285 replies to this topic

[Fox With A Shotgun]

Okay. So let's get this straight.

This proposal for nerfing laser ranges. As a light pilot, clan lasers do not bother me all too much because their long burn times (and lack of quirks to reduce laser burn time) don't really allow for much damage if you're moving in an erratic manner. That being said, I can see the reason why IS heavies/mediums/assaults that aren't bolting around at 150-169kph can be more than a little annoyed by high hitscan damage hitting from ranges where they can't effectively retaliate. Bringing down clan maximum ranges to approximately equal (or slightly better than IS) will be a good thing for equality, even if the clan lasers still have a higher optimal range.

This mess about nerfing lasers without a lock?

Let's get one damn thing straight. It's a good thing on one hand because you can't just have enfilade fire down a group and have it all do full damage (even if spread between multiple mechs). Not like this usually happens, because ballistics and other front loaded damage weapons have a much easier time doing this (greatly increased target area / probability of hit).

But is it necessary to nerf ALL lasers the same way?! Small lasers and small pulse lasers are typically used for mechs that have low weight capacities and therefore must scrimp and save every last ton on their frames. Lights.

Lights do NOT have the luxury of armor to get more facetime on enemy mechs in order to acquire a lock. That one second that may be required to get a lock and a reading on an enemy mech is enough to strip off a large chunk of armor. Unless it is intended that short-range light mechs can actually acquire locks almost instantaneously at their optimal combat range, requiring them to get a lock or fight at 66m is a death sentence. Couple this with radar deprivation on most targets out there these days, and the problem worsens when the terrain is as cluttered as any of these newly reworked maps. Particularly Forest Colony, where the ground dips and rises like nobody's business and short mechs can't see squat.

Do us a favour and try to duel as a light mech at 66m. See if you can come out without ever colliding with either your target, another mech and coming to a halt - and then getting blasted to bits right after because netcode causes you to rubberband over and over again for the next 3 seconds. 80-100m is a more reasonable distance.

Unless, of course, I'm mistaken and the 'lock' required for optimal damage does not require a paper doll to show up. If that is the case, that combined with the fact that ECM no longer completely cloaks mechs is at least tolerable. Even so, I believe that the effective range nerfs on ML, MPL, SL and SPL are a bit too heavy handed as it stands.

[Kali Rinpoche]

The Sky is falling, the sky is falling chicken little! The way I look at it is that PGI really has been in control over their own destiny for just over a year. In a year, a lot of things have been addressed and the company has reached out to the player base over and over for input. A lot of that input has made it into the game. The core of this is that, F2P revenue streams only allow you to be so big when you're a niche game. I've been quite pleased with the FPS aspects of MWO, but I am really excited to see what CW will morph into. This is a small studio with probably 50 employees? Most like its a team of 5-6 core mechanics coders and then 2's and 3's for other support development aspects. If they had CoD money, they could have a team of 100 bringing you every wish your hearts' desired, but that isn't the case. Clan Ranges need to be reigned in a bit. I'm not overly excited about the IW aspects but I'm willing to adapt if it goes live in a state close to this. Many people will leave if you take away their alpha strikes with cone's of fire. Its what they rely on over and over in general play. Three years of so called unhappiness and your still around? Doesn't sound healthy to me. I for one will give these changes a chance. That "perfect" system may never come, but it may get close with our continued input.

Edited by Kali Rinpoche, 15 October 2015 - 03:32 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

The biggest crime of this new laser-infotech mechanic marriage is that it is completely unintuitive.

I am hoping they are just trying things out and seeing what sticks, because I'm not going to enjoy playing like this. It has little real effect in nerfing laser boats, but it does harm lights.

Also, unrelated, the slow-firing AC/2 in this PTS makes me very sad.

[FupDup]

Yeonne Greene, on 15 October 2015 - 03:28 PM, said:

Also, unrelated, the slow-firing AC/2 in this PTS makes me very sad.

Why is it firing slow? Are you talking about certain mechs losing their ballistic cooldown quirks, or is the gun itself slower?

[Johny Rocket]

Not sifting thru 11 pages of whine and outrage just going to throw my opinion out there.

ECM is getting Gimped, we know this.

Screw gimping clan lasers give IS erml and ersml.

I like the lock thing. It's an incentive to run more e-war gear and to lock. This helps Lurmers and it helps the whole team. When Im running no missiles I still want to know where the enemy is. I thrive working the flank and when I can see them on the hud I can plot a route and know which way they are facing. Destroyed a lot of legs this way. I already have ecm mechs and a few baps and tcomps, target dep, target decay....

[Shade 03]

PGI
This is stupid
Quit making up projects that waste your resources
and go finish CW

Edited by Shade 03, 15 October 2015 - 03:45 PM.

[Josef Koba]

I would have assumed, lore-wise, that my lasers' focusing lenses were tuned out to my weapon system's max effective range (i.e. 270 meters for IS medium lasers), which was essentially why damage decreased from there. In other words, my lasers were effective (maximum damage) out to 270 meters, but from there the focused beam dissipates and does less damage.

While this isn't a terrible idea (the original post), it just feels off for the reasons I stated above. And I'm not in favor of more convoluted and hidden explanations about how weapons do damage. It's not like this game, or virtually any games anymore, comes with a booklet explaining the mechanics. Now, if this game sold itself as a legitimate SIMULATION, then sure; let's do this sort of thing and have a no kidding guide/manual. But it's really only a quasi-simulation at best. Lock On: Modern Air Combat was a legit simulation (though it could be scaled toward an arcade style play) and required intimate knowledge of weapons systems and how they operated in combat conditions.

[Dirus Nigh]

This is just a bad change. It totally ***** over IS that could not compete with clan range as it is. Was IS med lasers doing 5 damage at 270 meters really that OP? I dont think so.

Edit.

This also hurts IS brawlers a lot. When you are fighting like mad in tight quarters, or running to save your life while out numbered, pressing R for every mech you snap fire at is just not going to happen.

Edited by Dirus Nigh, 15 October 2015 - 04:00 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

FupDup, on 15 October 2015 - 03:31 PM, said:

Why is it firing slow? Are you talking about certain mechs losing their ballistic cooldown quirks, or is the gun itself slower?

Loss of cool-down quirks...which honestly should be made baseline. But, we've rattled on about that one for awhile now.

[MischiefSC]

ArcturusWolf, on 15 October 2015 - 03:16 PM, said:

Okay. So let's get this straight.

This proposal for nerfing laser ranges. As a light pilot, clan lasers do not bother me all too much because their long burn times (and lack of quirks to reduce laser burn time) don't really allow for much damage if you're moving in an erratic manner. That being said, I can see the reason why IS heavies/mediums/assaults that aren't bolting around at 150-169kph can be more than a little annoyed by high hitscan damage hitting from ranges where they can't effectively retaliate. Bringing down clan maximum ranges to approximately equal (or slightly better than IS) will be a good thing for equality, even if the clan lasers still have a higher optimal range.

This mess about nerfing lasers without a lock?

Let's get one damn thing straight. It's a good thing on one hand because you can't just have enfilade fire down a group and have it all do full damage (even if spread between multiple mechs). Not like this usually happens, because ballistics and other front loaded damage weapons have a much easier time doing this (greatly increased target area / probability of hit).

But is it necessary to nerf ALL lasers the same way?! Small lasers and small pulse lasers are typically used for mechs that have low weight capacities and therefore must scrimp and save every last ton on their frames. Lights.

Lights do NOT have the luxury of armor to get more facetime on enemy mechs in order to acquire a lock. That one second that may be required to get a lock and a reading on an enemy mech is enough to strip off a large chunk of armor. Unless it is intended that short-range light mechs can actually acquire locks almost instantaneously at their optimal combat range, requiring them to get a lock or fight at 66m is a death sentence. Couple this with radar deprivation on most targets out there these days, and the problem worsens when the terrain is as cluttered as any of these newly reworked maps. Particularly Forest Colony, where the ground dips and rises like nobody's business and short mechs can't see squat.

Do us a favour and try to duel as a light mech at 66m. See if you can come out without ever colliding with either your target, another mech and coming to a halt - and then getting blasted to bits right after because netcode causes you to rubberband over and over again for the next 3 seconds. 80-100m is a more reasonable distance.

Unless, of course, I'm mistaken and the 'lock' required for optimal damage does not require a paper doll to show up. If that is the case, that combined with the fact that ECM no longer completely cloaks mechs is at least tolerable. Even so, I believe that the effective range nerfs on ML, MPL, SL and SPL are a bit too heavy handed as it stands.

No paperdoll. Just a full dorito.

You hit R, fire, get out of town before the paperdoll loads. All that happened was you showed your team where he was.

It also means that an enemy shooting at a teammate can't snap-fire at you as you run past and do full damage; he's probably going to do 40%. The benefit to lights who bite ankles in a furball is enormous. Where the benefit is limited is pokey lights, especially long range sniper lights. I don't grieve for their loss, I admit.

An actual boom n zoom lights or backstabber or ankle biter? This is solid money for them. Stay on the move, backstab, gank distracted targets and you'll only take 40% damage from most lasers. How in the world is that bad? The only tradeoff, the horrifying impossible to manage cost to being resistant to 60% of most the laser damage you take, is you have to hit R before you shoot someone at anything but point blank.

I would also argue that smalls and SPLs for the IS need an independent buff in a couple of ways. That aside though this change benefits lights. Just not terribad light pilots.

[Fox With A Shotgun]

MischiefSC, on 15 October 2015 - 06:58 PM, said:

No paperdoll. Just a full dorito.

I stand corrected, then. This is a massive buff for paper armor boom-and-zoom, like you said -- and god knows they actually need said buff. That is, aside from the ACH pilots, whose lasers just took a 60% range reduction, but do not really need a buff anyway because of ECM and loads of E hardpoints for their C-SPLs.

On the flipside, if it's only a full dorito we're after before full laser damage starts to apply -- this means that lights can effectively run around taking greatly reduced hitscan laser scrapes at extreme ranges, with all those annoying assaults and heavies boating CERLL and IS LLs being unable to lock on without the help of other high-scanrange lights.

Ankle biters, though, work at too close a range for this to work in their favour. I'm pretty certain that even at optimal ranges, an IS SPL is always going to have shorter range than literally every other weapon in game - flamers included. All lasers even without a lock would still chew them up...

Edited by ArcturusWolf, 15 October 2015 - 07:39 PM.

[Fox With A Shotgun]

Cryll Ankiseth, on 15 October 2015 - 07:55 PM, said:

Then everybody will adapt and start mounting BAPs, CAPs and the sensor range increase module.

Yes. Which is a good thing; ECM will be less a free get-out-of-jail-free card than it is an assistance module for getting close without your metallic backside getting shot to pieces.

Even so, BAP and CAP only boosts sensor range by 25%. Which on an already myopic assault mech is only +100m or so...meaning that an assault on its own with no light mechs to help it see is like a blind man without a guide dog.

[MischiefSC]

ArcturusWolf, on 15 October 2015 - 07:38 PM, said:

I stand corrected, then. This is a massive buff for paper armor boom-and-zoom, like you said -- and god knows they actually need said buff. That is, aside from the ACH pilots, whose lasers just took a 60% range reduction, but do not really need a buff anyway because of ECM and loads of E hardpoints for their C-SPLs.

On the flipside, if it's only a full dorito we're after before full laser damage starts to apply -- this means that lights can effectively run around taking greatly reduced hitscan laser scrapes at extreme ranges, with all those annoying assaults and heavies boating CERLL and IS LLs being unable to lock on without the help of other high-scanrange lights.

Ankle biters, though, work at too close a range for this to work in their favour. I'm pretty certain that even at optimal ranges, an IS SPL is always going to have shorter range than literally every other weapon in game - flamers included. All lasers even without a lock would still chew them up...

Sorta. You ankle-bite at ~200m. Or a bit closer if you're in smalls. I'm strongly in favor of buffs to smalls and SPLs for the IS.

Also adding BAP to everything wanting a laser boat is going to bork DHS/tonnage options. Most Clan laserboats have little in the way of shiftable tonnage and internals and for the IS freeing up 1.5 tons on a laser boat isn't optimal. Besides, that just gives range.

The real issue is that locks are life now and that makes people focus on where their locks are. If they shift to shoot the ankle biter they just unlocked the guy at 600m. Are they going to see if you're at 150m or 200m before switching locks? Oh hell no. They're going to see you're closer, maybe spray lasers at you, then go back to shooting their target after you're gone. You were 40m outside their 'full damage' range and thus... boom. 60% reduction.

It's not easy math. It just feels.... tankier. TTK on heavies/assaults shifted a little but it went up a *lot* on most lights. Suddenly they're the last ones down. That may change as people switch to PPFLD, I genuinely don't know.

For the moment though with a tiny bit of extra effort and a small shift in technique light mechs are taking way less hitscan damage in total on the match. If someone seems focused on you, book out and shoot his buddies. Otherwise though backstab when you can and keep to ~200m, boom n zoom and now your Commando soaks like an ACH!

I suspect people always lock an ACH. It's a threat. I haven't really noticed them, maybe just not a lot of them on PTS. Wouldn't that be ironic?

[adamts01]

This is all a huge mistake. Nerfing lasers across the board punishes mechs that shouldn't be punished. The solution should have been focused on the problem. Lasers aren't OP, boating them was. I do like the ECM nerf and the sensor changes, but this laser thing is terrible.

[MischiefSC]

adamts01, on 16 October 2015 - 12:53 AM, said:

This is all a huge mistake. Nerfing lasers across the board punishes mechs that shouldn't be punished. The solution should have been focused on the problem. Lasers aren't OP, boating them was. I do like the ECM nerf and the sensor changes, but this laser thing is terrible.

So lasers are better than ballistics. You can't have lasers not be boated; that's all some mechs can do is boat lasers. As stated prior, better to have one LL than one AC10 even if tonnage was equal.

This doesn't nerf them across the board. It just nerfs clan lasers beyond optimum range and it nerfs lasers at 60%+ optimum range without a target lock.

[Nightshade24]

oldradagast, on 14 October 2015 - 03:00 PM, said:

Thanks for posting this, but knowing the details does not change just how badly thought out this proposed change is.

The game does NOT need more goofy and illogical mechanics, like ghost heat and PPC's magically dealing 0 damage at 89 meters from the target. Yet another nutty thing to explain to new players, another way to mess with certain mechs, etc. Just more silliness.

Add a variable cone of fire, narrow it down when a lock is achieved, and be done with it.

It wasn't PGI's idea for the PPC 'magically' doing 0 damage under 90 meters.

it follows simular principles to the reason why LRM's do nothing under 180 meters. why Gauss and other sniper weapons do no damage under x range in TT, etc... it's to prevent a sniper weapon being a powerful brawling weapon.


Variable cone of fire is more goofier then conversion. You have to explain to a new person why did your AC 20 shot your allies back to the 20 meters to the right of your enemy where you aimmed... Russ really hates the idea of it and thinks it would really mess with the game and remove most skill from it- at least in terms of gunnery... World of Tanks has a RNG "Cone of fire" area where the gun shoots and people hate it... You get all sorts of illogical things occurring like bullets doing random 20 degree angle exits from the barrel and such... in short- suddenly guns are less accurate then early muskets. Even if the cone of fire is small... or insignificant... it isn't going to change lasers much besides making an illogical random firing on a burn durration weapon... It's very unlikely that lasers of all things would have a cone of fire unless somehow the actuators made for there conversion to aim at ranges from the arm or ST location somehow is manned by your pet monkey...


with all that out of the way- there is no reason why your idea isn't as "illogical" or "Silly" to explain to a new player then the PGI suggestion...

[adamts01]

People are suggesting cone fire as an increasing penalty for huge groups of weapons. And if the code could work it's a great idea. Up to 3 lasers would be pinpoint and as you added more and more the group would open up. AC20s that hit your teammate your standing next to were never asked for by anyone.

[Nightshade24]

adamts01, on 16 October 2015 - 12:53 AM, said:

This is all a huge mistake. Nerfing lasers across the board punishes mechs that shouldn't be punished. The solution should have been focused on the problem. Lasers aren't OP, boating them was. I do like the ECM nerf and the sensor changes, but this laser thing is terrible.

It isn't souly nerfing lasers and for some people this isn't even a nerf to begin with. It doesn't affect them.

What it does nerf is poor team work... get locks, get scouts, and have fun snipping lasers... get locks, get up close, and have fun boating pulse lasers or mediums or what ever...

Boating lasers is OP, it's side stepping the ghost heat and high alpha strikes. Which can't be avoided. This was ALWAYS the meta in every MW game...

adamts01, on 16 October 2015 - 01:21 AM, said:

People are suggesting cone fire as an increasing penalty for huge groups of weapons. And if the code could work it's a great idea. Up to 3 lasers would be pinpoint and as you added more and more the group would open up. AC20s that hit your teammate your standing next to were never asked for by anyone.

however it could be illogical... why are 6 fixed weapons in the exact same arm in a 1 meter or less area between the first and last laser will fire all over the place?

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

Dino Might, on 14 October 2015 - 04:35 PM, said:

From a "why does this make sense in pseudo-real world" perspective:

If not targetting a mech leads to the lenses not focusing correctly, then why not just set the lens focal point at infinity? It's a small opening for the laser light to exit. Why does it need to focus down to an even smaller pinpoint? Is that really the only way they do damage? If so, you'd never really hurt anything unless you got really lucky. You'd just put a bunch of tiny pinholes in mechs and wouldn't blow off limbs or destroy large portions of the mech.

The only way to get significant dispersion for reduced damage is to set a focal point very (and I mean very) close to the muzzle so that you have significant dispersion at normal weapon ranges. Who would do this? Just set it at infinity and you'll have no dispersion. Maybe you don't get optimal damage on a pinpoint, but you are still delivering the same energy to an area that's maybe less than a meter in diameter - seems good enough for government work. If we're somehow blowing limbs off with lasers, then that point of impact is probably already fairly large and not, in fact, the head of a pin, so the lens focusing issue makes no sense whatsoever.

Jesus christ people.

You want to know why? BECAUSE BATTLETECH. that is the answer. Seriously the answer could be "Because fairy dust and unicorn farts" and it wouldn't make any difference. BATTLETECH TECHNOLOGY DOES NOT WORK 100% BASED OFF OF REAL WORLD TECHNOLOGY.

So no, you can't "set the focal length to infinity" because then you loose all damage output and just have a pretty lightshow! There's your f'n explination!

I've seen more complaints in this single thread alone than I've seen on the forums in a month! You know what, anything ANYTHING that shakes up the meta at this point, is good. I see all you high tier guys complaining too... funny how you all are complaining it'll "Ruin" your gameplay experience isn't it... Because you all f'n crutch! You have to optimize, you literally, cannot function unless you're running the optimal, cookie cut, meta of the day. Because that's what EVERYONE's using right?

No, learn a new system, come back to me when you can take a 3025 era standard heatsink atlas and rubble a direwhale. Come back to me when you can make a 3025 era proxy warhammer using a grasshopper, and make that actually perform decently in a match.

I may be tier four, but you know what, I'm technically there by choice, because I REFUSE to crutch myself on the bs that's been broken for YEARS now... and now that PGI is trying to fix that, you're all throwing fits.

It's funny as hell to watch, you know that? All this whine, and for what... because "muh lazorz require lockons to be most effective boo hoo."

You know what, GOOD, they should have all along. Mechs take a TARGETING PENALTY when trying to shoot at multiple targets in a turn in the tabletop. Guess what this is reflecting.

I saw someone complaining that this is going to be taking an "insane number of actions per minute" and then claimed they were a Star Craft 2 player... clearly you're not, because MWO doesn't take nearly that many actions per minute to be decent... And you should be targeting the mechs you're shooting at ANYWAY... unless you're taking a quick snap shot to do some extra damage in a brawl. and even then, this change isn't going to effect brawling distance ANYWAY... so where's the complains coming from? Outside of laser boating lights trying to keep max distance with mediums or something [looking at you firestarters, yes you're still broken] this doesn't really hurt anyone.

Quit Crutching... learn to deal with what PGI throws at us. If this went live tomorrow, I'd be fine... stop dreaming that this game will be some e-sports god... it won't be. Make the game playable and fun, then move forward.

Edited by Flash Frame, 16 October 2015 - 01:33 AM.

[adamts01]

There will always be a better weapon, but right now boating lasers is ridiculously favored. And it can be avoided. It used to be much worse, ghost heat helped, we just need a little more of it. I love the new sensor changes, this game needed that. But, as ever slight as you think a 40% range nerf to an unlocked target is, it's still a nerf, and many terrible lights who can only bring energy are in a worse spot than ever.