148 replies to this topic

[Koniving]

Mcgral18, on 14 October 2015 - 02:59 PM, said:

Yes, it would be fine if it was a 60% reduction from the MAXimum range, but 60% reduction of Optimal is just sad and uncalled for.
But at least the Jesus Box was brought down a peg.

What's funny is that while the method is not lore friendly, the end result might be -- if done as a reduction to max range.
Though the targeting thing is just bonkers.

The issues with hitting things for lasers included smoke, dust, even anti-laser aerosols. So someone launches a fresh batch of missiles...

Note the smoke.
...and laser protection briefly.

I suppose the targeting thing is more fair. Do I think it should be against max range? Certainly. And it should be fairly universal...but convergence.

Sigh.

Anyway.
I can see some good reasons for it to be against optimal (long) range. Still there's simply better ways to nerf lasers that are more reasonable. Also listed in the first picture is not only laser variants (Beam versus burst [standard laser variants] versus the entirely different machine-gun like pulse [as in pulse lasers]), but also issues that the weapon systems have from frequent use, separate of the heat system.

Instead of ghost damage or ghost heat, we could have the much more reasonable ghost weapon destruction. Fried your lenses? Fried part of the emitter or the power cables? Well damn you broke it! Just give us some reasonable warnings. Excessive smoke, additional heat buildup, flashy warnings, verbal cues. Anything of the sort. Abuse the system, fire too frequently and fry your weapons.

And if it's to make pressing R to target more important, isn't the auto target thing already enough? I fire at something and it seems to automatically target someone even when I don't want it to. Unless there are plans to put in a "WARNING: TARGETED!" voice file prompt back in to warn us when someone has us targeted (to which NOT targeting would allow you to get in close for a really dangerous attack all stealthy like)... then I see no reason for it to begin with.

But okay, Press R to do damage.

Spoiler

Just needs to read "Press R to target."
"He saved us all."

[Vandul]

Dear PGI.

Please remember the NGE and what it meant to another game.

Otherwise, keep on doin what your doin.

[tenchugecko]

not the mechanic i would have chosen, but_

do it for min ranges aswell, but not that hard- to help fast small mechs
and pls dont overdo the balancing steps like always. slower is better

[HUBA]

I guess what this system hurts a lot was the number change on the weapons display. It make it look totally random and no one understands what is going on there. IMO it would be much better if the numbers stay (ML 270m) but the color is yellow when the target will not get full damage (as if it is now when above 270m) Also it should be made very clear at the weapon description, at the startup tips and in tutorials that a active target results in full potential of Lasers otherwise a damage drop occur above about 50% of the optimum range.

[Chorm]

Laser changes are OK if we're speaking about LLs and ERLLs, but MLs and SLs are hurt badly. IMO this range reduction must vary depending on the laser type. 66 m without targeting is kinda ridiculous. And please change the range output on the weapon groups window. Changing numbers is worse than changing colors, for example.

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

Chorm, on 17 October 2015 - 02:46 AM, said:

... 66 m without targeting is kinda ridiculous. ...

Is it possible that 6xCSPL ACHs or 8xSPL FS9-As are kind of overpowered? How often do you attack without target data? Maybe a third of the time?

If it affected the weapons every time you tried to shoot beyond optimal range, I'd be more likely to agree with you.

(SLs, on the other hand ... I don't know if there's anything that can make IS SLs OP, unless we're able to squeeze more than one in a hard point.)

[Idisvali]

Koniving: There is a laser inhibiting Arrow IV round in Cannon btw.

Personally, I feel that the Hud wasn't clear enough form me to adjust my tactics with the new laser dynamic.

Edited by Idisvali, 17 October 2015 - 09:10 AM.

[Jess Hazen]

The only thing that can be deciphered from that first chart is that the optimal range of clan lasers won't be changed... So now whats up with the 40% reduced maximum range? is that a percentage reduction from total range (optimal+falloff) or is it just 40% reduction in the falloff range? You could be more descriptive when trying to explain this nerf, try rewording it to 'falloff range reduced by 80%' or 'falloff range reduced by 40%' or whatever the case may be.

Just this reduction in laser range is a huge change, now couple that with the proposed new reduced damage if not locked... this BS damage reduction if target is not locked is a garbage addition to the game. Having a lock is not something that has anything to do with skill. This dreadful idea about needing a lock to do full damage at range should be nixed from this balance update and all future thought on balance as the value it adds to the game is less than nil.

@Paul. Maybe if you want the fights to last longer you should try doubling armour values across the board again...... you know... or not... maybe shrink the size of cockpit hit-boxes some more, that should help to improve gameplay. Maybe just remove head hit-boxes all together so I can remove all armour from there. Well that's my bit about being frustrated with your attempts at game balance Paul. Do your best and I hope to see you succeed in improving gameplay.

Edited by Jess Hazen, 17 October 2015 - 11:36 PM.

[Racersky]

will there simply b a 40% reduction in heat?

[Wintersdark]

Jess Hazen, on 17 October 2015 - 11:33 PM, said:

The only thing that can be deciphered from that first chart is that the optimal range of clan lasers won't be changed... So now whats up with the 40% reduced maximum range? is that a percentage reduction from total range (optimal+falloff) or is it just 40% reduction in the falloff range? You could be more descriptive when trying to explain this nerf, try rewording it to 'falloff range reduced by 80%' or 'falloff range reduced by 40%' or whatever the case may be.

It's confusing, but the simplest explanation is:

Optimal range remains the same, maximum range is reduced by 20%. Thus, a weapon with an optimal range of 500m and a maximum range of 1000m becomes a 500m/800m weapon.

Sadly, this was not well communicated at all.

Quote

@Paul. Maybe if you want the fights to last longer you should try doubling armour values across the board again...... you know... or not... maybe shrink the size of cockpit hit-boxes some more, that should help to improve gameplay. Maybe just remove head hit-boxes all together so I can remove all armour from there. Well that's my bit about being frustrated with your attempts at game balance Paul. Do your best and I hope to see you succeed in improving gameplay.

Doubling armor again has severe "collateral damage" issues, and is grossly unfair to lighter mechs. Double the armor on a locust, and it still gets oneshot. Double the armor on a Direwolf, and it's an unstoppable killing machine. There are other issues too, such as ammo. Basically, though, just doubling armor again is a minefield of problems.

[Corviness]

Most player, who has not use "R", will not use "R" too, after this patch. And if you nerf the weapons to a maximum range of 1 meter, the same % of ppl (the most) will not use "R". For what? To wait seconds for the info, look to them and shoot then to the weakest spot? Naah... most ppl will never do that, they see a mech, ah, center torso, shoot!.
Nerfs seem to me 100% useless. Especially, clan mechs are overpowered against IS mechs for a long time, till they upgrate their mechs (is er ml, etc.) Thats lore, deal with it.
Before that patch, most IS Pilots I saw where very good, it was a good balancing.

[1MAD MAX1]

Dear PGI, if you realese this patch....than please back my money for mechs, and play in this tetris alone.

[Neput Z34]

TLDR: AS IS: Pin-Point Alpha Builds are superior; Lurms are buffed inderectly; C-SSRMs are unaffected; Brawlers and SRMs are irrelevant.

The proposed changes to lasers ranges do not address the core "balance" issue of FLPPD.
FL: Front-Loaded / High Alpha
PP: Pin-Point
D : DAMAGE

Has any one considered why hardly anyone uses C-ERLL? That is because C-ERLPL have higher alpha damage, lower heat, shorter burn time at expense of 2 extra tons and 140m range.

Why do most Clan Mechs run 1 or 2 Gauss Rifles and a combination of C-ERLPL +C-ERMDL /MPL?
Because that is the most effective way to achieve high alpha damage while avoiding ghost heat.

Another example on IS side would be AC20 + 3LPL that is near instantaneous* 53 points of damage, or combination of 2-3 LPL + MPL/ MDL for maximum effectiveness

High Alpha Pin-Point Instantaneous* Damage builds make everything else inferior.
For example: Dual Gauss builds are effective at almost any range, generate next to no heat, short time of flight, reasonably fast cycle time for CQB/ Brawl and are not going to be directly affected by changes to lasers. Same goes for the rest of ballistics heavy builds.

Instantaneous*: Burn time on LPLs is approximately 0.6 ~ 0.67s, time of flight for an AC20 @ 300m is approximately 0.46 sec. Not quite instantaneous, but only slightly longer then half a second.


////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////_IMPORTANT_PART_FOLLOWS_\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

There needs to be some counter play between "Sniper", "Brawler", "Skirmisher" /"Striker", "Scout", "Fire Support" builds. More precisely there needs to better differentiation between weapons used by different mechs with different roles and I don't mean Quirks. May be something like this:

Get rid off Ghost heat and make all heat sinks have heat capacity of 1. DHS would have the benefit of "double" heat dissipation. If need be implement heat penalty based on amount of heat generated in 0.5 sec vs. number of heat sinks a mech has equipped.

Gauss and C-Gauss cycle time increased to 7 sec
ERPPC and C-ERPPC cycle time increased to 6sec
PPC, ERLL and C-ERLL cycle time increased to 5sec
LL cycle time increased to 4 sec

Turn all Pulse Lasers into a DPS weapons by lowering alpha damage well below beam lasers, while deceasing cycle time and heat to maintain overall DPS and HPS

C-Ultra AC10 / 20 may have to be reverted to fire more shells.

Increase LBX damage per pellet from 1 to 1.4 and reduce optimal range by 1/3, because pointless to use one past 200-300 m unless "rolling" for crits.

SRM hit detection may require a closer look.

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////_END_STATEMENT_\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

But odds are we are more likely to see another "Whack-A-Mole" balance "solution".

Edited by Neput Z34, 19 October 2015 - 09:47 PM.

[Yozaa]

Make an anti targeting (R button) module with a range of 50 meters Evil laugh extended version.
Lights can rush the enemy formation with said module neutralizing enemy mechs inbuilt C3 systems (lore guiz) and ability to target lock (R Button) within a 50 meter radius.
Aka information warfare.

Pressing R isn't hard, and should be added to the golden rules of how to play MWO well. Add a "press R to target the enemy for addition combat bonuses" to the tips screen pre game on high rotation.

Edited by Yozaa, 20 October 2015 - 09:10 PM.

[Setun]

Honestly getting rid of the x2 range entirely would probably be an easier and more worthwhile fix. Not saying this new system is horrible, but having lasers have a fixed range like LRMs or SRMs would give them that 'support weapon' feel that they should have. That way ammunition dependent weapons will be preferred, and PPCs will have the unique 'energy weapon that can hit outside of max range' advantage (at the offset of the increased heat vs lasers)

[Jess Hazen]

Thanks for clarifying that bit about the 40% reduction in maximum range being pertinent to falloff range only, the chart was pathetic.

Wintersdark, on 18 October 2015 - 05:31 PM, said:

Doubling armor again has severe "collateral damage" issues, and is grossly unfair to lighter mechs. Double the armor on a locust, and it still gets oneshot. Double the armor on a Direwolf, and it's an unstoppable killing machine. There are other issues too, such as ammo. Basically, though, just doubling armor again is a minefield of problems.

Oh yes I very well know this fact and have disagreed with the doubling of armour the first time. The heavier the mech the more disparaging the the difference in armour in comparison with lighter mechs. I was being sarcastic.

[Jess Hazen]

New question: Am I to assume that firstly clan laser range would be un-nerfed before this new nerf to their falloff range? And if not why aren't IS lasers being given the same treatment?

[RolfS]

Whattt!!!!!???? PGI can you please not obfuscate Laser damage. Keep weapon damage simple and easy to understand. Making it impossible to tell what damage you do with lasers unless you memorize 10+ random rules isnt fun or wanted....

[RolfS]

Since this thread is not actually about the test build I think it is time to kill an important myth.

In table top battletech it is possible to target a single part of the mech as can be read here

http://www.sarna.net...geting_Computer

A target computer combined with any pulse weapon would actually create the same high Alpha build and play as we see in MWO. Pin point damage was a "problem" already in the original rules tough some people may not have replaced ER-PPC with Large Pulse Lasers on their Adders (to allow legging the enemy quickly) but I certainly would.

The problem in MWO is that classic builds such as Summoner and Nova don't work very efficiently.

The only way the summoner stock build can get to be good or acceptable is if

Weapon damages need to be increased, otherwise players will only boat the same weapon type to compensate
Weapon damage behaviour needs to be different, otherwise players will only boat the same weapon type to compensate
Weapon ammo needs to be increased, otherwise players will refuse to play stock summoner mech

The single biggest step to fix the above issues is to make small weapons "bounce" off thick armour. Less boating of small arms and more stock builds that actually work....

[GalmOne]

Here's a little idea i've come up with.

Consider the position of each weapon on a mech chassis and the relevant size of the mech itself
Add in weapon convergence, as already implemented
Now, produce an "inaccuracy cone of fire" of sorts, the kind that in modern FPS has a different size depending if you are still or on the move
Ex:

Fast movement ---> ( o )
Stop ---> (o)

Now, apply weapon convergence at all ranges in different degrees based on said "cone of inaccuracy", i'd say heavier mechs with a lower speed should be affected less and arm mounted weapons (if actuators are present) should be less affected but there should never be an inaccuracy greater than the mech size itself at all ranges, something like : if you shoot while going at max speed all your weapons will just travel in a straight line

Factor in the function of the "R" (targeting) button which works like a lock of sorts and guarantees maximun precision by staying on target.
The idea is that the convergence should be present in a relative amount at all ranges, except when the mech is in a completly stopped position OR it has targeted someone (with "r") long enough


The point of this would be to eliminate accurate pin-point damage at all ranges instantly, would give a purpouse to arms and actuators but not impact short range combat excessively, by also making it more difficult to pinpoint all your dmg instantly you are indirectly increasing the life time of all mechs (albeit debatable in some cases, see hitboxxes)

Edited by GalmOne, 26 October 2015 - 01:10 PM.