145 replies to this topic

[LordNothing]

Dimento Graven, on 07 October 2015 - 02:15 PM, said:

Y'know... Not to sidetrack your valid point there, but... I think the MG is balanced fine just where it's at.

Sure, sure, you won't find many viable builds boating the weapon, but, I see plenty of decent builds that INCLUDE the MG and plenty of people doing reasonable damage and getting kills while firing it.

So... GOOD JOB ON THE MG, IT'S BALANCED!

Anyway...

mg was just an example. dont take it too seriously. i just wanted to use a weapon that much of the population considers bad to get my point across, i should have used flamers or perhaps lb autocannons as an example, but lazy.

only time mgs are weak is on light mechs that cant carry at least 3. but thats more of a mech balance issue (easily fixed by quirks, hardpoint inflation, etc).

Edited by LordNothing, 07 October 2015 - 02:22 PM.

[Khobai]

Quote

Y'know... Not to sidetrack your valid point there, but... I think the MG is balanced fine just where it's at.

Sure, sure, you won't find many viable builds boating the weapon, but, I see plenty of decent builds that INCLUDE the MG and plenty of people doing reasonable damage and getting kills while firing it.

Its not really balanced.

There just happens to be NOTHING else to put in a ballistic slot that weighs less than 6 tons.

Its still less ideal than another energy slot most of the time.

[Dimento Graven]

Mcgral18, on 07 October 2015 - 02:18 PM, said:

You are a minority there, it seems.


Uncalled for 20% nerf.

Unneeded 3M CoF

Khobai, on 07 October 2015 - 02:36 PM, said:

Its not really balanced.

There just happens to be NOTHING else to put in a ballistic slot that weighs less than 6 tons.

Its still less ideal than another energy slot most of the time.

Yeah, yeah, boating 6+ MG's on a light/medium you can pinball off heavier 'mechs no longer results in nearly killing anything you can accidentally hold your cursor on for a few seconds.

BUT, it's MORE balanced now than it has been, ever.

And even then, I'd be happy to give your 20% back, IF, knock downs were brought back too...

[Johnny Z]

Khobai, on 07 October 2015 - 10:54 AM, said:

Paul obviously doesnt know what hes doing. Or we wouldnt have dire wolves doing 70 point alphas in the first place.

There was a time when they had to nerf 35 point alphas for being too strong.

And then with the addition of clan mechs they allowed 50-70 point laser alphas and somehow thought it would be balanced lolol



Unfortunately thats not how industry works. The best person doesnt always get the job. People who are good at their job tend to be bad at job politics because they never had a reason to develop those skills to mask their incompetence. While people that are incompetent at their jobs tend to be much better politicians because they had to learn to lie to their bosses and scapegoat their failures onto others. Thats why people who politick their way into management or lead positions are generally incapable of doing their jobs... thats how its been at every place ive ever worked.

Great reply. An insight into the very fabric of modern day.

Although I think the guy doing balancing has a tough job and catering to the pro OP Omni mechs crowd has made it more difficult if not impossible.

Who it always seemed to only want nothing more than to wipe out the Inner Sphere players regardless if the game TT or video game, did well or not in the process. Rather than making a game both could enjoy playing.

Edited by Johnny Z, 07 October 2015 - 03:29 PM.

[pwnface]

I think they should leverage the community more for making balance decisions. They have a lot of really experienced players who understand the gameplay much better than they do wanting to help, but balancing decisions are all made secretly and mysteriously until they are unleashed upon the public and generally raged on by the community.

How about setting up community polls for possible balance changes and letting us decide stuff like "Do machine guns need to have their damage reduced?" or "Should flamers generate more heat for the enemy you are flaming than for yourself?"

[Mcgral18]

Dimento Graven, on 07 October 2015 - 03:13 PM, said:

Yeah, yeah, boating 6+ MG's on a light/medium you can pinball off heavier 'mechs no longer results in nearly killing anything you can accidentally hold your cursor on for a few seconds.

BUT, it's MORE balanced now than it has been, ever.

And even then, I'd be happy to give your 20% back, IF, knock downs were brought back too...

You mean 8 seconds?


They are bad weapons. They don't kill. You take Lasers every chance you can get. Also, 2 Meds can mount 6 MGs; the Arrow and the SadCat. Guess how many of those actually use MGs? Arrow, a few, but tri LPL or LL builds are more popular.


People actively ignore Ballistic slots for heatsinks, because it's more effective than having to face your target to deal any damage whatsoever (suicidal, in fact).



If you were to objectively examine the weapon system, you'd see that.

[pwnface]

How many builds were ever considered OP when boating machine guns? The FS9-Ember was the best light mech for a while but even then the machine guns were never OP.

[Burktross]

Dimento Graven, on 07 October 2015 - 02:15 PM, said:

Y'know... Not to sidetrack your valid point there, but... I think the MG is balanced fine just where it's at.

Sure, sure, you won't find many viable builds boating the weapon, but, I see plenty of decent builds that INCLUDE the MG and plenty of people doing reasonable damage and getting kills while firing it.

So... GOOD JOB ON THE MG, IT'S BALANCED!

Anyway...

Just because my Adder has a flamer and I do well with it doesn't mean the flamer is good.

[LordNothing]

pwnface, on 07 October 2015 - 03:30 PM, said:

I think they should leverage the community more for making balance decisions. They have a lot of really experienced players who understand the gameplay much better than they do wanting to help, but balancing decisions are all made secretly and mysteriously until they are unleashed upon the public and generally raged on by the community.

How about setting up community polls for possible balance changes and letting us decide stuff like "Do machine guns need to have their damage reduced?" or "Should flamers generate more heat for the enemy you are flaming than for yourself?"

yes and no. the community can give you an idea of where the balance issues lie, but you cant really rely on their anecdotes and biased opinions on the matter. you got to put the science back into computer science. you need to look at the data, make a change, then determine how much that change effects the next data set. this data needs to come from the in game stats, live stats from the pts, not from polls. though you can use polls to identify where the trouble spots are so those can be scrutinized in more detail.

[pwnface]

LordNothing, on 07 October 2015 - 04:28 PM, said:

yes and no. the community can give you an idea of where the balance issues lie, but you cant really rely on their anecdotes and biased opinions on the matter. you got to put the science back into computer science. you need to look at the data, make a change, then determine how much that change effects the next data set. this data needs to come from the in game stats, live stats from the pts, not from polls. though you can use polls to identify where the trouble spots are so those can be scrutinized in more detail.

I disagree with relying too much on in-game stats. At middle to lower tier gameplay the amount of LRMs being used would make it seem like they are super effective weapons when in reality they are quite bad.

[Mcgral18]

pwnface, on 07 October 2015 - 04:30 PM, said:

I disagree with relying too much on in-game stats. At middle to lower tier gameplay the amount of LRMs being used would make it seem like they are super effective weapons when in reality they are quite bad.

That's also the issue with changing a single item; everyone flocks to it.


Changing 3-5 items in a patch which wouldn't directly relate (LRMs, SRMs, MGs, XLs?) to get a small selection of things the population can choose from, and keep it for a full patch (unless very broken, IE Artemis Lurmageddon headshotting everything). With small, variable changes, that shouldn't even be an issue.


That way, you prevent things like the -15M/s LRM hotfix due to high LRM usage. Ideally.

[Alistair Winter]

Can't wait for that aggressive weapon balancing.

[Andi Nagasia]

for Balance i would like to see,
LRMs= Direct Fire(Always Target with LOS) Indirect Fire(only if Ally has Target, &Target isnt under ECM),
SRMs= Increase IS-SRMs Damage to 2.5(to Start), and increase C-SRMs Damage to 2.3(to Start),
MGs= Increase Damage to 0.9(to Start) give Dynamic COF 3M(COF will always be 3M at Target location)
XLs= Increase Pellet Damage to 1.2(to Start) increase Crit Chance to x2-x3 what is currently is,
If too Much Lower next Patch, if too Little Increase Next Patch,

[Dimento Graven]

Mcgral18, on 07 October 2015 - 03:33 PM, said:

You mean 8 seconds?


They are bad weapons. They don't kill. You take Lasers every chance you can get. Also, 2 Meds can mount 6 MGs; the Arrow and the SadCat. Guess how many of those actually use MGs? Arrow, a few, but tri LPL or LL builds are more popular.


People actively ignore Ballistic slots for heatsinks, because it's more effective than having to face your target to deal any damage whatsoever (suicidal, in fact).



If you were to objectively examine the weapon system, you'd see that.

Please, I was there BEFORE that last nerf, if you weren't packing as many MG's into your 'mech as possible, you were being an idiot.

Post nerf, the MG is NOW what it should be: A low heat, constant crit potential, SUPLEMENT to your MAIN alpha.

Cry about it all you want, it is actually balanced now.

[Mcgral18]

Dimento Graven, on 07 October 2015 - 05:00 PM, said:

Please, I was there BEFORE that last nerf, if you weren't packing as many MG's into your 'mech as possible, you were being an idiot.

Post nerf, the MG is NOW what it should be: A low heat, constant crit potential, SUPLEMENT to your MAIN alpha.

Cry about it all you want, it is actually balanced now.

...what?


You're talking about the 1 DPS MGs? Or the 1(2?) week(s?) we had the 67% Crit Chance+1 DPS?

Neither were particularly great. You did not kill things instantly. I was not packing all the MGs I could, because it wasn't a viable option.


They're not as far from balanced as they've ever been (lol, 0.4 DPS), but they are most certainly not a weapon system you'll ever choose to bring. Remove the CoF, and we could argue they'd be adequate, or return the 1 DPS.

Remove the CoF (or 5CM, like that missile splash) and return the 1 DPS, we'd likely have a viable weapon system for 150M. As it stands, they're laughable weak. Barely better than a Flamer.

Or do you also think Flamers are viable weapons? They're 0.7 DPS VS the 0.8 of the MG.

Edited by Mcgral18, 07 October 2015 - 05:07 PM.

[Agent 0 Fortune]

pwnface, on 07 October 2015 - 04:30 PM, said:

I disagree with relying too much on in-game stats. At middle to lower tier gameplay the amount of LRMs being used would make it seem like they are super effective weapons when in reality they are quite bad.

I disagree with this. If LRMs are statistically super effective, then action is warranted. Tier level is inconsequential, especially if the numbers make them statistically insignificant.
However, if statistics agree with your premise, and LRMs are actually an ease-of-use issue, PGI could increase their complexity as a possible solution. If the affected number of users warrant it.

[pwnface]

Agent 0 Fortune, on 07 October 2015 - 05:14 PM, said:

I disagree with this. If LRMs are statistically super effective, then action is warranted. Tier level is inconsequential, especially if the numbers make them statistically insignificant.
However, if statistics agree with your premise, and LRMs are actually an ease-of-use issue, PGI could increase their complexity as a possible solution. If the affected number of users warrant it.

I disagree with your disagree because balance should be based on the merit of the mechanics rather than what an average to poor player uses to be moderately less than awful. The best LRM player will not beat even a moderately skilled direct fire player, yet LRMs are abundant because a ton of players are not moderately skilled.

[Gas Guzzler]

pwnface, on 07 October 2015 - 03:30 PM, said:

I think they should leverage the community more for making balance decisions. They have a lot of really experienced players who understand the gameplay much better than they do wanting to help, but balancing decisions are all made secretly and mysteriously until they are unleashed upon the public and generally raged on by the community.

How about setting up community polls for possible balance changes and letting us decide stuff like "Do machine guns need to have their damage reduced?" or "Should flamers generate more heat for the enemy you are flaming than for yourself?"

The problem is, the community demands nerfs for everything that kills them. How do they know who actually knows what they are talking about, and who just likes to whine.

[pwnface]

Test changes in PTS then have community vote if they want the change or not. This is literally the only way you can make the most people happy.

[Dimento Graven]

Mcgral18, on 07 October 2015 - 05:06 PM, said:

...what?


You're talking about the 1 DPS MGs? Or the 1(2?) week(s?) we had the 67% Crit Chance+1 DPS?

Neither were particularly great. You did not kill things instantly. I was not packing all the MGs I could, because it wasn't a viable option.


They're not as far from balanced as they've ever been (lol, 0.4 DPS), but they are most certainly not a weapon system you'll ever choose to bring. Remove the CoF, and we could argue they'd be adequate, or return the 1 DPS.

Remove the CoF (or 5CM, like that missile splash) and return the 1 DPS, we'd likely have a viable weapon system for 150M. As it stands, they're laughable weak. Barely better than a Flamer.

Or do you also think Flamers are viable weapons? They're 0.7 DPS VS the 0.8 of the MG.

OMG, how f'ing easy do you want this game? If you weren't able to kill something EXTREMELY quickly with lasers and a crap load of MG's you were doing something wrong. Crimany, EVEN Jaegers were sporting 2 PPC's and 6MG's and racking in 6-8 kills a game. Frickin' Jaegers...

The fact that the damage is reasonable when stacked with more than 2 and is such low heat and STILL has a fairly decent crit chance is why we STILL see them being used. If they were as bad as you're crying about no one would bother, just load up more heat sinks.