230 replies to this topic

[Kdogg788]

Everyone is so focused on whether the target reticule flashes on hits on distant targets and completely overlooking what is probably the most nonsensical proposal in the most recent test server, and that is for lasers to do reduced damage on unlocked targets over a certain range. This makes absolutely no sense. A weapon will do its intended damage whether or not you have it locked. Why reduce this damage. Many of us can pick out ECM shielded mechs from a distance and put damage to them. This does nothing for role warfare and instead is a buff for ECM.

-k

[Tennex]

Not overlooking it.

I think its a very stupid idea

[Speedy Plysitkos]

nono, we alrdy read it.

and its nice BS.

[Myke Pantera]

I have to say that both proposals are not to my liking. AT. ALL.

Hope they never make it into productive.

[TheCharlatan]

It making sense or not has no importance: you can always find a way to explain it.
For example: i could tell you that lasers have a number of lenses that move to focus the beam at a certain distance, so the targeting computer needs the exact range to the target to do full damage... or i could tell you that it's "space magic".
What is important is if it works or not for balance.
It basically says: heavier mechs that want to be laser snipers need a scout.
Also, remeber that in this PTS iteration ECM no longer prevents lock-on, just makes it slower.

Edited by TheCharlatan, 14 October 2015 - 04:59 AM.

[Prof RJ Gumby]

Not a fan of this solution, but lasers sure could use some more drawbacks to get them in line with all the other weapons.

Good to keep in mind it will work only above the optimal range (from 60% of max range onwards). Within optimal range, having/not having a lock won't matter.

The real question is: how much will it be? 5 percent? 10? 50? 90?

Edited by Prof RJ Gumby, 14 October 2015 - 05:01 AM.

[Kdogg788]

Prof RJ Gumby, on 14 October 2015 - 05:00 AM, said:

Not a fan of this solution, but lasers sure could use some more drawbacks to get them in line with all the other weapons.

Good to keep in mind it will work only above the optimal range (from 60% of max range onwards). Within optimal range, having/not having a lock won't matter.

The real question is: how much will it be? 5 percent? 10? 50? 90?

I'm not sure.... If you read the literal quote of:

"Lasers will not do full damage when striking a ‘Mech that is not target-locked from a range greater than 60% of the Laser’s Maximum Range."

...then it would be the same as now because after optimum range energy weapons drop from 100% damage to 0 from optimum range to twice optimum? The quote implies there will be further reduction though after optimum range which is nonsensical.

-k

[DaZur]

You folks are overlooking the the logic behind this...

Community is bent sideways because of ranged ppd how it mitigates brawling. PGI answers with reduced damage at range without lock. Ballistic has its own skill based adjustment in drop off mechanics (obviously Gauss is not included).

It's a simple mechanic to mitigate ranged ppd and drive team based info cooperation.

I'm actually intrigued to see how it actually plays...

Edited by DaZur, 14 October 2015 - 05:19 AM.

[CDLord HHGD]

Yay, reduced across-the-map laser vomit.

I cannot help but notice the majority of people not liking the PROSPECT of these changes are all the meta-L33T-tryhards anyways.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

cdlord, on 14 October 2015 - 05:15 AM, said:

Yay, reduced across-the-map laser vomit.

I cannot help but notice the majority of people not liking the PROSPECT of these changes are all the meta-L33T-tryhards anyways.

I am definitely not and dont like it lol

[Thorqemada]

The Idea is that all Lasers (all Weapons in your Mech) are handled by a Basic Target Computer and without lock the Weapons are not adjusted for Pinpointdamage and stray damage occurs that does not hit the Mech...

[Kdogg788]

I can second that being in T4. I play for fun not comps and tourneys and the change doesn't make much sense. Adds another level of unnessessary head math to the game. They will have to put max range on the HUD as well at this point. With this change on top of quirks, modules, etc, you will need it.

-k

[Speedy Plysitkos]

cdlord, on 14 October 2015 - 05:15 AM, said:

Yay, reduced across-the-map laser vomit.

I cannot help but notice the majority of people not liking the PROSPECT of these changes are all the meta-L33T-tryhards anyways.

Sure thing brotha. Im leet captain tryhard T5.

[Phantom Limb]

Maybe they don't intend for all these changes to be in the live game. Depending on what they are testing (info sharing for instance) they may want to manipulate certain other variables on the test server to help collect data. In the case of the info sharing, it would make sense to encourage target locking.

I wouldn't like these changes in the live game either, but it is likely way too early to panic.

[El Bandito]

Obligatory:

[Mothykins]

I don't think I'm going to complain until after I see for myself.

That said, I did raise enough of a ruckus about the K2 that it got PPC quirks, so if it's terrible expect essays on why.

Edited by Cavale, 14 October 2015 - 05:32 AM.

[Clownwarlord]

hmm reduce laser damage on unlocked targets ... hmm not an issue for me I lock my targets at all times when possible. If not possible then I normally have a target locked of another mech that is able to be locked while I still shoot the hell out of my target. I also do not like laser weapons I prefer ERPPC, Ballistics, and Missiles ... PGI should really boost damage for srms. So to the try hards who point click all day with 60 point laser alphas ... SUCK IT!

[sycocys]

So lasers start losing damage faster -after- their optimal range when you don't or refuse to target enemies?

Not really sure I see what the huge fuss is, fight withing the optimal range of your weapons if you don't want to target. Or equip bap and the sensor range module and get your target if you can't be bothered to engage in your full damage range.

[CDLord HHGD]

Titannium, on 14 October 2015 - 05:26 AM, said:

Sure thing brotha. Im leet captain tryhard T5.

I said the MAJORITY and don't you or some other T5 have a post up saying how the PSR and numbers can't possibly be right? I don't have the time or inclination to investigate myself so I took their word for it, that it's quite probably broken....

Besides, anyone can shoehorn meta into a mech, not just T1 and T2. Just those who do tend to get to those tiers fast.

So, if you aren't blindly defending your meta and/or do not use meta, and we obviously haven't tested this yet, then no-one can give an objective opinion about these changes.

I said in another post that the mechanics are a bit wonky, but I am willing to reserve judgement until I an test it.

[Speedy Plysitkos]

El Bandito, on 14 October 2015 - 05:29 AM, said:

Obligatory:

Yep, NERF incoming to that green thing soon. Dont worry...