744 replies to this topic

[n r g]

Kain Thul, on 29 September 2014 - 02:43 PM, said:

With the current slow speeds and lack of pinpoint damage compared to the IS I would like to see the full 15 damage applied to imipact instead of the 2.5 splash damage to 2 components.

I'd rather (and the majority of the competitive community) have a speed/velocity buff to all PPCS. Somewhere in the middle,700-900 was a bit over-nerfed, nothing like it was pre-nerf but maybe 1000-1300 or somewhere in the middle.

Doing a full 15 damage is really irrelevant - if the shot fails to land, which it will 75% of the time due to how slow it is, even if it does 90 damage is null.

Speed is everything.

[Asmudius Heng]

This all looks fantastic Russ.

I am not sure such a slight heat increase to the clan side torso destruction will really do much though - I do hope you are simply taking baby steps with this and willing to add more nerfs if they are needed as the clan engines are just that strong IMO.

I am loving the sort of detail given to IS mechs in the quirks I want to see that list ASAP!!!

[Russ Bullock]

Sandtiger, on 29 September 2014 - 03:13 PM, said:

Not really. I mean this is Mechwarrior isn't it? Make your Mech the most vicious killing machine viable for your play style. I think someone has been giving you bad advice.

Or use your Prime and B variants for full dps and with the JJ changes have an S variant build you use for more mobility?

People always calling for more role variety.

[FupDup]

I have a few questions for Russ about the quirks pass, if it's not too soon to ask for specific clarifications:

1. What tier are the Raven 4X and 2X variants considered to be? (I know what I would consider them, but I'm not the one making the quirks pass...).

2. I think it's safe to assume that the Shadow Hawk is a tier 2 mech at minimum, or perhaps even tier 1. That being said, are the 2H and 5M variants (maybe even the 2D) be considered a tier lower than the other "epic" variants like 2D2 and 2K?

[WonderSparks]

Well, I cannot say I am happy that OmniPods which, as they are now, enabled us to add JJ if we wanted will be made to give us fixed JJ (and only because I like to be able to fit an Active Probe in my TBR-S's CT instead of the fifth JJ), but other than that I think I can live with these changes.
I suppose, at the end of the day, it depends on exactly how everything works out. As one of my favorite video games on the SNES once said...
"Yet to be seen, try it" _{-OnTheBall by Taito}

[Russ Bullock]

knightsljx, on 29 September 2014 - 03:15 PM, said:

I think the number of fixed JJs on both Summoner and TBR-S should be changed/fixed at 3, with the addition of 1 fixed JJ in each S Torso. Also, I'm sad to see there is no move to un-nerf the Highlander and Victors. The nerfs were implemented when Clans were not out. Highlanders and Victors need to be returned to pre-nerf specs to balance out Clan and IS mechs. Also, Class I JJs need fix. A 2 ton JJ that provides next to no lift is just broken.

You are assuming that the Victor isn't being changed? The Victor negative quirks are being flushed. Of course this immediately puts it in Tier 1 category again so it will not receive additional quirks but yes the negative ones have been flushed.

[Nightmare1]

Asmudius Heng, on 29 September 2014 - 04:29 PM, said:

This all looks fantastic Russ.

I am not sure such a slight heat increase to the clan side torso destruction will really do much though - I do hope you are simply taking baby steps with this and willing to add more nerfs if they are needed as the clan engines are just that strong IMO.

I am loving the sort of detail given to IS mechs in the quirks I want to see that list ASAP!!!

Clan Mechs have been nerfed enough already. No more nerfs are needed.

[Russ Bullock]

rangergord, on 29 September 2014 - 03:22 PM, said:

I second the concern about the quirks with mechs having to use only certain weapons or being subpar. Out of curiosity, would you be willing to post the current tier list?

The alternative is taking a tier 5 mech and buffing every single weapon on it and each of the variants - then you end up with 5 dragons that remain very much the same.

Better to say well this one only has 1 ballistic hard point lets make it about the Gauss and this one with 3 hard points more about the AC2 both in a support role. That's more interesting is it not.

[MonkeyCheese]

I just want a reason to own a 5V spider, 12 jumpjets should mean something seriously its TWELVE JUMPJETS,

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...ca76cc9fab03363 this thing with its speed and jumpjets should rocket off like lrms do, you should be able to jump a radio tower or the walls in the moon map in a single bound.

[Mawai]

Thank you for the update.

The only immediate comment I have is on the jump jet turn rate. I think it makes sense to scale turn rate in the air with the number of jump jets equipped. However, the actual turn rate could be an issue and you haven't mentioned how it would scale.

In theory, jump jets should add to maneuverability .. will the minumum turn rate be equal to the turn rate of the mech on the ground? Will the mech turn slower with jump jets? If it will turn faster ... how much faster and how will it scale? Will the turn rate scale from 1/2 ground turn rate with one jump jet to 2 time the ground turn rate with full jump jets? Or some other scaling.

Depending on how you set the values this change to jump jets could either do very little or be a strong motivation to fit close to a full set of jump jets.

[Asmudius Heng]

Clan weapons have been nerfed not the mech's inherent survivability advantages

This should have been done long before weapons changes with a look to individual chassis before global weapons changes too.

They approached clan balance from the wrong end.

[ratgoat]

Quote

Since the adjustment of JJ thrust, along with fall damage, we have seen 'pop-tarting' gameplay decrease to a much more acceptable level.

It's not a valid tactic anymore...like whatsoever. I still do it from time to time because it's enjoyable and takes skill. But honestly I'll just laser vomit with my Timber Wolf if I want to put up numbers. When was the last time a comp team tried to employ a pop tarting strat?

I think the thing that really bothers me is that a Highlander at the height of pop-tarting ridiculousness has nothing on a Direwhale. The damage they are putting out is insane and the ONLY reason that they are not a huge issue is 3-3-3-3, which was not in place when Highlanders were running amok.

And I think the clan XL nerf is a bit too tame. Need to drop 20% off the max speed as well.

All the other stuff seems good to me! Keep at it!

Edited by ratgoat, 29 September 2014 - 04:45 PM.

[D0hle]

Nightmare1, on 29 September 2014 - 04:33 PM, said:

Clan Mechs have been nerfed enough already. No more nerfs are needed.

Clan Mechs haven't been nerfed at all. Clan weapons on the other hand have been. Seems only reasonable to move from weapon balance changes to equipment and specific Mechs.

Edited by D0hle, 29 September 2014 - 04:40 PM.

[Anarcho]

Rise or Die, on 29 September 2014 - 02:53 PM, said:

Great. Now you ruined all 3 of my Timberwolf builds since EVERYONE uses at least one Timberwolf-S omnipod and no jump jets. And now all three are broken.

If there are more fatal nerfs that break the Timberwolf even more im not playing this game anymore. Ive spend a lot of money the last 2 years for this.

My mind is picturing a 20 something years old bearded guy rolling on the floor and crying like a baby now...

[Asmudius Heng]

Quote

The alternative is taking a tier 5 mech and buffing every single weapon on it and each of the variants - then you end up with 5 dragons that remain very much the same.

Better to say well this one only has 1 ballistic hard point lets make it about the Gauss and this one with 3 hard points more about the AC2 both in a support role. That's more interesting is it not.

Agree, more granularity for variants is good - doesn't stop people using what they want but encourages the use of its stock builds of what it was DESIGNED for.

A machine is built around its optimal usage of its factory settings, they should be more efficient since all the hardwired engineering was geared for that sort of load

[Russ Bullock]

wanderer, on 29 September 2014 - 03:29 PM, said:

Actually, in TT the destruction of a side torso XL for a Clanner destroys two-thirds of the engine's critical machinery. Three hits to an engine disables it- it simply has lots of crit locations to represent being a big target- and this is also part of why later 'Mechs have options for what's called Compact Engines and Gyros. You can put more stuff into the same location, thereby insulating it against those lethal three crit hits being so likely.

It's not [redacted] rocket science- if you read the rulebook, there's an easy, clear answer to your problem. Just make engines damageable like they should be with the appropriate increases to heat load as they absorb more hits and you've not only fixed Clan XLs, you've made a better damage model for all 'Mechs. One third of engine health gone = .5 heat/sec. Two thirds = 1 heat/sec, and obviously fully destroyed = dead engine. A Clan XL side torso will generate 1 heat/sec when trashed, which is a nice solid penalty - and everyone else's engines will behave like they should when damaged as well.

And likewise, get a real overheat system working. You've been using the same kludgy, almost penalty-free placeholder for years now. If the overheat bar had actually caused increasingly negative effects from the get-go like it should, we would never have "needed" ghost heat and 100%-overheat dancing would have been the [redacted] it should have been from year 1.

As stated I cannot take weeks out of the schedule to implement a full system like this at the moment - with all engineering on Community Warfare.

This is an additional penalty for Clan mechs in the meantime.

Solahma, on 29 September 2014 - 03:29 PM, said:

What about the missing weapon modules? when can we expect those?

Oct 7th

[Kaeb Odellas]

Russ Bullock, on 29 September 2014 - 04:26 PM, said:

The key is a boost without resurrecting pop tarting

I think the heat generation and PPC speed reduction should effectively prevent the mass pop-tarting issues we had before the nerfs.

[Flitzomat]

When can we expect information on the new reward system?

[Russ Bullock]

Felio, on 29 September 2014 - 03:32 PM, said:

My only other nitpick is that I'm not sure how I feel about weapon-specific variant quirks and the effect it might have on build diversity, both what I encounter in the field and what I might consider in my own builds.

Again I think this ends up helping build diversity.

When I currently run my Dragon mechs it seems each one looks dang similar. AC10, medium lasers and SRM.

Now I might actually make my 5N about AC2 and my FANG about AC10 and my 1C about Gauss etc. A reason to diversify my Dragon mech's from each other.

The alternative is just buffing all weapons for every Dragon so you have the same issue you have now where I take the same thing out in my 5N that I take out in my 1C or near enough.

[OznerpaG]

Russ, you and the PGI team are doing a fantastic job steering this ship towards greatness - it'l take time of course, but it's great we are starting to see land in the distance!

one thing that i'v been noticing in regards to the IS is that at first you guys were pretty skimpy with a lot of missile tubes with earlier mechs, and the later IS mechs plus all the clan mechs all have a minimum of 10 tubes. that being said, it doesn't seem like tubes really mean much to clan mechs since they stream their missiles anyways

any consideration in increasing every single IS missile tube to a minimum of 10 so they match the clan and newer IS mechs and give them a tiny bit more flexibility in that regard?

there's no limit to individual ballistic or energy mounts on any mech, and the LRM10 is kind of the worse deal as far as LRM launchers go so i don't think it's really going to swing any balances, and in fact should give some mechs a new lease on life as a somewhat partially acceptable missile carrier (SRM as well as LRM)