179 replies to this topic

[Sable]

Laser lock wasn't necessarily a bad idea it just would have needed A TON of tuning to work at an acceptable level. Especially in combination with the new targeting mechanics they put in.

[Wintersdark]

I *am* sad to see a reduction in the need to get and share target information, though.

I'd REALLY like to see weapons have fixed convergence at target distance, or infinite if no target.

[fat4eyes]

Wintersdark, on 06 November 2015 - 09:57 PM, said:

I *am* sad to see a reduction in the need to get and share target information, though.

I'd REALLY like to see weapons have fixed convergence at target distance, or infinite if no target.

I like this idea, if it's at all possible. It also has the nice side effect of buffing projectile weapons so they converge on one spot even when you're leading your target.

[Wintersdark]

fat4eyes, on 06 November 2015 - 10:13 PM, said:

I like this idea, if it's at all possible. It also has the nice side effect of buffing projectile weapons so they converge on one spot even when you're leading your target.

Yup. No more literally impossible to hit speedy skinny lights.

[DAYLEET]

Wintersdark, on 06 November 2015 - 09:54 PM, said:

In the PTS, laser lock on was a TTK increaser, not a Clan Nerf.

If anything, IS suffered more than clams to the laser lock thing - Clams have lots of very excellent long range weapons that still functioned acceptably without locks (such as the esteemed cLPL). IS? Not so much.


What balanced Clams in the PTS was a combination of factors including Clams' low heat cap and massive armor and structure quirks IS side (things like +7 full body armor don't seem like much, but that's +7 armor everywhere - even the back torsos, cockpit, etc). The AS7K sported some 60 points of additional health from the rear center torso in addition to whatever armor you put there and the normal structure.

Or so ive been told many times, but when i played pts i saw differently. Maybe because clanners are used to be lazy. I only played light and meds in pts2.

[Impyrium]

That's a pity. The idea had a lot of potential, just needed a lot of tweaking and better representation visually.

[Lightfoot]

Wintersdark, on 06 November 2015 - 09:54 PM, said:

In the PTS, laser lock on was a TTK increaser, not a Clan Nerf.

If anything, IS suffered more than clams to the laser lock thing - Clams have lots of very excellent long range weapons that still functioned acceptably without locks (such as the esteemed cLPL). IS? Not so much.


What balanced Clams in the PTS was a combination of factors including Clams' low heat cap and massive armor and structure quirks IS side (things like +7 full body armor don't seem like much, but that's +7 armor everywhere - even the back torsos, cockpit, etc). The AS7K sported some 60 points of additional health from the rear center torso in addition to whatever armor you put there and the normal structure.

The armor and structure quirks sound very unbalanced to me. Atlas needs a little help, but last I checked there were several in every PUG drop I go on so it's working for some people. What are they doing for the Thor? It has problems similar to the Atlas really, although 30 tons lighter.

I don't really care, IS and Clan have good mechs and bad mechs and I can make IS mechs that beat Clan consistently. Go ahead, buff my IS mechs, who wants to play as a Clanner anyway? The fanboy dream is driving a Mad Cat for an Inner Sphere Merc unit or an IS mech with Clan tech. It's not playing for the Clans.

Edited by Lightfoot, 06 November 2015 - 10:43 PM.

[MischiefSC]

Mystere, on 06 November 2015 - 09:54 PM, said:

In case you missed it, there is hope:

No, what he's saying is that it's too tough and he'll explain why in a town hall. Read more of his Tweets - 'that's a really tough one' is how Russ says 'That's not going to happen'.

[Bishop Steiner]

Most Amazing to me is how many "woe, the end is near" posters never go away........

Some folks,if they are to be believed, haven't' done a drop in years, yet they hover around these forums like lost puppies.

Pretty frikking pathetic, really.

[madhermit]

RIP Mechwarrior. Good night sweet prince. Last hopes for even a remote resemblence of a simulator experience have been crushed. I regret ever spending a single cent on this game.

[ColourfulConfetti]

Deep down in my tiny shriveled black heart, I felt an ounce of sympathy for Russ. Poor guy is getting stressed out over how to properly balance a video game of all things.

[Anarcho]

And another good idea down the pipe because whinners... holy sheet you guys, the thing didnt roll for a week, and the "experts" already considered it BAD...

It doesnt matter all the balance or advantages that would bring, if PGI touches the holy meta, the "majority" and the "competitive" players who "know" what everyone else wants , start the crying river... f@#k off, really...

"Laser meta is bad!"
PGI changes laser dynamic
"Bring the laser meta back again!"

You are all a bunch of peek a boo meta coward players who cant adapt...

[Kin3ticX]

Anarcho, on 07 November 2015 - 01:39 AM, said:

And another good idea down the pipe because whinners... holy sheet you guys, the thing didnt roll for a week, and the "experts" already considered it BAD...

It doesnt matter all the balance or advantages that would bring, if PGI touches the holy meta, the "majority" and the "competitive" players who "know" what everyone else wants , start the crying river... f@#k off, really...

"Laser meta is bad!"
PGI changes laser dynamic
"Bring the laser meta back again!"

You are all a bunch of peek a boo meta coward players who cant adapt...

Comp players had no hand in this being axed. It added a layer of complexity and confusion that would have never made it to prod. It was actually quite buggy and confusing people as it was working sometimes and other times not. Was probably a combination of hard to fix and negative feedback from all walks of the game saying it was confusing.

[Sarlic]

It's something.

But it's not something preventing my to quit sooner or later.

I see Russ is atleast trying and the people responsible for the game design will just come up with other rediculous idea's written on some napkin.

In my opinion the guys responsible for lead design should have been fired long time ago. Without going personal.

Edited by Sarlic, 07 November 2015 - 02:03 AM.

[kapusta11]

That's a relief.

[MischiefSC]

Kin3ticX, on 07 November 2015 - 01:53 AM, said:

Comp players had no hand in this being axed. It added a layer of complexity and confusion that would have never made it to prod. It was actually quite buggy and confusing people as it was working sometimes and other times not. Was probably a combination of hard to fix and negative feedback from all walks of the game saying it was confusing.

Buggy how? Confusing how? Locks get better range. Easier to understand than gauss charge or the use of NARC or TAG or any modules.

Some people liked it, some didn't. Everyone talked about IW, not everyone actually wants IW as anything but window dressing. That is what it is but don't pretend that it was technical issues. If you don't have a target locked your lasers start getting their damage fall off that they get from being out of range sooner. That's it.

[Kin3ticX]

MischiefSC, on 07 November 2015 - 02:05 AM, said:

Buggy how? Confusing how? Locks get better range. Easier to understand than gauss charge or the use of NARC or TAG or any modules.

Some people liked it, some didn't. Everyone talked about IW, not everyone actually wants IW as anything but window dressing. That is what it is but don't pretend that it was technical issues. If you don't have a target locked your lasers start getting their damage fall off that they get from being out of range sooner. That's it.

buggy:
http://www.twitch.tv...ticx/v/24448676

Are you really asking me why its confusing?

[Brandarr Gunnarson]

It was a good try and being proactive about it is good.

But, this particular method was never going to address the core problems with lasers or bring balance to them.

Look at the stats, balance them internally and it'll be good.

[MischiefSC]

Kin3ticX, on 07 November 2015 - 02:12 AM, said:

buggy:
http://www.twitch.tv...ticx/v/24448676

Are you really asking me why its confusing?

Yes. Why is it confusing. If you're shooting at someone you haven't locked, you do less damage at range.

TAG and NARC:

NARC shoots a missile that can be shot down by AMS that when it hits creates not just a lock but provides a 50% increase in missile tracking strength, 50% faster missile lock time and target locks decay 25% slower. Countered by ECM, lasts 20 seconds. If a NARCed target is tagged it reduces lock time by 75% and increases missile tracking strength to 75% but doesn't extend lock decay. TAG is 1 ton, 1 slot energy hardpoint but NARC is 3 ton missile launcher with 12 shots per ton ammo.

Not to be confused with Artemis of course.

Artemis IV works with locking and non-locking missiles. It increases missile tracking strength by 50% and reduces locking times by 50% but only with LoS, doesn't work on indirect. Those benefits do stack with TAG up to 75% for tracking strength and reduced locking but it doesn't affect lock decay. It also doesn't work with Streaks. It does however improve SRM spread by 34%.

Well all of that is incredibly intuitive and newbie friendly. Simple and easy to use, right?

Because in reality all anyone knows/cares about it is that they make missiles work better. How many people knew the percentages? Almost nobody, because anyone who put the effort into using missiles 10 times total figured it out.

The mechanic was simpler than Gauss charging/no more than 2 Gauss at a time mechanic. If you shoot at someone who isn't locked, your damage is reduced, sorta like when you shoot at someone beyond optimal range even with a lock.

If anyone couldn't figure out how it worked in 2 or 3 drops then I don't know what to do for them. Generally 2 or 3 shots in one drop should have been sufficient. People just don't like change I guess? It didn't feel exactly the game did without the changes and as such was horrible idea because NOT EXACTLY THE SAME BUT WITH SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT NUMBERS.

[Impyrium]

Kin3ticX, on 07 November 2015 - 02:12 AM, said:

buggy:
http://www.twitch.tv...ticx/v/24448676

Are you really asking me why its confusing?

Don't buy it.

If it was the buggyness that people were frustrated about, people should have been looking to see if the bugs could be fixed, not crying to have it completely removed.