71 replies to this topic

[Mystere]

oldradagast, on 13 September 2015 - 03:28 PM, said:

If somebody seriously offered an "idea" to tune up your car by setting it on fire, would you think "eh, he'll get it right next time." before politely declining?

This WAS their idea for balance, or at least half of it, since they apparently think that this "balance" can also be tested with valid results without seeing the weapon quirks, which is nuts.

You really do not need weapons balance when your intent is to test Mech durability. You just want to make sure that the target Mechs under analysis are being shot at and shot at often enough. Then analyze what did the shooting, how, and what effect it had on the target.

This PTS was a first run. It was a first test of their "diamond" balancing scheme, not actual balance itself.

I thought that was clear enough. Well, I guess not and PGI should say things more clearly.

[Mystere]

Astrocanis, on 13 September 2015 - 03:54 PM, said:

In my mind, there's a difference between seeing it and trying it out and deploying an obviously unworkable product. Some of the quirks made so little sense that it's hard to imagine it just being a typo. And, in the event it WAS a typo, the fact that nobody even bothered to look at the numbers before they were posted is ridiculous.

I've seen (and have had fired) enough developers to know that such things do happen. It's too bad I couldn't have their managers fired as well.

[oldradagast]

Mystere, on 13 September 2015 - 04:57 PM, said:

You really do not need weapons balance when your intent is to test Mech durability. You just want to make sure that the target Mechs under analysis are being shot at and shot at often enough. Then analyze what did the shooting, how, and what effect it had on the target.

This PTS was a first run. It was a first test of their "diamond" balancing scheme, not actual balance itself.

I thought that was clear enough. Well, I guess not and PGI should say things more clearly.

Balancing mech durability without balancing weapons / damage output is a futile task. I mean, sure, they can look at the data and say, "Wow, those IS mechs died a lot!" but that hardly means IS mechs have poor durability since it can also mean they can't deal damage fast enough to compete with Clan mechs. That's just an example, but the point being made should be clear.

As for PGI, yeah... A LOT of things should have been made more clear with this effort.

[Vashramire]

oldradagast, on 13 September 2015 - 04:53 PM, said:

Ah, yes. Internet photos - the last resort response of people who can't address the point being made.

No I just thought you would respond to pretty pictures better than words since you are so focused on the fact that the game is already ruined when nothing has been released. Compared to when quirks first came in, this is a massive heads up to at least having an insight to what they want to achieve instead of them just dumping it on us like last time and then adjusting them on live with several weeks of broken mechs. You seen to be personally offended by this entire PTS like they coded the whole thing while thinking of you and flipping you the bird, laughing like maniacs. You obviously can't handle change or proper feedback channels so I pity whoever has to spoon feed you irl. All of your analogies and metaphors are quite overblown.

Everything we have in this game is not ours. We are are paying to use makebelieve robots on the internet that are someone elses property. We did not make them. If they servers go down, you can't play because you own nothing. You are entitled to nothing. If you spend money, you are paying for the chance to use their concept of what they deem that mech to do and be. If they change it, you should have been adult enough to deal with it like an adult. All of your metaphors involve burning something to the ground or destroying something. It's not even live and you are crying like a little baby claiming they took your favorite toy.

Edited by Vashramire, 13 September 2015 - 05:19 PM.

[oldradagast]

Vashramire, on 13 September 2015 - 05:18 PM, said:

No I just thought you would respond to pretty pictures better than words since you are so focused on the fact that the game is already ruined when nothing has been released. Compared to when quirks first came in, this is a massive heads up to at least having an insight to what they want to achieve instead of them just dumping it on us like last time and then adjusting them on live with several weeks of broken mechs. You seen to be personally offended by this entire PTS like they coded the whole thing while thinking of you and flipping you the bird, laughing like maniacs. You obviously can't handle change or proper feedback channels so I pity whoever has to spoon feed you irl. All of your analogies and metaphors are quite overblown.

Everything we have in this game is not ours. We are are paying to use makebelieve robots on the internet that are someone elses property. We did not make them. If they servers go down, you can't play because you own nothing. You are entitled to nothing. If you spend money, you are paying for the chance to use their concept of what they deem that mech to do and be. If they change it, you should have been adult enough to deal with it like an adult. All of your metaphors involve burning something to the ground or destroying something. It's not even live and you are crying like a little baby claiming they took your favorite toy.

The part where you rage about other people daring to get angry is a very nice touch.

Point of order: Yes, customers do have a right to be ticked when somebody is "threatening to break their toys" or otherwise change a delivered product. Yeah, yeah - you can spout off nonsense all you want about how the NDA lets them do whatever they want, and while that's technically true, do you honestly think that changing everything everyone bought - yet again - is good for business? And how many people (aside from you, I assume) are going to keep buying mechs when they keep changing into heaven only knows what?

I've already been over why we should be concerned that this joke was released for testing. If you want to pretend that what we saw has nothing to do with the final product which "has to be totally different / far better / great!", that's your choice, but don't come crying to me when reality bites you in the rear. Some of us learn from our mistakes; I suggest you look into that.

Edited by oldradagast, 13 September 2015 - 06:02 PM.

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

I've bought a lot of 'mechs with real money ... pretty much every package available.

Is it wrong for me to want all of them to be viable at some point?

AS7-D ... fun three years ago, sucks now ... might be great tomorrow
CPLT-C1 ... fun every now and then, but those CPLT CT hit boxes haven't been right ever
HBK-4G ... good (except the "shoot me here" hunch), then sucked, now good again ... might suck tomorrow
JR7-D ... fun then, compared to a ACH or FS9, sucks now ... probably will continue to suck

I could go on ... the meta changes, whether you paid for the 'mechs with CB, MC, or cash.

I want there to be choices, for most 'mechs to be viable, especially if that means reducing the effectiveness of some of the 'mechs I have bought ... I do not want pay-to-win.

[MischiefSC]

Going to Tweet Russ tonight for confirmation that quirks on weapons stay until weapon rebalance is done.

[oldradagast]

MischiefSC, on 13 September 2015 - 06:01 PM, said:

Going to Tweet Russ tonight for confirmation that quirks on weapons stay until weapon rebalance is done.

Good idea. I hope he responds with a clear and concise reply.

[Vashramire]

oldradagast, on 13 September 2015 - 05:50 PM, said:

Lol - such anger! I particularly like the long spewing of personal insults because somebody on the internet isn't mindless nodding in agreement with whatever fantasies you have about where this game is going based on nothing at all. The touch where you rage about other people daring to get angry is a very nice one.

As for the rest of your drek, I'm not sure how long you've lived in the real world, but, yes, customers do have a right to be ticked when somebody is "threatening to break their toys" or otherwise change a delivered product. Yeah, yeah - you can spout off nonsense all you want about how the NDA lets them do whatever they want, and while that's technically true, do you honestly think that changing everything everyone bought - yet again - is good for business? And how many people - aside from you - are going to keep buying mechs when they keep changing into heaven only knows what?

But, hey - based on your post, you're just going to keep handing them money anyway, no matter what they do, while spewing personal attacks at anyone who points out that maybe - just maybe - when a steaming pile of BS is released for "testing" it calls the quality and future of the product into question.

Have fun with that, sucker!

Yeah, nowhere in my posts here did I say I was for anything that they are doing or have done on the PTS. My point was this thread serves no purpose but for people like you to cry as loud as you can and take people with you so you can feel justified in your decision to say that the game is ruined. If you really felt sure of your statements that the game was broken as bad as you say then you would just leave. You gain nothing by making claims of how this not released content is already breaking your enjoyment of a game you seem so keen on bashing now.

My statements aren't for defending if the PTS is even close to right. They are aimed at the fact that people like you blow small things way out of proportion. This is something that can be adjusted by our feedback and your feedback is "you broke my game I'm so angry". That has no point of reference and no direction. It's barely a cohesive though. Maybe "I do not like X I would like it to do Y because Z" would work better. Though I'm not sure you know how to make constructive feedback since you seem to think everyone who opposes your method of feedback is just throwing money at them to trash the game.

[Livewyr]

What bothers me is not the level of the balancing, but the direction... Random CT nerfs on Omnimechs with identical CTs???

WTF For?

Not a good direction.

[Vashramire]

Livewyr, on 13 September 2015 - 06:15 PM, said:

What bothers me is not the level of the balancing, but the direction... Random CT nerfs on Omnimechs with identical CTs???

WTF For?

Not a good direction.

From what I gathered, the algorithm that chose quirks were basing the values off that mechs stock omnipod loadout and weapons. High or low profile weapon points and position equate to certain sensor and movement values. It goes nuts when you start swapping pods because you can min-max to have nearly all positive quirks on a bunch of mechs. They may need a separate algorithm for just clans that accounts for all possible hardpoints and locations for values.

[ShinVector]

Kageru Ikazuchi, on 13 September 2015 - 05:58 PM, said:

JR7-D ... fun then, compared to a ACH or FS9, sucks now ... probably will continue to suck

Well... I won't say... 'Sucks'.
But at this point of time *made obsolete. Yes.

However if rebalance goes through it would put back IS lights back in a more even playing field.

Edited by ShinVector, 13 September 2015 - 06:47 PM.

[MischiefSC]

oldradagast, on 13 September 2015 - 06:02 PM, said:

Good idea. I hope he responds with a clear and concise reply.

He's already tweeted that the patch wouldn't go live until it made the game better. My concern is how subjective that is. I'd sorta like some specifics about weapon balance.

[Andi Nagasia]

MischiefSC, on 13 September 2015 - 06:48 PM, said:

He's already tweeted that the patch wouldn't go live until it made the game better. My concern is how subjective that is. I'd sorta like some specifics about weapon balance.

Russ and Paul have stated that they are already working on the Tech(Weapon) balance Pass,
which is why the this rebalance isnt coming out the 22nd, as they are still working on tech,

[Gas Guzzler]

Dr Tachyon, on 13 September 2015 - 03:41 PM, said:

Everyone agree? Huh? Balance is the best its ever been. Stay the course, keep tweaking. If this game is losing revenue, its not due to balance, its due to a lack of fun end game content

Honestly this is my opinion as well.

I get that they need to balance, but let mechs retain their flavor. If a Huginn is doing too much DPS, dial the quirks down a bit. Same with the Dragon-1N. Seriously, keep the tweaking going, every month or so, look at the mechs that are outperforming, and dial them back a little bit, then repeat. Doesn't all have to happen in one patch..

[ShinVector]

Gas Guzzler, on 13 September 2015 - 07:06 PM, said:

Honestly this is my opinion as well.

I get that they need to balance, but let mechs retain their flavor. If a Huginn is doing too much DPS, dial the quirks down a bit. Same with the Dragon-1N. Seriously, keep the tweaking going, every month or so, look at the mechs that are outperforming, and dial them back a little bit, then repeat. Doesn't all have to happen in one patch..

Dunno man.. I and probably some other feel that Quirks made MWO strange.

[Gas Guzzler]

ShinVector, on 13 September 2015 - 07:07 PM, said:

Dunno man.. I and probably some other feel that Quirks made MWO strange.

Why? Which quirks? The new balance pass is mainly quirks so you don't like that either right? How else do you address the disparity between mechs?

If its the 50% cooldown quirks that bother you, then yes, I agree, those are lopsided and should be dialed back. I don't think 10% weapon quirks here and there makes the game strange, it just gives different mechs flavor.

[Night Thastus]

This is the first wave.
Of an experimental PTS server attempting to re-balance the game in it's entirety. You didn't expect they'd get it right on the first shot, right?

That's why many of us area playing matches, building 'Mechs, trying new tactics, and trying to give them detailed feedback so that they do get it right soon.

Instead of complaining that it isn't good, go and make a detailed post about what needs to change, and why. Then others will listen, or perhaps not. But at least there is a chance you will do something productive, rather than this.

[ShinVector]

Gas Guzzler, on 13 September 2015 - 07:16 PM, said:

If its the 50% cooldown quirks that bother you, then yes, I agree, those are lopsided and should be dialed back. I don't think 10% weapon quirks here and there makes the game strange, it just gives different mechs flavor.

Those 7-10% quirks was enough to make Ember obsolete versus the other FS.
This is what I am referring to but it is just my opinion on the matter though.

[Wayreth]

Vashramire, on 13 September 2015 - 06:12 PM, said:

My statements aren't for defending if the PTS is even close to right. They are aimed at the fact that people like you blow small things way out of proportion. This is something that can be adjusted by our feedback and your feedback is "you broke my game I'm so angry". That has no point of reference and no direction. It's barely a cohesive though. Maybe "I do not like X I would like it to do Y because Z" would work better. Though I'm not sure you know how to make constructive feedback since you seem to think everyone who opposes your method of feedback is just throwing money at them to trash the game.

This is like the pot calling the kettle black. Causing drama while at the same time denouncing it? Radagast has a different experience with MWO and PGI as have I. Perhaps instead of denouncing people like him try to understand where he is coming from. I was there for the 2013 melt down when PGI was pushing forward without any word on what it was doing and the phrase “PGI Lied, MWO Died” was uttered quite often. People have been through a lot with this game and I mean A LOT. So please excuse us when we get gun shy over words like re balancing and new and improved.

Edited by Wayreth, 13 September 2015 - 07:44 PM.