cSand, on 22 June 2015 - 09:15 AM, said:
What if I have good matches most of the time in my random low-tier chassis, and sometimes have bad macthes?
You are playing against bad pilots most of the time?
El Bandito, on 22 June 2015 - 09:16 AM, said:
PGI can test out some weapon balance change immediately, such as increasing LBX pellet damage or removing Machine Gun CoF. Takes only few minutes to make the change in the XML sheet--and they can just test it in their PTR if they are afraid of live servers abusing the newly balanced weapons. Yet they don't. They make me sad.
Still, PGI is at least doing balancing more frequently than Blizzard. Been waiting for ages for them to do the next balance patch on Hearthstone.
Exactly balance changes are easy to do for PGI. There is no reason to leave mechs that need help non viable.
Ultimatum X, on 22 June 2015 - 09:17 AM, said:
The reality is that it's not good for business.
It's better to buff select things at select times, and have other things not be as good than it is to try and sell "everything good" to everyone - because players will shift and buy those new good things if they don't already have them.
Sometimes things will also get buffed in order to sell a specific content, like making viable drop decks for CW.
I'm not advocating this, I'm just telling it like it is.
I think it is good business to have better balance. You keep selling more things like Victor Dragon Slayers. You have more people happy and playing the game and buying mech packs etc. Balance is good business.
TheCharlatan, on 22 June 2015 - 09:23 AM, said:
There is a problem here: you say that
Which means that "your opinion dosen't count."
But you say that we have to follow Gman's opinion on what is good and what is not.
Why his opinion and not someone else's?
This is the main problem with balance from the player side: it's based on opinions.
The only guys with the stats are the ones at PGI. They look at the numbers and, hopefully, know what to do to change them in the way they think is good to the game.
If we were to go in "quirk overload" as you ask, we would have meta-shifts way too fast, and people would get pretty angry with the constant "buy the FOTM mech".
No let me put it this way. Look at the Highlander. The majority of people (not just Gman) think it needs help. Hardly any one plays it. Most of the time when it is played it does not do well on average. So when one person comes in the thread and says I have great games in my Highlander. It does not prove its good it only proves that one person had a good game or two. Thats all I ment
Yeonne Greene, on 22 June 2015 - 09:28 AM, said:
Just throwing this out there, but tweaking 'Mech quirks takes longer than changing the base stats of the weapon itself. If we're going to be quirking Medium lasers out to a nominal range of 311 meters on the majority of 'Mechs, for example, we'd be better off just giving them a base range of 315 meters and calling it a deal. Similar deal with heat; if you are going to be knocking off a nominal 12.5% from energy weapons, just reduce the heat values 12.5% across the board.
Could they make changes to IS weapons yes. Will they probably not. So in keeping with how they are doing things I am asking for changes in that system.
Mcgral18, on 22 June 2015 - 09:29 AM, said:
- Crit chance
- Crit damage multiplier
- Missile spread
- Cooldown
- Burn Time
- Heat
- Range
- Movement Archetype (override, like Mr Gargles from Huge to Large, or KCrab from Large to Huge)
- Quirks
These changes, to the best of my knowledge, are just edits to a .XML
I think they've automated burn durations and audio (which wasn't always the case, so I could be wrong).
Bi Weekly with the patches, or at least once a month, a change or two would be appreciated. The change itself takes no time at all.
I'll assume testing takes more time. For those who want to give the .XML a change, here's a sample, from the Clam Machine Gun.
<Weapon faction="Clan" HardpointAliases="Ballistic,MachineGun,ClanMachineGun," name="ClanMachineGun" id="1209">
<Loc iconTag="StoreIcons\ClanMachineGun.dds" descTag="@ClanMachineGun_desc" nameTag="@ClanMachineGun"/>
<WeaponStats maxDepth="10.0" volleydelay="0" speed="100" lifetime="1.0" duration="-1.0" tons="0.25" maxRange="240.0" longRange="120.0" minRange="0" ammoPerShot="1" ammoType="ClanMachineGunAmmo" cooldown="0.0" heat="0.0" impulse="0.001" heatdamage="0" damage="0.08" numFiring="1" projectileclass="" type="Ballistic" slots="1" Health="10" spread="1.5" maxheight="0" critChanceIncrease="0.06,0.03,0.01" critDamMult="9.0" rof="10.0"/>
Exactly they have talked about how its not hard to change these basic things now. Its just a matter of them choosing not to do balance updates.
Sjorpha, on 22 June 2015 - 09:39 AM, said:
Gmans tier lists are not just his opinions though, it is his way of reporting the metagame trends from the competitive scene and high elo play. He puts a lot of work into getting this as unbiased as he can and should be respected for that work IMO, as I see it there is a huge difference between what he does and some random dude posting screenshots of his favourite mech performing.
I'd like some more frequent, and smaller, balance tweaks as well, so I agree with the OP.
Exactly he is not perfect but does have a good idea. At higher Elo the problems with mechs are more clear. Honestly when playing low El players you can have great games in any mech you take.
5
