148 replies to this topic

[Mad Dog Morgan]

Convoluted system and completely unnecessary.

[cSand]

Paul Inouye, on 14 October 2015 - 02:21 PM, said:

Hey folks, here's a clarification post (with pictures!) for the laser changes on PTS build 2 for 'Mech Rebalance.

There are 2 fundamental changes being made here:

1) Clan laser MAXIMUM distances are being shortened globally. The LongRange value is not changing from what it is now. (It WILL be affected by change 2 below however).

Here's how Clan lasers are being affected...



2) A global change to lasers based on target lock.

If the target 'Mech is not locked, your 'Mech's targeting system is going to focus your lasers at 60% of it's normal LongRange. Damage falloff happens from this point on. If you DO target your enemy 'Mech, your targeting system now knows the distance at which to focus the lasers to do maximum damage. This is when your lasers go back to normal max damage at LongRange. Targeting or Not Targeting does not affect MaxRange distances.

Here is how targeting affects all lasers...



These two system combined are meant to futher enhance the importance of InfoTech and Clan laser max range imbalance.

Hey Paul I gotta ask

since the main goal here is to curb laser spam with huge alphas

Is there a reason you haven't looked at just lowering the heat cap altogether and mayyyybe doing away with ghost heat.. and rearranging the heat values of some weapons? i know people grind you about that all the time but I'm wondering if you're not making more work for yourself here when the answer might be right there all along

Cranking off a huge laser alpha wouldn't be much of an issue, if it left that mech shutdown and exposed out in the open.

Alphas were suposed to be kinda the final option of desperation becuase they might blow you up, and right now they are just the default on most mechs since there's not much a heat penalty for wanging em out

Would be a simpler way maybe to curb not just laser alphas but any kind of alpha

Edited by cSand, 14 October 2015 - 06:18 PM.

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

@Paul ... I don't envy the task of trying to balance this mess of 30+ years of jumbled together tabletop game rules and lore into a modern PC first-person shooter ... I'm glad PGI is doing it, but I don't envy your task.

You have come up with a few simple or elegant solutions to adjusting features in the game to bring OP aspects of the game in line ... adjusting the RVN leg hit boxes, for example ... that actually worked.

There have been other solutions, however, that have been downright confusing ... heat scale and weapon grouping (Wait ... Russ called it "Ghost Heat", didn't he?), quirks that affect weapon characteristics by more than about 10%, etc.

The Clan Laser maximum range change probably falls in the former category ... they're still powerful, and will still be able to out-range their IS counterparts (without the outrageous quirks currently in play).

The laser-target lock thing -- especially when combined with the weight-class-based sensor range with netted target data -- might be ... if the problem your trying to solve is the feedback you got from the last balance PTS ... that we don't need information warfare to do damage.

Losing reticule flash for any weapon hit ... that one will hurt those of us who have more than 100 ping to any server pretty hard.

[Santos Villalobos]

Paul Inouye, on 14 October 2015 - 02:21 PM, said:

If the target 'Mech is not locked, your 'Mech's targeting system is going to focus your lasers at 60% of it's normal LongRange. Damage falloff happens from this point on. If you DO target your enemy 'Mech, your targeting system now knows the distance at which to focus the lasers to do maximum damage.

This "ghost damage" mechanic again torpedoes the suspension of disbelief. Not only do my lasers inexplicably cause exponentially more heat when fired within an exact half-second window, but if I don't have a target lock, they fire at diminished capacity? What kind of weapons engineer would design a feature like that? Don't trust a pilot to know when he has a good shot lined up? Is there a corresponding decrease in heat generation to match that power loss? There is literally no in-universe purpose for the weapon damage to be deliberately underpowered depending on the unrelated existence of a radar lock. Besides, the computer already determines range - the green/yellow HUD lights in the weapons window and the rangefinder next to the targeting reticule process range instantaneously. But lasers somehow can't use that information, and require a separate lock? And, if there is no lock, they will intentionally reduce their damage despite generating the same amount of heat as a full-powered blast?

[Koniks]

This is a really convoluted way to make InfoTech matter and to reduce laser effectiveness.

Simple fixes are best. Adjust range, heat, duration, and cooldown not new mechanics. Unless you want to make flamers useful or make pulse lasers work like flamers where you can hold the trigger til you overheat. That's a new mechanic I can support.

[dario03]

I'm not a fan. I prefer having the option of targeting a mech, making note of its damage, engaging it, and while engaging it be cycling through other enemies to pick my next target or break off and engage a more open target. This system punishes that kind of play if using lasers. Yes you should press R but its not always best to hold target and just ignore all the other enemies around you. If I see that the enemy dragon is orange CT and fresh every where else, I know thats where to hit, I don't need the doll to tell me anything more. I need to know what my next target should be after I kill him.
It also punishes if engaging at long distance because without the target hit flash I can't be sure if I'm hitting a invisible wall or not. And sadly this game does have issues with invisible walls or objects not fully rendering at range especially if running lower settings.
Its also just to many changes at once. Less max range, less range if not targeting, less targeting range if in a bigger mech, if these all go in the upcoming rebalance its just to much. Long range laser builds don't need to be nerfed that much.
Also what are the range changes? It says 40% reduction so I'm assuming 1.6x though the graph seems to show 1.4 and I've seen others say 1.4 but in the testing grounds it seems to be 1.6. It also seems to be 1.6 for the IS ERLL which I thought was not affected.

I would prefer for the change to hit flash and the laser range penalty when not targeting be left out of the rebalance pass.

Edited by dario03, 14 October 2015 - 08:11 PM.

[Sturmwind]

For crying out loud...why do you guys always come up with some complicated, and in this case unnessary, change instead of adjusting the already in place values across the board?! Honestly, I don't get it, Paul.

As many have said before, there are those that will cry and complain all the time about something that they simply can't adjust their playstyle to, but that's -no- reason to throw a wrench into the game for everyone else! Yes, the high-alpha boating is annoying to some extent and I personally miss the times where matches took longer than 3-4min as it is now with bomb-rushing everything and just alphaing the living jeebees out of targets. Yet, this is partly your own fault with the quirks you have given certain mechs (pretty much forcing people to run them in that particular build otherwise still not as good as others in their weightclass) and the fact that we competitive people will min-max everything to get the most "effective" build.

The latter is logical and something you cannot avoid. By generating completely new mechanics you're just making it MORE complicated for everyone! You'll have to keep in mind that new players (which is one big reason for this rebalance again) won't have ANY idea about all these things as they would have to ask someone playing for awhile already telling them, or reading up tons of stuff on the forums. Who wants to do that to be able to enjoy playing a game?! By now a printed manual would have so many changes the writers would probably quit.

Somehow I see lasers being used way less than before and GAUSS, ballistics overall and perhaps PPCs once again dominating. It's not balancing, it's messing it up in my opinion.

Edited by Sturmwind, 14 October 2015 - 08:45 PM.

[Sneaky Shadow Stalker]

sooo.. let me get this straight...

our targeting reticles tell us how far whatever object we are looking at, say, a mech at 300m. so if i am not locked on said mech, my HUD knows how far away the mech is, but my IS medium lasers will do decreasing damage because they don't know exactly how far away the mech is, but it knows that it is more than 60% of the optimal range. there is a paradox here making targeting pretty convoluted and arbitrary in the name of "balance".

whats the point; getting people to lock onto targets because no one does? i get it, locking onto a mech to see where its weak points are important, but it shouldn't be required to do full damage, and in the case of ecm without a counter, impossible. i fail to see how this change helps anything, rather making the game more complicated than it needs to.

Edited by Sneaky Shadow Stalker, 14 October 2015 - 08:50 PM.

[Yozaa]

Thanks for the pics, clarified things for me quickly.

From a lore fluff point of view, I view the changes as such.

/BT Fluff speculation on

Lasers need to have their lenses focused on a target to output maximum damage much like a camera needs its lenses be focused to display a clear picture. Fuzzy picture means less damage .
(Think Magnify Glass)

An auto focus camera uses a laser range finder to determine which settings provide for a clear picture, provided that the rangefinder is aimed at the target.

Like wise a mechs targeting system needs targeting data to determine the best settings to focus a laser systems lenses for maximum damage. Without such data a mechs targeting system uses a default setting which may not be optimal

/BT Fluff speculation off

Edited by Yozaa, 14 October 2015 - 09:39 PM.

[Scandinavian Jawbreaker]

Paul Inouye, on 14 October 2015 - 02:21 PM, said:

Hey folks, here's a clarification post (with pictures!) for the laser changes on PTS build 2 for 'Mech Rebalance.

There are 2 fundamental changes being made here:

1) Clan laser MAXIMUM distances are being shortened globally. The LongRange value is not changing from what it is now. (It WILL be affected by change 2 below however).

Here's how Clan lasers are being affected...



2) A global change to lasers based on target lock.

If the target 'Mech is not locked, your 'Mech's targeting system is going to focus your lasers at 60% of it's normal LongRange. Damage falloff happens from this point on. If you DO target your enemy 'Mech, your targeting system now knows the distance at which to focus the lasers to do maximum damage. This is when your lasers go back to normal max damage at LongRange. Targeting or Not Targeting does not affect MaxRange distances.

Here is how targeting affects all lasers...



These two system combined are meant to futher enhance the importance of InfoTech and Clan laser max range imbalance.

Out of curiosity - is the targeting mechanic server or client authorative? In other words does ping have and impact how fast you are able to do maximum damage to targeted mech or is it tied to HSR?

[Mycrus]

Paul Inouye, on 14 October 2015 - 02:21 PM, said:

Hey folks, here's a clarification post (with pictures!) for the laser changes on PTS build 2 for 'Mech Rebalance.

Point 2 is worrying... no dmg falloff within normal range pls... it is do hard for newbs to understand that...

There are 2 fundamental changes being made here:

1) Clan laser MAXIMUM distances are being shortened globally. The LongRange value is not changing from what it is now. (It WILL be affected by change 2 below however).

Here's how Clan lasers are being affected...



2) A global change to lasers based on target lock.

If the target 'Mech is not locked, your 'Mech's targeting system is going to focus your lasers at 60% of it's normal LongRange. Damage falloff happens from this point on. If you DO target your enemy 'Mech, your targeting system now knows the distance at which to focus the lasers to do maximum damage. This is when your lasers go back to normal max damage at LongRange. Targeting or Not Targeting does not affect MaxRange distances.

Here is how targeting affects all lasers...



These two system combined are meant to futher enhance the importance of InfoTech and Clan laser max range imbalance.

[DoVeX]

Dear PGI,
You just sold us a bunch of energy only hardpoint mechs that lack the ability to carry other types of loadouts.
Please don't make it more difficult to do damage with them, as we already must sacrifice many tons on heatsinks .It forces us to run XL motors on most builds and makes us more fragile. All in order to keep up with the high alpha strike meta gameplay.
I understand the difficulty of game balance, lets just try to keep it SIMPLE and fair for all mechs.

[K1ttykat]

For a second it looked like you were doing something almost clever with the original wording of the news article but it turns out no. If it was 60% of the max range, clans would be more affected by not targeting than IS.

Clan range isn't a problem ESPECIALLY the max range, it's damage at range that's a problem. The max range is just a bonus, most fights with the erML+LPL builds happen around the optimal range of 400m and the same goes for the gauss+LPL at 650m. Nerfing the maximum range has a minimal effect on the current most powerful clan laser based builds. With this change at best clans will sometimes be dealing reduced damage at range. It is NOT acceptable for a 1 ton, 1 slot weapon to deal 7 damage at 405m, EVER.

Keeping in mind that clans fight best around 405m mark, with the base sensor range at 500m most clan mechs (without significant negative sensor range quirks) will be able to lock their own targets and thus will be able to deal full damage most of the time. So in the end we're right back where we are now.

I mean come on it's bad enough you have stormcrows, timberwolfs and ebon jags walking around with 60-70 damage alpha strikes but the fact that they can project that damage over 400m is outrageous.

The way to reduce damage at range and keep the long range feel of clan lasers would be to give them a very large maximum range, similar to what they have now, but keep their optimal range or "long range" very short. This would give clans a level of risk/reward and ensure that the IS large laser can trade with weapons like the erML.

Edited by K1ttykat, 14 October 2015 - 10:05 PM.

[SkyHammyr]

When I first read the PTS Notes, I didn't know the target range nerf effected damage within Optimal Range.

Directly messing with a weapon effective/optimal range is a very heavy handed nerf. Effect maximum range is okay as shooting that far out is already inefficient and inadvisable.

I noticed my lasers seemed a bit short on range tonight. It didn't dawn on me until now.

Please, reconsider.

[Kmieciu]

Paul Inouye, on 14 October 2015 - 02:21 PM, said:

1) Clan laser MAXIMUM distances are being shortened globally. The LongRange value is not changing from what it is now. (It WILL be affected by change 2 below however).

Clan Laser Maximum Ranges

• Maximum Ranges for all Clan Lasers have been reduced by 40%.

I logged into the PTS client just to check.
In the mechlab I could see that ERML now has a maximum range of 648 meters.
It used to be 810 meters.
(810-648)/810 is actually 20%.
But they, I'm from Europe. Out Math is probably different than yours ;-)

Edited by Kmieciu, 14 October 2015 - 10:27 PM.

[Better Call Saul]

Makes the game pretty complicated for new players.

[slummy]

Its like Paul just asking for PPC/Gauss meta x2 bahahha but with Direwolves with JJ's this time!

[Thorqemada]

I like it - though IS gets now ridiculous low ranges without lock...

[Prof RJ Gumby]

In general like the idea, only the numbers are a bit too harsh imho.
Clan max range nerf is ok. Personally I would just put it at 50% for things to be simpler and easier to remember (We would just have 3 types of max range beyond optimum: +2xoptimal range / +1x optimal range, + 0,5x optimal range.

Lock/no lock
Thoughts: I think it would be better and simper if optimal range was untouched. On the other hand, changing numbers are an obvious tip for the noobies that locking matters (in case of max range difference only, optimal range numbers would not change ingame, giving no hint that range and lock have something to do with each other.). On the first hand again, some IS lasers already have terrible range (like mpls, spls)....
...On the third hand it may be a very positive weight-to-damage balancing issue - lasers would need tag/bap/narg to work at optimum all the time. I must say I like that thought a lot.

[Not A Real RAbbi]

QUESTION FOR MISTER PAUL:

Why is it, then, that if I have NOTHING AT ALL TARGETED, the lasers' ranges are the same as though I had my crosshairs DEAD-ON a targeted mech? Should it not be the case, that having reticle on locked target is the ONLY time I'd have the full proper range indicated? If I just NEVER hit R at all, then I KNOW I'll get full range out of my lasers, at least as the PTS is working currently. So, instead of RARELY hitting R, somewhere in North Tier 4 and above we'll just stop hitting it completely, and the whole lasers thing will blow on over. (Hitting 'R' is, therefore, STILL for untalented noobs like me, who need zero-skill LRMs to do damage, or some such nonsense.)

Sorry. Whole thread was TL;DR. I skipped from the sixth post down. No offense.

Also, pro tip:

Want to be sure you're lined up on that small, distant target? GREAT! Watch the range number on your laser weapons in the lower-right. IF that range number is the usual, longer number for that weapon, then you're on-target. If not, then your aim is off. No more guess work for YOU!

(No, I'm not a pro. But I DID stay at a Holiday Inn Express once.)