 3.6 = 12. (40% heat. Safe, but still not safe to actually fire in BT.)
6 seconds. Cools 3.6 = 8.4 (28% heat).
7 seconds. Cools 3.6 = 4.8. Fires 2 ER ML + 10 heat (14.8 = 49.33% heat).
8 seconds. Cools 3.6 = 11.2 (37.33% heat)
9 seconds Cools 3.6 = 7.6 (25.33% heat)
10 seconds. Cools 3.6 = 4 (13.33% heat).

Notice only at one point did we even breach 50% heat, and this is with 30 threshold and technically, with virtually the same cooling as we get in MWO after elites.
(18 DHS tabletop: 3.6/sec cooling, 30 threshold.
DHS in MWO before elites: Cooling Rate : 3.12 heat/sec Heat Threshold : 61.2
DHS in MWO after elites:Cooling Rate : 3.59 heat/sec Heat Threshold : 73.44
(If it had 17 DHS instead of 18, it'd be higher than tabletop cooling).

The principle idea of the Nova was not 'zomg lets boat lasers for one shot kills', it was 'lasers are easily destroyed by a critical hit and some weapons (both Clan and Inner Sphere) can crit 3 weapons in a single blow. Lets have some redundancies just in case so we won't be neutered in a single shot."

(I mean crap, if you seen how frequently I thru-armor-critical players in Megamek, you'd carry a dozen backups as well! Had a one-shot cripple on an Annihilator's gyro with a single Gauss Rifle in a Hollander [35 ton], the Annihilator actually destroyed itself trying to get back up. That just messed it up rather than destroy it. Against a Hunchback, one-shot the AC/20 into destruction with a Gauss Rifle. Had an AC/20 destroy 2 SRM launchers and a medium laser in a single shot [armor was bare]. That's why Novas carry so much; not "derp Alpha! dead. Derp.")

Quoted for truth and because I could not give it 10k+ likes.

[Finster]

LOL what a joke. Can you imagine Blizzard (who routinely puts balance changes on PTR) actually coming out and saying, "We're gonna test balance changes, but not tell you what they are. HURRDURR?"

"LOL NUMBERS AND DATA R DUM LET'S BALANCE ON HOW THINGS FEEL! LOL WHAT IS METAGAMING?"

Edited by Finster, 28 August 2014 - 02:11 AM.

[TexAce]

Sounds like they want to balance clan and IS by 12 vs 12 instead of 10vs12 and thus nerfing the clan weapons...


bad decision IMO

[HellJumper]

o0Marduk0o, on 28 August 2014 - 01:27 AM, said:

So basically changing your mobile phone provider because other companies offer better service and conditions is for you a sign of private insolvency? Keep your fingers away from business man, it can only go wrong.

errr...changing you mobile phone provider because you want a more cost effective way of getting service
rings a lot of bells for me..why? because i cannot afford the level of service being provided by my current provider. get it now??

(Keep your fingers away from business man, it can only go wrong.) what is this suppose to mean?

TexAss, on 28 August 2014 - 02:18 AM, said:

Sounds like they want to balance clan and IS by 12 vs 12 instead of 10vs12 and thus nerfing the clan weapons...


bad decision IMO

well we dont even know till now what there decision is...

[Ensaine]

I would also suspect a 'Placebo' PTS, where NO changes were made, aside from DeSync issues, where they can see the forum posts about the 'nerfs' where there are none .......

[Cavendish]

TheMagician, on 27 August 2014 - 04:58 PM, said:

It's a shame too, because you guys had the IS really well balanced against each other, and then the clans threw it all off.

I am sorry, but WHAT?

What was balanced before the clans? The fact that you could only use 4 diffrent mechs to be competative? The 3 usable weapons (Gauss, AC, PPC)? The pop-tarting dominion of the last year? Please explain your thoughts about balance because MWO has never been balanced and most likely will not be.

Before it was poptarting Highlander, then DS, now Timber Wolf. Top dog changes, flavour of the month/year when it comes to weapon loadouts changes, but the fact that there is no balance between best and worst weapons does not change in MWO.

[MasterBLB]

Clan weapons were perfectly fine after 1st improvement,when they boosted pulse lasers.The only bad change was nerfing ER SL damage,it was fine at 5 points.
So any futher attempts to balance must be started from reverting latest Paul's idiocy,I mean PPC speed an C-ER LL nerf.Then clan weapons will be fine,they are better as they should be canonically,but with weaknesses important enough.
And then if needed,another step should be done not by nerfing clans,but adjusting IS weaponry - starting of changing ML heat generation to canonical value 3 not 4.Same for MPL.
ER PPCs can be balanced that way - IS one 12.5 heat,Clan one 12.5 pinpoint damage 1.25 to side components and maybe a little longer cooldown (4.2s let's say).And of course,restore speed 1600 m/s for them too.

[Finster]

http://www.reddit.co..._the_pts_xpost/

[o0Marduk0o]

HellJumper, on 28 August 2014 - 02:22 AM, said:

errr...changing you mobile phone provider because you want a more cost effective way of getting service
rings a lot of bells for me..why? because i cannot afford the level of service being provided by my current provider. get it now??

(Keep your fingers away from business man, it can only go wrong.) what is this suppose to mean?

You know what a more cost effective service means? Same service for lower cost or better service for same cost. When you still not see why a company is doing that then all hope is lost. I have no doubt that you have no clue what the last sentence means, you show your lack of understanding in every post.

[Finster]

o0Marduk0o, on 28 August 2014 - 03:16 AM, said:

You know what a more cost effective service means? Same service for lower cost or better service for same cost. When you still not see why a company is doing that then all hope is lost. I have no doubt that you have no clue what the last sentence means, you show your lack of understanding in every post.

There is another option: worse service for lower cost

Edited by Finster, 28 August 2014 - 03:24 AM.