99 replies to this topic

[Sereglach]

1. I think the ECM change is desperately needed and it's exactly the kind of change that many of us have been advocating for at various points. While having things like BAP will be nice for running streaks, it'll no longer be an absolute necessity . . . that 1.5 tons is murder for a lot of light mech builds.

2. The sensor ranges are a great start, and help provide more substance to role warfare. I'm sure we'll see a bit more tuning and tweaking as things progress (like Catapults getting a very long range for a heavy mech, for example, since they're dedicated LRM support in lore), but it's a great start. Also, they haven't re-implemented the rest of the facets from the first test, so we'll need to see how things start to come together. It's another snippet of a much larger picture.

3. I think the Clan Laser change will be another good one for the game. It's distinctly maximum (not optimal) range, so it's going to give Clan Lasers a very distinct flavor. While IS Lasers would have shorter Optimal ranges but reach almost as far as Clan Lasers, Clan Lasers would have much better Optimal range but very quick damage drop-off. Thusly, mechs might be able to trade fire at nearly equal ranges, but Clans will still win out in a purely range-based engagement. It's all in how you look at it. Most people are saying the sky is falling, but I don't think that's the case.

(Side Note: Remember, even the makers of Battletech wish they could mulligan and redo the Clans, saying it was a major screw-up that severely hurt the game with blatantly overpowered tech . . . so why is it such a bad thing if PGI actually wishes to try and instate a level of balance that creates fun and competitive play for everyone?)

4. As for sharing team targeting data and information: I think it's fantastic! Personally I think they should throw Command Consoles in the mix to make it so that each Command Console on your team decreases delays in target information sharing by 25% while they're at it. The Command Console NEEDS more to it than just being a "poor-man's-targeting-computer". That's one way to start giving it some solid functionality.

5. Also, about the only thing I'd consider addressing right off the bat is I still believe that wanderer's suggestion of making weapon convergence require a solid target lock is one of the most superior solutions to the whole TIG affecting Firepower issue. However, testing will tell and I think the TIG facets that they're implementing are a great start.

6. Lastly . . . Single Heat Sinks: While it's great they're getting some love . . . they need something that actually makes them competitive. I'm sure we'll see how this goes on PTS, but I think making SHS the only heat sinks that actually increase the heat cap is a good way to make them far more viable (obviously I'm an advocate for a mostly fixed heat cap). Time and testing will tell, however. I think this is a nice start to addressing some heat scale problems.

All-in-all I think this is a great start of PGI moving in the right direction. I can't wait to see it all start to come together as the PTS Phases go by.

[Drunk Canuck]

Some of this stuff I am fine with if they address other areas. Give lights ECM range bonuses, lets all just be honest and admit that the Hellbringer is the only reason ECM is deemed as an OP piece of equipment. Lights are going to get shoe horned because of the ECM jam range nerf, Skill Crows are basically going to be mandatory in order to crush lights, because they won't be able to do much as skirmishers with the whole target lock thing nerfing the amount of damage done to a target with lasers, and a lot of lights play near the tips of their max weapons effective range.

The flaw in the whole ideology is that Clans can't do sustained damage, they never have. Clans are all about the big lunch and taking out their enemy without taking much damage against an inferior tech base. All of the existing cooldown nerfs need to be reverted, but if they want to take a massive dump on laser boats than they needs to fix Clan ACs and make them single shot weapons like they should be.

[Heer]

I like the Less Damage if not locked being applied to Lasers

Personally, I think it should apply to all weapons - It is in the Canon (books) but not in the board game. I suspect the board game assumes locks or adds +to hit to reflect issues with locks.

What has not been said is Clan Targeting Computers should reduce lock-on times to reflect the way they make it easier to hit in the board game. However that is probably part of the whole ECM implementation issue.

It looks like this is a final move away from the everyone has a C3 installed and more a move to individual targeting.

If they could only implement Heat Scaling where hot mechs move slower, etc it would so reduce this whole alpha strike issue.

[Kin3ticX]

I have only so far eagerly skimmed through this.

My initial reaction is that this looks good and a vast improvement over PTS 1.

I need more time to go through and see it all on paper. For example how the 3 second ECM change makes LRMs more viable but on the same note could bring AMS out of the "waste tonnage" bracket. I mean, I could see maybe maybe a potential lurmpocalypse in some form out of this but on the other hand ECM creep is also a thing. Its not all perfect, but damn I am pleasantly surprised here.

Edited by Kin3ticX, 13 October 2015 - 08:33 PM.

[Pjwned]

It's cool to see that PGI is actually trying to tone down the jesus box finally, but I have a few concerns.

1. G-ECM should still not have a radius of protection, the radius should be 0.

2. Delaying target locks by 3 seconds still seems pretty powerful, I hope PGI is willing to nerf that down to a lower value if necessary.

3. Is ECM stacking still going to result in ridiculous missile lock times even when painting somebody with TAG?

4. Will TAG perhaps be changed to mitigate delayed target lock times against a target in an ECM bubble?

5. Is NARC still going to be ass when fighting against stacked ECM and having it be worthless unless you NARC every ECM carrier? I understand that the radius reduction helps with this issue, but I can't see the problem being improved a whole lot.

[SkyHammyr]

Understand that these so called "nerfs" of 40% (to Clan lasers) and 60% (to unlocked targets) only effects maximum range, not optimum range.
Seriously, this is hardly a nerf. If you're shooting at ranges past the weapon's optimal, you're wrong or you're sniping (and, even then, you're wrong). Hell, the way the visibility is on most of these maps, this shouldn't be an issue at all!

[Jack Shayu Walker]

SkyHammr, on 13 October 2015 - 08:35 PM, said:

Understand that these so called "nerfs" of 40% (to Clan lasers) and 60% (to unlocked targets) only effects maximum range, not optimum range.
Seriously, this is hardly a nerf. If you're shooting at ranges past the weapon's optimal, you're wrong or you're sniping (and, even then, you're wrong). Hell, the way the visibility is on most of these maps, this shouldn't be an issue at all!

Yeah... no.

a cERSL should not have a max range of 240m, even if it's optimal is still 200m.

[Illya Ghost Bear]

MischiefSC, on 13 October 2015 - 07:15 PM, said:

I like all of it except the whole lasers at 60% thing. I'm going to recommend something else instead......

No weapon convergence on an unlocked target. You want to make Infotech matter? That'd do it. That'd do the holy living **** out of it. You want to make 'role warfare'? That'd do it in spades. You want to shoot at someone outside of 500m and alpha strike them, you need them locked by someone else or you need sensor quirks/goodies. Otherwise you have to chainfire weapons with a 0.5 second 'convergence' delay on each weapon to the crosshair or you alpha and they just go straight out of the barrel, centered around your crosshair.

This also gives use to that convergence perk in the skill menu. Speeding up weapon convergence on unlocked targets.

Do it. It makes more sense than reducing laser damage.

While i like your idea..here's the snag.

They can't make delayed convergence work with HSR. What likelihood is there they could work staggered convergence?

It sounds good on paper, but even if the HSR and Server Side stuff wasn't an issue, also seems like a hell of a lot of code. Sometimes "makes more sense" is not doable.

So as I said, while I don't dislike the idea itself, is it even doable?

If it worked, it would make more "IRL" sense than what PGI is trying to test. But I'm thinking they are going this route because of engine limitations.

In honesty, shorter range lasers actually fit Clan Philosophy better. Here's my concern... shorter range.. AND the same beam duration. If they do decide to implement shorter ranges (not as huge a concern IMO when you consider the average clan mech is faster than the average IS, not counting Lights) I do believe they need to address the beam duration, too, or there will be an issue.

Edited by Illya Arkhipova, 13 October 2015 - 09:04 PM.

[Haydin]

Okay, this PTS I can get behind. Reduced heat capacity for clan DHS is a GREAT idea, and the falloff range should really help too. The Information warfare stuff could be interesting, but I want to see specific values on that first.

[Not A Real RAbbi]

MischiefSC, on 13 October 2015 - 07:15 PM, said:

I like all of it except the whole lasers at 60% thing. I'm going to recommend something else instead......

No weapon convergence on an unlocked target. You want to make Infotech matter? That'd do it. That'd do the holy living **** out of it. You want to make 'role warfare'? That'd do it in spades. You want to shoot at someone outside of 500m and alpha strike them, you need them locked by someone else or you need sensor quirks/goodies. Otherwise you have to chainfire weapons with a 0.5 second 'convergence' delay on each weapon to the crosshair or you alpha and they just go straight out of the barrel, centered around your crosshair.

This also gives use to that convergence perk in the skill menu. Speeding up weapon convergence on unlocked targets.

Do it. It makes more sense than reducing laser damage.

Oh dear mother of GOD, THIS time my undying affection to the power of my current e-rection, PLEASE F***ING YES DO ME BIG DADDY!

And stuff.

Okay, the moment's gone.

Still, WONDERFUL suggestion there.

And since we're departing from lore just a tad (you know, can't actually destroy an engine via critical hits, so even if we COULD damage the engine, we couldn't deal with that increased heat generation thing like in TT since 1980-something, and we can't crit the gyro to cause, oh I dunno, SOME manner of additional piloting difficulty, and so on, yeah this has SO ignored old TT), perhaps have the Active Probe systems do something to improve the above convergence rate idea, or y'know, SOMETHING.

Yeah. Combined with a baseline sensor range favor to light mechs, I think that's a flat-out STELLAR idea.

You don't happen to be a 35 year-old (or older) natural born US citizen with a clean criminal background, do you? Oh, you've got until next November to let me know, you sensible mofo you...

[M1Combat]

I like the initial read...

As far as the clan lasers...

I think we can all just decide it's a focusing issue. They do more damage than IS lasers. Maybe it's because they focus to the target range to do that extra damage, and you need a way to pass range info to the weapon so it focuses and you get your extra damage?

I don't know... But it sounds cool .

I'm sure they'll play with the actual distances until they're happy with them. I'm sure it'll take a few passes.


I also like the idea posted about weapon convergence too...

Maybe you could have an array of dots around your reticule that constantly try to converge at the distance readout of the reticule. Kinda like Elite but they only move towards the reticule and not auto aim to a targeted mech of course.

The problem is that the smart players would just always aim at the ground somewhere near an expected target location to "pre-converge" their weapons. Once the mech stepped out or whatever they'd run the retcule up the leg to the CT and never lose convergence. Maybe convergence should only take maybe .1s to mitigate that? It would make fire support a bit more difficult. Another interesting effect would be if they converge at the distance of whatever mech you have targeted... then you fire at some other mech that's closer or farther... You'd have a spread. It would become even more important to target what you're shooting...


Anyhow... Looking forward to testing

Edited by M1Combat, 13 October 2015 - 09:59 PM.

[bar10jim]

Illya Arkhipova, on 13 October 2015 - 08:53 PM, said:

They can't make delayed convergence work with HSR. What likelihood is there they could work staggered convergence?

It sounds good on paper, but even if the HSR and Server Side stuff wasn't an issue, also seems like a hell of a lot of code. Sometimes "makes more sense" is not doable.

I might be wrong here, but I believe the problem with delayed convergence was the "convergence over time" issue not playing well with HSR. The non-convergence vs. instant convergence on a locked target is not a moving or floating value. It's a binary value - yes or no. That should be doable under HSR.

[M1Combat]

Oh and just to make the suggestion...

Can we PLEASE at some point get a cool ranch dorito (blue) over the mech that's being targeted by the lance and/or company leader?

[Illya Ghost Bear]

bar10jim, on 13 October 2015 - 09:55 PM, said:

I might be wrong here, but I believe the problem with delayed convergence was the "convergence over time" issue not playing well with HSR. The non-convergence vs. instant convergence on a locked target is not a moving or floating value. It's a binary value - yes or no. That should be doable under HSR.

it might be, which is why I raise the question. We know there are convergence issues, but just what does the engine allow? As I said, if ti works, then I am all for it. It's similar to what I proposed, which was a CoF beyond optimal range. Which, btw, I know can be implemented.

[M1Combat]

Right now HSR looks at a yes or no for all weapons... having weapon convergence like we're talking about would just split it into an HSR call for each weapon yes? Maybe even only for three sets... Arm/Arm/Torsos... instead of each weapon.

[Elizander]

The Clan ER Large Laser has never had that big a range difference to IS and nerfing its max range by 40% is a bit much since the IS Large Laser will now have superior range over it by a wide margin which would make it quite a discrepancy. Might want to adjust that to a lower value. Otherwise I approve of the laser range changes.

Laser damage related to target lock is a bit extreme. I would have preferred reduced crit chance for all weapons if you do not have a lock or maybe you can't crit at all if you don't have a lock.

If you want to reduce laser burn damage you already have the proper value to do that in terms of burn time.

You already have the necessary data to observe since you have extremes in the game. You have your 0.60 second burn lasers and your 1.5 second burn lasers. Just adjust it to what levels you find satisfactory in your data.

Also if you want to lower laser damage more, then backload the damage instead of giving an even burn. Let the lasers start out weak and then have the higher damage pulses happen near the end. This coupled with slightly longer burn times should negate high laser alpha to anyone who knows how to twist their mech.

[Garheardt The Black]

Kill convergence on non-targeted mechs. I totally support testing this.

[ST0RM3R]

Clan dhs -30% of IS dhs - this is win. Clan lasers max range -40% this is second win. Where is clan lasers duration +50%? And ghostheat from 2 clan lls?
GG WP PGI! Awesome as always.

[627]

first thing to say, I like nerfs more than buffs. Everything that helps to expand TTK is a good move.

I like especially the intention with the clan changes, it is now at least in the direction of a sidegrade instead of update. Lower heat cap but better dissipation was demanded by some forumwarriors for a long time, now we can start to test that out.

And the smaller max range for ER Lasers is the tradeoff for the "ER" beside extra heat. Will be interesting how this plays out and if the IS ERLL will get the same treatment someday.

ECM - Yes, please! Without testing it this is a very good change. Now it does what a 1.5ton item should do and not something totally op.


Laser damage when locked,honestly I'm not sure I understood exactly what that means. Does the reduction anly affects max range beyond the "optimal" range or always? So does the ML always do 5 damage within 270m and only outside of that this cutoff kicks in?

And a last thing to sensor range, while this makes sense, I still like the idea of turning this around. You can detect assaults from farther away than lights, no matter what mech you have. But it's a start.

[M1Combat]

As I read it... they're removing 40% of the max range of the Clan lasers... I don't think they're touching the optimal range.


With the range nerf of the Clan lasers...

IS-ERLL drops 1 damage per 75m after 675.
C-ERLL drops 1 damage per 44.4m after 740.


At 900m we're looking at 6 damage for the IS-ERLL vs 6.4 damage for the C-ERLL. I haven't done the math but I think they're very close at 1000m.

Edited by M1Combat, 13 October 2015 - 10:31 PM.