431 replies to this topic

[InRev]

The thing is, this is what PGI gets for keeping us in the dark for months while they fiddle away. A command chair post detailing their ideas before doing all the engineering and data entry would have averted this disaster, or at least mitigated it. It's obvious to most people who have the slightest notion of how the game works that this whole "rebalance" is flawed both in idea and (especially) execution, and yet PGI plowed away and blew countless man-hours forcing a PTS build for a doomed product. What a waste of resources.

And why? What did they accomplish by blind-siding the player base? Why are they so averse to feedback when their ideas are still in the design stage, before anything has actually been engineered? Why do they wait until it's too late, thus prompting a total meltdown in the community? Hubris? Incompetence?

The amount of re-engineering that they are going to need to do to fix this cluster **** will be yet another needless delay.

Edited by InRev, 12 September 2015 - 09:29 AM.

[Yokaiko]

InRev, on 12 September 2015 - 09:28 AM, said:

Hubris? Incompetence?

aka PGI

[Elizander]

Finding PTS games has always been a problem. It really is about time that PGI unlocks 2v2-8v8 and dump them in the old smaller maps just so people can keep trying stuff out even in dead hours.

[Deathlike]

InRev, on 12 September 2015 - 09:28 AM, said:

The thing is, this is what PGI gets for keeping us in the dark for months while they fiddle away. A command chair post detailing their ideas before doing all the engineering and data entry would have averted this disaster, or at least mitigated it. It's obvious to most people who have the slightest notion of how the game works that this whole "rebalance" is flawed both in idea and (especially) execution, and yet PGI plowed away and blew countless man-hours forcing a PTS build for a doomed product. What a waste of resources.

And why? What did they accomplish by blind-siding the player base? Why are they so averse to feedback when their ideas are still in the design stage, before anything has actually been engineered? Why do they wait until it's too late, thus prompting a total meltdown in the community? Hubris? Incompetence?

The amount of re-engineering that they are going to do to fix this cluster **** will be yet another needless delay.

Well, they weren't specific when it was initially posted, so to find out what actually happened is most in due part to not being specific.

How do you address something when you don't have the specifics? Might as well pull fortune cookies out of my arse.

[TLBFestus]

My this is some good popcorn! I'd brag about seeing this coming but in truth only a fool couldn't.

[MischiefSC]

Bishop Steiner, on 12 September 2015 - 09:18 AM, said:

Cool. You do realize that's part of the point? It's not to win matches, it's to gather data, actual IN GAME test date to compare. The more data, especially on the BAds, the better.

The Community always cries they want to be in on balance decisions, yet what happens whenever you invite the public in, is they simply gravitate to whatever is easiest, and play it like they are playing the game for rewards, etc. So Bad mechs are simply ignored, etc, and no useful data is gathered.

Yet when they invite small groups of squirrels in to actually test, the Community as a whole cries.

Mind you, playing it on an even t weekend? Kinda ludicrous..... won't deny that.

I did a bunch of drops on PTS already. No direction, data I'm 'testing' felt so broken that I'm not sure what any value would be in what I'm doing. I don't care about double XP weekends - leveling mechs is part of the fun of playing the game to me.

However in the current environment there is absolutely no real way to test if, for example, the buffed IS to the Atlas is that big a deal when the now heavily buffed (as in all the energy negatives functionally removed) TW, working like it did back pre-quirk, pre-TW nerfs, obliterates your 'extra strong' side torso with 1/2 of 1 extra alpha. Which is no big deal given that his lasers don't have the same head issues, burn time increases or slowed cooldown.

What the PTS tells me right now is 'Clan vs IS balance is broken as hell without big quirks'. Also 'the sensor stuff is alright, I wouldn't mind it in game but it's going to make the learning curve even steeper now that it plays like every mech has ECM'. It tells me nothing useful about the mobility quirks or structure quirks because the biggest, most important, most impactful and relevant metric in the game (weapon balance) is badly broken.

If they made the PTS IS vs IS I could test and provide tons of data. Same with Clan vs Clan. This? Feels like wasted time. It's like asking me to weigh feathers to see which are heaviest while I'm falling out of an airplane. How about we fix the falling at 100mph issue, so I can actually pay attention to something as small and nuanced as feather weight.

[Ultimax]

MischiefSC, on 12 September 2015 - 09:36 AM, said:

If they made the PTS IS vs IS I could test and provide tons of data. Same with Clan vs Clan. This? Feels like wasted time. It's like asking me to weigh feathers to see which are heaviest while I'm falling out of an airplane. How about we fix the falling at 100mph issue, so I can actually pay attention to something as small and nuanced as feather weight.

This.

This is an apt description of the issue with "testing" this.

[MischiefSC]

Ultimatum X, on 12 September 2015 - 09:54 AM, said:

This.

This is an apt description of the issue with "testing" this.

Going to keep repeating this so we get some clarity on the issue.

I'm all for structure, mobility and sensor changes. I think it's a great idea.

However, weapon balance trumps all of it and by such a degree that it makes trying to balance the other smaller factors next to impossible.

Gank > Tank > Twist > Sensors. Balance weapons, then structure/armor, then mobility, then sensors. In that order I can generate useful test data and effectively make useful balance suggestions. In the current format of weapons being utterly out of balance I can not gauge real value on the other factors.

[Weeny Machine]

Bishop Steiner, on 12 September 2015 - 07:52 AM, said:

So, you bought it because you knew it was massively overquirked (50% Cooldown vs 25%??), in a game with Dynamic Balancing (glacially slow dynamic balancing, but still ever changing)..... and you are now upset that it finally is addressed? After seeing the TDR-9S quirked, etc?

Huh.

1. The poster is right. Like it or not, weapon quirks made chassis different. Why buy a Grid over a 4G for example?
2. Are you seriously implying that the Grid was OP and that people bought it for this reason? I am sorry, but that's quite a strawman and a pseudo argument which isn't helping the discussion in any way.

Alienized, on 12 September 2015 - 07:55 AM, said:

waitwat. you engage a atlas face first with a 50ton mech and you are NOT engaging it from behind or the sides?!?.....
my bad. i really thought you knew better the way you are posting in this forum.

if you really have the desire to do that, at least have the guts to take the fire.

Troll more

[Yokaiko]

Bush Hopper, on 12 September 2015 - 10:16 AM, said:

1. The poster is right. Like it or not, weapon quirks made chassis different. Why buy a Grid over a 4G for example?
2. Are you seriously implying that the Grid was OP and that people bought it for this reason? I am sorry, but that's quite a strawman and a pseudo argument which isn't helping the discussion in any way.



Troll more

Bishop has at least one rage thread screaming about the GI, and he had a point, a 50% quirk should never have existed.

[Monkey Lover]

It's easy to tell this test wasn't ready to happen. There are lots of missing quirks and lots of errors. I don't think my jag is going to come with a 75% twist speed nerf. They must have just pushed it out to make us happy.

[Juodas Varnas]

Monkey Lover, on 12 September 2015 - 10:18 AM, said:

They must have just pushed it out to make us happy.

Good job, i guess?

[Monkey Lover]

Yokaiko, on 12 September 2015 - 10:18 AM, said:

Bishop has at least one rage thread screaming about the GI, and he had a point, a 50% quirk should never have existed.

I don't agree with that. I the size of the quirk doesn't matter the question is did it get balanced. In my view it needed even more quirks to be balanced compared to other mechs in the same tonage for snipers.

Edited by Monkey Lover, 12 September 2015 - 10:26 AM.

[Alienized]

Bush Hopper, on 12 September 2015 - 10:16 AM, said:

Troll more

where should i be trolling?

[Yokaiko]

Monkey Lover, on 12 September 2015 - 10:23 AM, said:

I don't agree with that. I the size of the quirk doesn't matter the question is did it get balanced. In my view it needed even more quirks to be balanced compared to other mechs in the same tonage for snipers.

So the TDR-9S when it was ER-PPC god?

You didn't have an issue with ER-PPCs being cooler than LLAS?

[Ultimax]

Monkey Lover, on 12 September 2015 - 10:18 AM, said:

It's easy to tell this test wasn't ready to happen. There are lots of missing quirks and lots of errors. I don't think my jag is going to come with a 75% twist speed nerf. They must have just pushed it out to make us happy.

This is a good example of why there is rage and not much feedback.


How do you give feedback to a developer that thinks, in the current state of the game where clan mechs and clan lasers dominate and they decide in the face of that to give NEGATIVE twist speed nerfs to a Jagermech?


But, wait, there's more.


This is a mech with really big, un-protectable side torsos.

This is a mech that almost has to run XL to run a variety of it's ballistic loadouts and not move like a slug.

This is a mech that relies heavily on ballistic loadouts, has lost firepower quirks for those loadouts and then on top of that all of those ballistic loadouts were indirectly nerfed by the addition of MASSIVE structure quirks across the board - which by the way REINFORCES the current Clan Laser / Laser+Gauss dominated meta (due to lower reliance of ammo, on superior mechs with less accuracy issues due to hitscan).



This is what is upsetting, it's that they don't seem to understand any of this.

[Monkey Lover]

Yokaiko, on 12 September 2015 - 10:28 AM, said:

So the TDR-9S when it was ER-PPC god?

You didn't have an issue with ER-PPCs being cooler than LLAS?

What about it? I think the 9s is in a good place along with the stk4n after they nerfed them. Heck the Stk is almost stock. The dragon 50% ac might be a little bit op. My wvr 6r has 40% and feels very balanced.
The gird even with 50% is below average. I seen lots of people run ac5 over the 25% extra gauss.

[Kodyn]

I think the biggest problem here, and the reason we're seeing so many pretty extreme reactions, is this looks like a joke.

The devs admitted that this system was created by running an algorithm through a computer...not by taking feedback from players, not from playtesting, not from the facts of what makes mechs powerful or not powerful.

When the entire basis of the system isn't even man-made or logical at all, we know that there's no way the system is in any way going to work or make sense. They'd need to scrap this entire algorithm they're using, and actually try to balance the game based on facts.

When it looks like they aren't even paying attention to what came out of the computer, 1st stage, preliminary test, whatever, it's sure as hell going to scare some people. Why even release this on PTS, if you've as a dev taken a look at it and realize how ridiculous the whole thing looks? If they haven't checked out their own results, it's an oversight. If they have, then they have absolutely zero idea how their own game plays, what it needs for balance, etc. It's scary stuff, thus, the reactions.

Edited by Kodyn, 12 September 2015 - 10:41 AM.

[Yokaiko]

Monkey Lover, on 12 September 2015 - 10:38 AM, said:

What about it? I think the 9s is in a good place along with the stk4n after they nerfed them. Heck the Stk is almost stock. The dragon 50% ac might be a little bit op. My wvr 6r has 40% and feels very balanced.
The gird even with 50% is below average. I seen lots of people run ac5 over the 25% extra gauss.

Ummm yeah, after they nerfed them.

The -4N it basically doesn't matter what quirks it has ghost heat set to 4 plus its mounts mean it will be competitive, quirks aside, the -9S vanished after its 15 minutes of super quirk and the -1N is still a dragon that needs a lot of facetime.

[Burktross]