Jump to content

Constructive Criticism On Pts Trial From Tcaf Member (Long Read)

PTS feedback balance

7 replies to this topic

#1 DivineEvil

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • IS Exemplar
  • IS Exemplar
  • 903 posts
  • LocationRussian Federation, Moscow

Posted 14 September 2015 - 02:18 AM

Since PTS servers went online, I've begun collecting feedback from my unit members and formulating it into a comprehensive shape. Still, very few people aside from me were able to participate in active testing when there were enough players present to effectively perform testing runs, thus the major part of the following thesis is still my own view with an addition of other opinions, mostly based on discussions over raw math and shared screenshots. Unsurprisingly, many TCAF members, just as a vast majority of MWO public, were unable to comprehend the idea behind the first testing phase. To respect PGI intentions, these opinions will be left out. General points will follow:

Sensor/Targeting quirks and changes are major positives. Without a doubt, there were a need for information-related modifiers to incentivise role warfare and increase Light mech efficiency in performing flanking and scouting. With the upcoming nerfs to the ECM, these are going to make a big difference. One thing that bites me, is that base delay to the target spotting is not obvious. It might worth to implement a "signature" parameter to the mechs, together with available Sensor Range, to illustrate the base number of seconds of visual observation required to get a lock on a given mech without considering quirks.

It is unclear why PGI have decided to eliminate IS weapon quirks entirely from this testing procedure. It is a major undermining factor to the whole idea of changes. It is by all means true, that specific weapon quirks have been narrowing down the customization options for particular variants. It might also be true, that the total magnitude of both specific and general weapon quirks when combined are driving some variants out of the picture. But the presence of these issues have never been as severe as to nullify them. Firepower aspect should've been generalized and toned down, and quirks touching different aspects of weapons should've been given to the mechs still. Lack of these draft general weapon quirks made mechs intuitively unrecognizable in live performance from one-another and incomparably worse than their present unchanged relatives.

Russ Bullock have specifically stated, that 'mechs will be evaluated on four designated values - Defense, Firepower, Mobility and Sensors. Taking out one of these parameters out simply made no sense in a frame of these mentioned statements, no matter how early it is. Changing the methodology without even starting to follow it is counter-productive!

Character and/or values of new quirks in present form are inconceivable. The variety of different quirks, that affect a multitude of variant' parameters, makes the balance analysis impossible. At this point is almost futile to try to efficiently detemine where quirks are unbalanced among the mechs. Even superficial understanding of balance between either two different variants or chassie is impossible to reach to without using third-party datasheets or obscene amount of time of trying to recall all the different values. Long story short, first iteration of quirks is inconvenient by relying less on presence/lack of particular quirks and more on actual values of those quirks. It blurs and scatters the apparent differences between variants and mechs. Several quirks affecting the same DFMS aspect should be only applied, if otherwise applying one quirk with the same total magnitude will create a critical case. There's should be some different quirks, rather than many different values of those same quirks!

The amount of quirks makes the whole system unbearably tedious to use. When approaching the strong and weak sides of a variant or a chassis, it is mportant to remain subtle in displaying them. Supplementing the past paragrapth, using quirks to modify every particular aspect of a mech's parameters is obscene. Using one line for each component's structure value, rather than using one percentage value to increase Structure Strength, hurts the visual part of the quirk system and doesnt make sense from the balance standpoint. Arms, Legs and Torsos are all different components and should have different benefits from corresponding quirks. Specific local bonuses are only to be used in separate cases (Centurion's Shield, Dragon's Belly, Cat Ears, Hunch etc.). Same goes with Target Scan Time@Range; Basically it doesn't lights the bulb what are those three range profiles are, and why the disparity between Short Range and Long Range buffs/debuff is so large. It is hoped for them to be simplified to a single, general quirk of Target Info Delay, which would affect all ranges equally.

Quirk Handle and Variety proposals:
Spoiler


EXTRA: Example methodology for developing role-based quirk variety:
Spoiler


EXTRA: Potential ways to address the general MWO issues:
Spoiler


Thank you for reading!

Edited by DivineEvil, 14 September 2015 - 02:49 AM.


#2 Nexano

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • IS Exemplar
  • IS Exemplar
  • 124 posts
  • LocationFrom There

Posted 14 September 2015 - 06:41 AM

Hope this topic won't get lost, and PGI see it. Whining in other topics not very informative.

#3 Krivvan

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Littlest Helper
  • Littlest Helper
  • 4,318 posts
  • LocationUSA/Canada

Posted 14 September 2015 - 12:14 PM

View PostDivineEvil, on 14 September 2015 - 02:18 AM, said:

Finally, Clan VS Inner Sphere balance bias. That problem, ironically, can be adressed simply by tweaking either of two previously mentioned operations in favor of Inner Sphere Mechs. If only Inner Sphere mechs would get double internal structure, or if only Clans would lose their virtual Heat Capacity, this would create a significant rift between the concepts of two Factions. Whether Clans would be more compact and mobile, yet more brittle, or if they would get more powerful weapons, that are harder to use and manage with less heat capacity, the balance can shift in a place that most people are anticipating. Even more, if both changes are administered together in favor of IS mechs, the changes can be so dramatic, that there will be no need to bother with any weapon balance, and both IS and Clan mechs can be quirked on equal terms with similar amount of positive and negative values.

There are parts that I disagree with and parts that I agree with, but that section is what I agree with the most. Reducing heat capacity, possibly only for Clan mechs, is what a lot of us "meta tryhard" players have been asking for. Big offenders like the Dire Wolf will be less able to throw out 86 damage alphas over and over and over again to the point that it overshadows any other assault.

We all know that bracketed builds are terrible. If Clan mechs were a forced to delve into that a little bit, it really would be a significant Clan nerf that has the added advantage of balancing the upper tiers without making life terrible for the lower tiers.

Edited by Krivvan, 14 September 2015 - 12:15 PM.


#4 Nothing Whatsoever

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 3,655 posts
  • LocationNowhere

Posted 14 September 2015 - 02:56 PM

I'd like to see the Heat System addressed at some point. Here's where I'm starting to lean towards:

Reduce the value of 30 that you mention to 14
Disable Cool Run and Heat Containment
Change Heat Scale Penalty buckets to better account for damage above say 30 to 40 Damage, including more weapon combos
Raise Dissipation and Adjust Capacity with Cool Run and Heat Containment being disabled and replaced.

SHS
0.25 Dissipation
1.00 Capacity

IS DHS
0.40 Dissipation
2.00 Capacity

Clan DHS
0.30 Dissipation
1.60 Capacity

This way 28 SHS would provide 7.00 Dissipation a second and 42 Capacity to the First Shutdown we can Override. For comparison firing three PPCs with current AWS-8Q PPC Heat Gen Quirks and Heat Scale Penalties factored is ~31.95 Heat, HPS is in the range of 7.98 to ~9.98 depending on Fast Fire, cooldown quirks and Weapon Modules. Then two PPCs would be 15 Heat, so the player would need to alternate firing to avoid shutting down, along the lines of 3/2/3 and so on.

20 IS DHS would provide 8.00 Dissipation and a Capacity of 54 Capacity to the First Shutdown we can Override. If we consider the AWS-9M with its ERPPC quirks, an alpha of all three is ~47.93, with an HPS of ~11.98 to ~13.69. and so would need to be careful.

28 Clan DHS would provide 8.40 Dissipation and a Capacity of 58.8 to the First Shutdown we can Override. If we consider the Warhawk Prime. Firing three would spike heat really close to shutdown at ~58.79 in most maps and if moving. Firing two is a spike of 27.6 with an HPS of ~6.90 to 7.26.

An Adder Prime with 15 Clan DHS has 4.50 Dissipation and a Capacity of 38 to the First Shutdown we can Override. Firing two ERPPCs is a spike of 25.5 with an HPS of ~6.38 to 6.71. A single ERPPC is 12.75 spike with an HPS of ~3.18 to ~3.35. So much more sustainable than what we currently see, even with a reduced Capacity.

A 6xMPL Timber with 26 DHS, would have a Dissipation of 7.8 and a Capacity of 55.6 to the First Shutdown we can Override.
At their current heat of 6 each, the mech would spike 36 Heat with an HPS between ~9.35 to ~12.00. So there could be a Heat Scale Penalty that can be applied since the damage sits at 48. And I would have no problem seeing C-MPLs return to 7 Damage each while retaining their current 6 Heat, since base Dissipation would be increased anyway.

#5 DivineEvil

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • IS Exemplar
  • IS Exemplar
  • 903 posts
  • LocationRussian Federation, Moscow

Posted 14 September 2015 - 09:05 PM

I woudn't be so specific with the values. It requires some preliminary testing to see clearly what the values should be. Simply starting with all DHS on their base 2,0/0,2 values and SHS on 1,4/0,14 would be a good start. Then we can see if further adjustments are needed.

It boils down to that we need to avoid addressing the specific nerfs to Clan weapons and equipment, and instead look at their core values, because core values is where their advantage lies. We do not need to address the advantages of the Clan mechs, but we need to address some values, that Clan and IS are equal on and use them to round the balance up.

Edited by DivineEvil, 14 September 2015 - 09:05 PM.


#6 Kdogg788

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 2,314 posts

Posted 15 September 2015 - 04:33 AM

I can get behind the system implied by your chart. Could be a more rational means of "quirking" mech chassis then arbitrarily giving mechs of the same chassis exceedingly different quirks that make no sense especially when compared to one another.

-k

#7 Lily from animove

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Devoted
  • The Devoted
  • 13,891 posts
  • LocationOn a dropship to Terra

Posted 15 September 2015 - 07:15 AM

View PostDivineEvil, on 14 September 2015 - 02:18 AM, said:

Since PTS servers went online, I've begun collecting feedback from my unit members and formulating it into a comprehensive shape. Still, very few people aside from me were able to participate in active testing when there were enough players present to effectively perform testing runs, thus the major part of the following thesis is still my own view with an addition of other opinions, mostly based on discussions over raw math and shared screenshots. Unsurprisingly, many TCAF members, just as a vast majority of MWO public, were unable to comprehend the idea behind the first testing phase. To respect PGI intentions, these opinions will be left out. General points will follow:

Sensor/Targeting quirks and changes are major positives. Without a doubt, there were a need for information-related modifiers to incentivise role warfare and increase Light mech efficiency in performing flanking and scouting. With the upcoming nerfs to the ECM, these are going to make a big difference. One thing that bites me, is that base delay to the target spotting is not obvious. It might worth to implement a "signature" parameter to the mechs, together with available Sensor Range, to illustrate the base number of seconds of visual observation required to get a lock on a given mech without considering quirks.


This is the point where I would need to ask you if you or your members really play the MWO I play. What incentives? There was a need? what need? for what? The current MWO has not need for these information warfare, because nothign in MWO supports this except lrms (dead in higher tiers) and srms (not good due to spread lock).
Even with ecm nerfs, this is NOT going to mae a difference, Good pilots shoot on sight, not on scan or targetting. And information wafare will not change this. all those negtive "information warfare" quirks will not have any influence on mechbuilding for most good players. it does not even increase the scots efficiencies if they target ot not, or if they scan or not.

#8 DivineEvil

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • IS Exemplar
  • IS Exemplar
  • 903 posts
  • LocationRussian Federation, Moscow

Posted 15 September 2015 - 08:26 AM

View PostLily from animove, on 15 September 2015 - 07:15 AM, said:


This is the point where I would need to ask you if you or your members really play the MWO I play. What incentives? There was a need? what need? for what? The current MWO has not need for these information warfare, because nothign in MWO supports this except lrms (dead in higher tiers) and srms (not good due to spread lock).
Even with ecm nerfs, this is NOT going to mae a difference, Good pilots shoot on sight, not on scan or targetting. And information wafare will not change this. all those negtive "information warfare" quirks will not have any influence on mechbuilding for most good players. it does not even increase the scots efficiencies if they target ot not, or if they scan or not.

- Light mechs suffer from uniform sensor range. Since an enemy only needs to get you in his periphery to spot, you cannot effectively spot for your team. Only ECM mechs can do that at the moment.
- Light mechs can't perform well as strikers in most occasions, for the same reasons. Even if you'd manage to flank an enemy group undetected, as soon as you've landed a single shot on the target you've chosen, you can be spotted instantly, and the entire group will put their attention on you. If you carry an ECM, you're probably screwed even before making a move.
- Heavy LRM boats would now require an assistance from lighter mechs, and these lighter mech would be able to offer a nice support simply by providing extended target retention.
- On a competetive scene, information makes a lot of difference. One UAV placed on the right spot at the right time can decide whether your team wins or loses. With sensor quirks, a choice between a harasser, brawler or scout Light mech will make a significant impact.
- On a competetive scene, having a knowledge of enemy damaged components also determines between victors and losers. Simply being unable to focus your fire on a designated target affects the outcome of a fight.

It might seem meaningless from a standpoint of a regular Random Queue player, but from my point of view, being a two-year veteran player from a unit, which participates or participated in RHOD, MRBC, ISW, MLMW, NBT and some smaller leagues, its going to have some considerable effect.

Having said that, I'm afraid, we have vastly different definitions for a "good pilot", not to insult you or anything.

Edited by DivineEvil, 15 September 2015 - 08:28 AM.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users