572 replies to this topic

[Nephoros Sradac]

Overbuilt, on 14 October 2015 - 10:05 AM, said:

this seems a bit backwards.... Clan techs are getting dumber the longer they stay within the Inner Sphere instead of I.S. techs getting smarter? There should be an unbalance until the timeline catches up and it should be I.S. buffs bringing them closer to clan tech not the other way around.

Try telling that to PGI with their bias views!

[Coralld]

Prosperity Park, on 14 October 2015 - 09:51 AM, said:

I like how Angel ECM + Null Sig Armor that weighs only 1.5 to 1 ton and only takes up 1 to 2 crits is being removed from the game, and Guardian ECM is being put in as a replacement.

This will be interesting.

Fixed that for you.

[Av4tar]

40%

what about testing 10%, 20% and 30% first?

[Tarogato]

I really with PGI would increase Clan laser duration instead of fudging around with the range values. Increasing the burn duration would make Clan lasers harder to use, less pinpoint, and in general reduce their effectiveness as a whole, without taking away the thing that makes them unique: the extra range they get over IS.

This whole "60% of maximum range" thing is just confusing - it's a nightmare for new player experience, it's not straightforward, and it's hard to calculate in your head in real time. Just... please. Play with laser durations first and see how that pans out - it's a much more natural way to affect balance and adds depth.

[Coralld]

Eden Blackheaven, on 14 October 2015 - 10:20 AM, said:

40%

what about testing 10%, 20% and 30% first?

I'm pretty sure they mean the drop-off range so calm down.

[Felicitatem Parco]

Coralld, on 14 October 2015 - 10:15 AM, said:

Fixed that for you.

Except the nullsig part... PGI never released any technologies that hide your thermal signature.

[Coralld]

Prosperity Park, on 14 October 2015 - 10:22 AM, said:

Except the nullsig part... PGI never released any technologies that hide your thermal signature.

True, but ECM+Null sig hides targets from sensors like how ECM currently works where as regular ECM did not.

I'd like it if PGI added in Null Sig as long as time line appropriate, but that would mean the Null Sig upgrade would take up 12 crits, increase base heat, and reduce heat dissipation, and provide personal sensor jamming only as well as hiding said "steath" mech from thermal when active.

Edited by Coralld, 14 October 2015 - 10:28 AM.

[Jack Shayu Walker]

Tarogato, on 14 October 2015 - 10:21 AM, said:

I really with PGI would increase Clan laser duration instead of fudging around with the range values. Increasing the burn duration would make Clan lasers harder to use, less pinpoint, and in general reduce their effectiveness as a whole, without taking away the thing that makes them unique: the extra range they get over IS.

This whole "60% of maximum range" thing is just confusing - it's a nightmare for new player experience, it's not straightforward, and it's hard to calculate in your head in real time. Just... please. Play with laser durations first and see how that pans out - it's a much more natural way to affect balance and adds depth.

The problem with that is small lasers don't need a nerf, and they've pushed the ER Large to the brink of extinction with it's burn time already.

Coralld, on 14 October 2015 - 10:21 AM, said:

I'm pretty sure they mean the drop-off range so calm down.

You may be pretty sure of that, but not all of us are.

[Gas Guzzler]

Kin3ticX, on 14 October 2015 - 12:41 AM, said:

Its not clear in the notes

But I bet Paul didn't take 405m on the ERML and reduce it 40%, thats crazy.

More likely the ERML still goes 405m, but doesnt double to 810 anymore. Exact numbers unclear but im guessing it means the ERML will stop at ~648 (not including range mods)

Its either 648, or 486... the latter is pretty devastating TBH.

Eden Blackheaven, on 14 October 2015 - 10:20 AM, said:

40%

what about testing 10%, 20% and 30% first?

Well if the 40% means that a cERML with no modules has a max range of 648m and optimum of 405m, thats really not bad.

Optimum of 405m and max of 486m is too much in my opinion. Depending on interpretation it could be either.

[Mazzyplz]

Quote

I can even remember cone of fire used by so many games already - it is not really important that it may not have been an MW title... important is, that it actually works and is tested and used to all extend throughout gaming industry.

the cone of fire is the reason games like ghost recon never caught up with counterstrike
and the reason a game like arma has no true comp scene

it can work but it's really not what pgi is going for.

they want to have actual legit pro players for this game, i like to joke that with a big cone of fire you can have the top team be comprised of an 85 year old, a 4 year old and a blind person

Quote

40%

what about testing 10%, 20% and 30% first?

actually, in software development when making a change it is common practice to overshoot first and then go down, it is easier than to go up in increments (it takes less steps)

the problem here being that paul inouye gave SRMS a 40% nerf 2+ years ago and called it a day.
they're still there

Edited by Mazzyplz, 14 October 2015 - 10:51 AM.

[Balder Shadow]

Sereglach, on 13 October 2015 - 06:00 PM, said:

Honestly, everything here looks pretty frigging awesome. I think I seriously heard the Heavens open in a choir when I saw the changes to ECM. That is an utter Godsend.

I'm glad you (and many others) feel that way. Light stats already place them in the lowest usage bracket and without full time ECM coverage they're done. It was already getting tough with all the counter-measures and now, just not worth playing an ECM light.

To be seen as a light is to be killed at the higher tiers. When this is implemented I will be done with the ECM lights. I cannot wait to see the fallout of 3-6% lights in matchmaker.........

Edited by Balder Shadow, 14 October 2015 - 10:34 AM.

[Tarogato]

Jack Shayu Walker, on 14 October 2015 - 10:26 AM, said:

The problem with that is small lasers don't need a nerf, and they've pushed the ER Large to the brink of extinction with it's burn time already.

And I would agree, but that just proves my point - this change would work. Nerf the duration on at least the cERML and cLPL. These are the "problem" weapons after all. The cERLL is fine as it is, I reckon, so it doesn't need the change, but many of the others do.

Edited by Tarogato, 14 October 2015 - 10:38 AM.

[Tom Sawyer]

Not getting into the whole table top lore vs MWO online rant.

But seriously clan mechs when they first invaded aka 3049 SHOULD be more powerful. It should take 2 or sometimes 3 IS to take them down. That is HOW it was done.

How about a true lobby system. One in which you can arrange the parameters of a drop. 12 IS vs 10 clan. Or even 8. You get a bonus if clans are out numbered. If "balanced" you get nothing.

Something other than this constant chase to balance something that was never meant to be balanced. Once the time line advances and the IS starts fielding their own omni's with xl light engines, rotary canons ect.

Barking into the wind I fear.....

[-Ramrod-]

40% laser nerf? I love it! But of course I knew most of the clanners would be crying about it. At least you still have your Ultra-AC Billions.

Edited by Ramrod AI, 14 October 2015 - 10:40 AM.

[Coralld]

Gas Guzzler, on 14 October 2015 - 10:30 AM, said:

Its either 648, or 486... the latter is pretty devastating TBH.



Well if the 40% means that a cERML with no modules has a max range of 648m and optimum of 405m, thats really not bad.

Optimum of 405m and max of 486m is too much in my opinion. Depending on interpretation it could be either.

Exactly my line of thinking. If its Optimum of 405m and max of 486m then it is too much, but if its max range of 648m and optimum of 405m, like you and I are thinking then there is no problem at all.

[Luscious Dan]

We'll find out soon I suppose.

Anyway I like the concept of re-balancing the weapons themselves, rather than quirking the bejesus out of the IS. However, I still think the issue has more to do with boating weapons. 2-3 ER medium lasers isn't a problem. It's putting 6+ on a mech and doing far more damage at greater range than any IS laser boat can hope to match, short of Thunderbolt level quirks.

Make ghost heat a little bit more strict, and have it also increase beam duration when you have more than the threshold amount equipped. The same logic can apply to ballistic and missile weapons. Instead of just heat, have multiple autocannons generate cross hair shake/recoil for the attacking mech, and missile reload times increase if you have too many launchers equipped (representing a finite amount of support systems feeding ammunition within the mech).

This simple approach will apply the nerf bat more universally, rewarding mixed loadouts and taking the emphasis off of chassis quirks to balance mechs that have variable number of hard points.

[Kjudoon]

There is but one thing in this that worries me seriously.

LRMs become incredibly team dependent. People don't lock (for whatever insanity they have) you cannot use LRMs except at about half range.

So much for going out and 'getting your own locks'. LRMs become the ultimate "I need a spotter to play" weapon. Or at the very least, you're going to need all the crutches to make you an independently functioning member of the team able to get your own locks at safe distances and be effective. I wonder if they have some huge buffs for the weapon system on the way to for when you do get the stars to align and launch a barrage of 40+ missiles.


On a positive note, they incentivize locking by those who previously refused to do it because now they don't even know if they hit. THAT is a good change. The rest is a seriously mixed bag that could be incredibly good, or bad.

The only other big change that has me excited is the ECM nerf.

Who knows. Maybe PGI is planning to roll out some brand new targetting gear or make the command console seriously worth it.

Edited by Kjudoon, 14 October 2015 - 11:03 AM.

[POWR]

The math is simple.....

Clan ER ML, for instance. 405 meters effective range, 810 meters maximum. In the PTS test it's 405 meters effective range, 648 meters maximum range.

It's not hard to understand.

That ERML still does 7 damage vs. the IS ML 5 damage. And does maximum damage at ranges where IS ML deals around 1 damage.

Edited by POWR, 14 October 2015 - 11:06 AM.

[Luscious Dan]

POWR, on 14 October 2015 - 11:04 AM, said:

The math is simple.....

Clan ER ML, for instance. 405 meters effective range, 810 meters maximum. In the PTS test it's 405 meters effective range, 648 meters maximum range.

It's not hard to understand.

That ERML still does 7 damage vs. the IS ML 5 damage. And does maximum damage at ranges where IS ML deals around 1 damage.

Not everyone can launch the test client firsthand while at work, amigo. Thanks for confirming though. Wish the info was clearly shown in the initial post...

[Ragtag soldier]

if you're not working on fixing the binary "on/off" mechanics of weapon convergance, you're gonna have a bad time.......