Nikolai Lubkiewicz, on 29 September 2014 - 02:20 PM, said:
Please let us know your thoughts on Russ' latest update!
I'll give you constructive feedback.
Russ Bullock said:
As you may be aware, our resources are currently focused 100% on Community Warfare Phase 2.
However, there are quite a few items that are currently in branch testing at PGI that I wanted to give you an update on... I do not have a firm patch delivery date for most of these items yet, though they should all be released in the months of October and November. I wanted to give everyone a heads up on those items so you can see some of the improvements coming in the future.
First: Thank you for this information. I think this is not only a very good way to get direct feedback, but also a good way to improve the work with the community. You fix a lot of lost reputation with these things - and this is good. Alright, now to your thoughts and some feedback towards it.
Russ Bullock said:
Fall Damage
I have instructed the team to make a small adjustment to fall damage for Medium and Light class 'Mechs. Currently Medium, Heavy, and Assault class 'Mechs all take falling damage at 35 m/s, with Light class 'Mechs starting at 38 m/s. After some more testing, we have decided to leave Heavy and Assault class'Mechs as they stand, but we will be slightly increasing Medium class 'Mechs to 39 m/s and increasing Lights to 46 m/s.
I feel this will feel a little bit better for the more mobile Medium 'Mechs and provide a much better feeling for fast-moving jump-capable Lights overall.
ETA: Oct 7th patch.
Well, a little more dynamic would be nice. The numbers look good, but go away from the "Light chassis" and adapt it to the tonnage. A 20 ton Mech should act different than a 25 ton mech. Also remember: There are mechs that cannot use Jump Jets at all. You should maybe give EVERY mech (despite its class or tonnage) a +5 m/s bonus on the threshold, IF that mech does not carry any Jump Jets.
Quote
Jump Jet Thrust
Since the adjustment of JJ thrust, along with fall damage, we have seen 'pop-tarting' gameplay decrease to a much more acceptable level. I think everyone agrees this is a positive step for MWO. However, I think certain 'Mechs, well-represented by the Summoner (who takes 5+ JJ into combat), are not receiving enough of a benefit for taking them into battle. I am going to be making a small adjustment to allow the thrust to increase a little bit faster as you add more JJs. This will make those 'Mechs feel a little more mobile and give more advantage to 'Mechs that dedicate more space to JJ.
ETA: Oct 7th patch.
There have been... about 100 feedback posts regarding a working alternative. While your method would be good, please have a look on how the JJ worked in MW:LL. A thrust so strong, that you are in the wide open for quite some time and will not move when you landed for a second or two. (depending on the height you have fallen)
This is much more intuitive, much more dynamic, JJ have a real use for getting over terrain and the pop-tarts will not be poptarting with it, as they stand in the bare open. Also using JJ in a brawl is now a more tactical one-shot and less a "missing hitbox hovering exploit" for as long as you have fuel. Separate the fuel in steps and go the full thrust from step to step. For example, one JJ will only have a single bar, while two give you two steps of jump jets fueling, being able to use them more accurate. Still, the activation will consume a full step.
Quote
Jump Jet Turn Rate
While analyzing why certain players still enter combat with as little as 1-2 JJs, we discovered (or at least reminded ourselves) that the JJ turn rate while in the air was the same whether you had 1 JJ or 5+. This is obviously a huge disadvantage for 'Mechs such as the Summoner that have 5 fixed JJs for 5 tons. We are making an adjustment so that the turn rate while in the air while using JJs will increase with the number of JJs equipped. This means that a 'Mech such as the Summoner will have a more appropriate advantage in a brawling situation over a non-jump capable Heavy, or one utilizing far less JJs. This, in combination with the small change in JJ thrust, should mean 'Mechs such as the Summoner will have a more appropriate advantage for its tonnage spent on JJs.
ETA: Oct 7th or 21st patch.
That is good. Nothing bad about this.
Quote
Omnimech Fixed Jump Jet Slots
The current rule for Omnimechs is that slots are set by the Prime variant. For instance, the Prime variant of the Summoner has 5 fixed JJs and this rule is dictated across each variant. We are expanding this rule slightly when it comes specifically to Jump Jets so that the rule is determined by the variant instead. What this can mean, for example, is that the Timber Wolf S variant will come with 5 fixed JJs. This also means that if you are using (again, for example) the Timber Wolf Prime and decide to equip the RT omnipod of the Timber Wolf S you will have 2 fixed Jump Jets and another 2 if you equip the LT omnipod.
This should result in a much more fair relationship between Clan 'Mech variants and chassis.
ETA: Oct 7th or 21st patch.
NO! Don't do this! Whatever your background thoughts on this is, you destroy the whole Clan-arsenal with it,. The reason people take the S-side-torso on the Madcat are because on the 2 missile slots, not because of the Jump jets. The Nova lacks on efficiency and you do not see that mech anymore because of it. The Summoner suffers because of it. The Adder suffers from the fixed Flamer, and now you want to cripple the Mad-Cat too? No, don't do it! I don'T even own the Madcat,. but if you implement this, you can count on it that I never will.
Its already bad to have a fixed engine, with fixed Loadout (like JJs and DHS and even weapons), fixed upgrades and weapons so hot, you cannot really build a cool Clan mech anymore, even with a staggering 24 DHS. This is INSANE! Already!
Go the long and hard way, make 10 vs. 12 but then with good Clan mechs. Fill the missing motivation to still drive IS-mechs with a C-Bill bonus or take the next step and go professional with implementing a BV for every mech. Then the players can modify their mechs to their own likes, but pay for a badass-setup with a high BV, which will limit the tonnage of their friendlies.
Make it fun to play by balancing tonnage, not by restricting everything everywhere. This is BAD DESIGN. It kills the fun... in a game. You know what that means, right?
Quote
Destruction of a Clan Side Torso
Although we hope to eventually put in a full engine critical hit system that would affect both IS and Clan 'Mechs, we are going to start out with a change to place some penalty on a Clan 'Mech that loses a side torso. Essentially, there needs to be some penalty for losing 2 critical engine slots. Using the tabletop game as a guideline, we have decided to not make movement a part of the penalty but to save that for some future implementation on the effects of heat on your 'Mechs functionality. A Clan engine has a total of 10 critical engine slots and the destruction of a Side Torso in a clan ‘Mech means the loss of two of those slots, or 20%. With this in mind, we have decided to implement a rule that the destruction of a side torso in a Clan 'Mech will result in a loss of 20% of the engines internal heat sink capacity. By way of example, a Timber Wolf with 15 internal engine heat sinks will lose the cooling equivalent of 3 of those heat sinks. A small penalty, but we feel that heat sink loss along with the loss of everything in that torso and arm will be enough.
Normally, I would say:
10 criticals, 10 internal heat sinks:
For every destroyed critical you lose one DHS. If you have internal DHS in the engine, you will lose the appropriate amount of them too (rounded down - we don't want to make it terribad here)
Quote
Updated Reward System
Since the implementation of the Queue size window, we have been working on an improvement to the reward system to help promote the use of Medium and Light 'Mechs. What we have done is rework the rewards table by adding some brand new rewards, as well as adjusting how the current ones work. Once implemented, it should represent a moderate improvement to the Role Warfare pillar of MWO.
ETA: Oct 21st or Nov 4th patch.
Waiting for more info on that one. In general, it sounds... good?
Quote
Inner Sphere Quirk System
The capabilities of the quirk system continue to grow. Our first full quirk pass with the new system has taken the input of several players, including competitive team members. This has allowed us to categorize each Inner Sphere 'Mech, from Tier 1 being the best to Tier 5 being the least competitive. Tier 1 Mech's won't receive any quirks at this point in time, while Tier 5 ‘Mechs will be receiving serious attention. We also made every attempt to give each variant a particular role: e.g. the Hunchback 4G has weapon-specific AC20 quirks, general energy weapon quirks, and Armor/Internal hit point quirks to the right torso. For the greatest impact, players will want to have an AC 20 with energy weapons. Other weapon configurations will still benefit from a subset of the quirks but will prevent the player from reaching the full potential of the variant. We hope to be testing the complete quirk pass by mid-week.
ETA: Oct 21st or Nov 4th patch.
Quirks are a shortcut and try to balance out missing hardpoints from one variant to another. Competetive players choose a chassis because it works on the current game mechanic. So instead of shifting it up and down, fix the cause, not the the flowing issues. So when you see a Shadowhawk as the prime IS-Medium, its because it can mount many SRMs or Lasers or Ballistics AND Jump-Jets while having balanced hitboxes. So yeah, the Shadowhawk is not OP, its just a good machine. That being said, EVERY machine should be a good machine. Look at any Cicada beside the 3-M. Or a Spider without ECM or an Atlas without ECM. Quirks won't help you, a working game mechanic will.
Again: There are about 100 suggestions and many of them outdrafted and more than valid for consideration. Have a look at them, they should have been posted to you from the community-managers around here. Listen to the suggestions! People have taken quite some time to design them. (General adjustments for tonnage eg armor rating, fixing sizes and hitboxes etc... you know...)
Thank you.
28
