572 replies to this topic

[Mystere]

kuritakun, on 13 October 2015 - 06:52 PM, said:

looks like time to give up kerensky's dream lol i like playing clans but i love taking out my is mechs too.. a very interesting quirk pass.. remember guys be open to the test its not final so dont whine just yet coz this might lead to a good balancing where "everybody is happy" (though i doubt that lol)
id do the same with the clan laser range testing, id reduce it by 40% then increase it in increments till it balances with is lasers with regards to max damage/max range

Why would I even bother to test Clan ER lasers that will have shorter range than IS standard lasers? What's the ******* point?

Edited by Mystere, 13 October 2015 - 09:09 PM.

[Coralld]

Wintersdark, on 13 October 2015 - 09:06 PM, said:

well, that depends on how "reduced the Max range" works.

If its Max range = 1480-(1480*.4) which is the literal answer, then clan ERLL ends up at 888m Max range - way below the is ERLL and even below the is LL. I hope its as you and others have suggested, as that does make more sense, though it is not what they said.

In the past, I've argued "Clearly what they meant was...." many times, but I've been wrong every time I said that... So we'll have to see. Thus far, they've always meant exactly what they said.

We'll see tomorrow though, and of course its a PTS so there no need to wave pitchforks.

And you know what? If they totally mangled Clan lasers, completely and utterly, but still fixed ECM as shown? I'd be happy. Stat changes to fix lasers later are more likely than functional ecm changes.

We will see tomorrow, but I'm fairly sure its to the Max range, as in its damage fall off range only, not total range.

[Mystere]

Madok Pryde, on 13 October 2015 - 09:07 PM, said:

if Clan tech it to be crippled to the point it is no longer Clan, why bother?
why would i want to spend more $$ on new mechs if they will be no different than the IS?

They will still be "different", and by that it really means "worse".

[Deathlike]

Mystere, on 13 October 2015 - 08:55 PM, said:

Loud and constant whining to the high heavens can and does work on the very weak-kneed. Sigh!

And the kicker? Clan double heat sinks being almost equivalent to IS single heat sinks is ******* hilarious. Clan ER lasers becoming short range weapons are doubly so.

Either you're not reading the stuff correctly, or that's a really high dose of hyperbole I've ever seen.

[Mystere]

D1SC0 LEM0NADE, on 13 October 2015 - 07:13 PM, said:

This sounds rediculous. The clan laser reduction makes no sense at all, until further clarified. Why do you need a lock to do damage? Flat out nonsense. It's no longer battletech and has become mecha-robot online. Clans HAVE superior tech, IS always had the numbers. Three lance vs two stars would take care of much of the crying without need for further balance.

I blame the ******* eSports crowd.

[Koniks]

PGI,

Please test fewer new changes at once. Testing the heat changes alone would've been sufficient. At most add the range changes, too.

The sensor and ECM changes deserved a separate test.

And for clarity's sake, next time show us the formulas and provide examples like you did with Ghost Heat.

I assume that "40% less max range" just means Clans now have a 1.6 max range modifier rather than a 2 max range modifier. Just like IS ballistics got a 50% max range nerf to a 2 max range modifier instead of a 3 max range modifier.

That one's pretty obvious. How you're calculating range for the no-lock penalty is completely opaque.

[Brut4ce]

I honestly have to say; "thank god there's another thing coming around the corner to satisfy my battletech thirst...". Before however, someone comes along and replies that "this is not constructive critisism", i will preemptively state, that, look where creative critisism and ideas from players that actually play the game and spent countless hours, or even days, putting them down in here all those years, got us. But lets trust someone that does not have a practical understanding, fiddle with the numbers...

The current state of balance in the game, while far from perfect, has been pretty decent, and apart from a few "overquirked" examples, has brought more diversity in the field. Now, all this latest "rebalance" is gonna do, is just create a new "meta" state and thats it.

How about, stop fiddling with numbers, that pretty much invalidate ALL your previous development, quite probably creating "new holes to plug", and instead, invest that time, effort and energy into introducing meaningful, quality content into the game. Except if this is pretty much all the content we are going to be receiving.

Thanks for reading.

[Scurry]

I'm pretty interested to see how long-range fights will be affected, since all LR options now have some sort of trade-off - locking, leading shots or charging. Well, except for IS ERLLs.

I'm a little curious about whether ECM targeting delay will stack.

[White Bear 84]

All the clanners gonna be coming out of the woodwork on those range decreases

and for clarification, because people do not read:

For the purposes of this test phase, all 'Mech and Weapon Quirks have been removed.

Plz no complaining about builds sucking without quirks.. ..that is not the goal of this test. The test is looking at the aforementioned changes in a neutral environment.

As for the number of changes - I hope PGI know what they are doing by testing so many variables at once. I would at least start with just testing HS changes to evaluate TTK...

Also, just WOW - Interesting way to ensure players lock on their targets!

"Lasers will not do full damage when striking a ‘Mech that is not target-locked from a range greater than 60% of the Laser’s Maximum Range."

Edited by White Bear 84, 13 October 2015 - 09:28 PM.

[Coralld]

Mizeur, on 13 October 2015 - 09:15 PM, said:

PGI,

Please test fewer new changes at once. Testing the heat changes alone would've been sufficient. At most add the range changes, too.

The sensor and ECM changes deserved a separate test.

And for clarity's sake, next time show us the formulas and provide examples like you did with Ghost Heat.

I assume that "40% less max range" just means Clans now have a 1.6 max range modifier rather than a 2 max range modifier. Just like IS ballistics got a 50% max range nerf to a 2 max range modifier instead of a 3 max range modifier.

That one's pretty obvious. How you're calculating range for the no-lock penalty is completely opaque.

That's how I understand it when it comes to the Clan Max range nerf, and after doing some number crunching it looks to be rather balanced for the most part. But instead of a 40% perhaps 30% would be better as we have to also consider the eventual implementation of IS-ER Small and Medium lasers, which may also involve adjusting ST IS lasers max range as well for balance and consistency.

[Scandinavian Jawbreaker]

Wintersdark, on 13 October 2015 - 08:27 PM, said:

IS ERLL outranges Clan IRLL now on quirked chassis, yes, but unquirked on the test server ever IS LL (and, obviously, IS ERLL) will outrange cERLL. Even the regular LL.

I'm not raging about this mind you. Maybe it'll work out. It just seems really wierd.

Consider: IS LL light, Clan ERLL Heavy. Light is fast enough tonstay out of Clan Heavy detection range, so the clan heavy cannot lock. The IS Light has longer range with its regular Large Lasers than the ERLL heavy, and the added damage falloff on the Heavy renders its ERLL's even less useful.

Maybe this will be a good thing? But it's strange! To have Large Lasers be better than ER LL at everything except short range? Bafflingly odd.

It is definitely not a good thing because clan er ll burn time is still 1.5 sec and heat at 10. Combined with DHS and range nerf the weapon might be useless. Have to test but I'm quite sure it's done with the changes.

[Jack Shayu Walker]

White Bear 84, on 13 October 2015 - 09:22 PM, said:

All the clanners gonna be coming out of the woodwork on those range decreases

You're not lying. I've suggested range nerfs before, but not ones that were this severe, and not ones to small lasers either.

[Monkey Lover]

Great job on the write up thank you for letting us know this time more of what we're testing and doing.

[Dagorlad13]

PGI, if Clan mechs are going to Clan mechs in appearance only, then fine, but please hurry and release all of the unseen mechs and allow anyone who spent money on Clan mechs to exchange them for an equivalent number of unseen mechs. Yes, even make golden Marauders and Warhammers to replace the useless golden clan mechs that the big spenders bought, it is the least you can do.

[Bloodweaver]

Clan DHS are already less efficient than Inner Sphere DHS. PGI's great idea? Make them less efficient still! And make the already-more-efficient Inner Sphere DHS even more more-efficient!

And this Clan laser range nerf... eesh. When did beam duration, heat output, and cycle time stop being valid methods of balancing laser weapons?

The Clan ERLL is going to soon 1) be out-ranged by the Inner Sphere ERLL, while 2) producing more heat, which 3) gets dissipated more slowly due to inferior DHS, and 4) still has a 1.5-second beam duration making each individual "tick" of damage that much less effective.

Brut4ce, on 13 October 2015 - 09:15 PM, said:

The current state of balance in the game, while far from perfect, has been pretty decent, and apart from a few "overquirked" examples, has brought more diversity in the field. Now, all this latest "rebalance" is gonna do, is just create a new "meta" state and thats it.

Honestly, the technological differences between Clan and Inner Sphere are already in a pretty good place. There's a lot of Inner Sphere players who complain about Clan weapons being lighter and more damaging. There's also a lot of Clan players complaining about Inner Sphere weapons being overquirked, easier to make builds for, and being a lot easier to do efficient damage with. But that indicates balance is good. Balance doesn't mean every opposing side is satisfied - it means each side is equally unhappy that they're not on top.

And finally... artifically reduced laser damage for shooting at targets beyond optimum range without being locked on to them? Are you guys serious? How much coke did your balancing team have to snort to come up with such an insanely convoluted concept that doesn't even make sense? Just tie weapon convergence to target locks!!!! Boom, info warfare always matters now! IT'S SO SIMPLE!

Edited by Bloodweaver, 13 October 2015 - 09:41 PM.

[Alex Gorsky]

InnerSphereNews, on 13 October 2015 - 05:14 PM, said:

• Lasers will not do full damage when striking a ‘Mech that is not target-locked from a range greater than 60% of the Laser’s Maximum Range.

#ghostdamage incaming

[BearFlag]

Quote

[color=#959595]This balance pass screams "YOU WILL LOVE INFOTECH EVEN IF YOU DON'T".[/color]

Indeed. PGI seems to be forging ahead in spite of the negative reaction on the first pass. I've been a sharp critic of this path to "balance" through "Information Warfare" (please stop calling it that). I fear that it will devolve to fight-by-instrumentation which is antithetical to duke it out mech/mech combat. I'm going to give it a try and see what it looks like, but there are a few things that are mis-steps out of the gate.

1) The double nerf of ECM will make it difficult to disentangle test results. Do one or the other.

2) Nerfing pilot aim by reducing damage on unlocked at .6+ laser range will not be well received. It is arcane, arbitrary and obscure. A better approach would be a straight linear attenuation. This is "real life", intuitive and easily understood. "Optimum" (half) range would be half damage. If you wanted to get fancy the "optimum" range might differ a bit on planets with denser or thinner atmospheres. Of course, airless bodies (HPG?) would have to be fudged - wouldn't do to have small lasers will full effect at two kilometeres.

3) I don't know how to put this lightly any more. If you continue to the nerf the Clan to level you rip out the heart of the story. The us/them, good guys/bad guys story line is destroyed. There's no point in even HAVING a "Clan" or "factions." Just run mechy death matches all day long. IS/Clan has been brought into a reasonable range that leaves the Clan a tough competitor and a somewhat exclusive club. This is how it should be. Clan/IS balance should be determined at the match level, not the mech level. (I say this as an IS pilot, BTW.)

---
"Information Warfare" (please stop calling it that). While IW has some overlap with EW, what is proposed is clearly EW. IW has close links with Psychological Warfare - propaganda, misinformation, etc. Every time I hear "IW" I think of a mech with loud speakers blaring "Surrender and you will be treated nicely." Change the name before the misnomer becomes embedded like poor "Community Warfare." Did you mean "Planetary Warfare" or "Faction Warfare?"

Edited by BearFlag, 13 October 2015 - 09:50 PM.

[1Grimbane]

Does anyone else think it's funny that when pgi says the "only" ways to counter ecm are five different ways..... ecm is just fine folks

[Fiona Marshe]

Rough examination of HS changes (which was suggested FOUR YEARS AGO).

Awesome-8Q
28 singles = dissipation 30.8, capacity 60.8
22 doubles = dissipaton 38, capacity 68, 6 tons left over.

Equivalent Clan:
22 cDoubles = dissipation 38, capacity 64.4, 6 tons left (which can be spent on a few more HS due to space savings).

[Nothing Whatsoever]

Sweet. I look forward to testing.

And I'm curious to see more on Item Health, such as considering having max counts calculated according to tonnage and slot usage, so that an AC/20 has more Health than an MPL.

I'm sure that Laser Ranges can get ironed out with feedback.

---

And I think there is a small typo with SHS decimal for cooling rate. Currently they are 0.10 Base Dissipation that goes to 0.115 with 2x Cool Run.

So I think, it is 0.11 Base not 1.10 on Dissipation.

So for Comparison on Dissipation (2x cool Run, Elited):

IS SHS should be 0.1265 Dissipation

IS DHS should be 0.230 in-Engine, 0.161 Outside Engine

C-DHS should be 0.230 in-Engine, 0.1725 Outside Engine


Small steps like this are perfectly fine by me!