92 replies to this topic

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Sandpit, on 05 January 2016 - 03:11 PM, said:

you do realize I'M not talking pinpoint right?
there's more to it than simply PPD
FLD is the issue when it comes to PPD and instant convergence.

Lasers aren't an issue when it comes to this because they don't do all of their damage instantly.

So laser puke is ok then because it isn't FLD? Wat.....were you around at all for the past year?
By that reasoning, instant convergence wasn't an issue again until recently which is definitely not the case, and makes the reasoning behind ghost heat on lasers even more nonsensical.

Sandpit, on 05 January 2016 - 03:00 PM, said:

shutting down for 3 seconds after shooting off every weapon you have repeatedly is not, in my opinion, a major consequence

Considering it causes you to sit still for 3 seconds wherever you were, it can be. Not so much in static long range poke fights, but considering the meta has stayed about big engines (BESM) that wasn't a common thing. Though thanks to structure buffs, it isn't quite as bad as you have to have a significant alpha to instagib a lot of shutdown mechs from the rear.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 05 January 2016 - 03:50 PM.

[Sandpit]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 January 2016 - 03:49 PM, said:

So laser puke is ok then because it isn't FLD? Wat.....were you around at all for the past year?
By that reasoning, instant convergence wasn't an issue again until recently which is definitely not the case, and makes the reasoning behind ghost heat on lasers even more nonsensical.



Considering it causes you to sit still for 3 seconds wherever you were, it can be. Not so much in static long range poke fights, but considering the meta has stayed about big engines (BESM) that wasn't a common thing. Though thanks to structure buffs, it isn't quite as bad as you have to have a significant alpha to instagib a lot of shutdown mechs from the rear.

Is that what I said or implied?
No, it is not, I'm talking specifically in regards to PPD/FLD
Don't know how else to clarify it...?

as far as "laser vomit" goes? I dont' see it. I see combinations of lasers and dakka more often than not.

I see lasers being used a little more prominently because they're more on par with dakka now. Same with lurms, you see them more now because they're more of a "viable" weapon system.

I understand what you're saying as far as shutdowns. I still don't see a 3 second shutdown after blasting away with everything you've got a few times as a "major" consequence. When you balance that 3 seconds against the damage output it looks even more insignificant.

[Ted Wayz]

Wouldn't it be great if Clan mechs were OP because they were supposed to be and the balance came from an honor system and having to face superior numbers?

Save me from these constant discussions about band aids.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Sandpit, on 05 January 2016 - 03:58 PM, said:

Is that what I said or implied?

Sandpit, on 05 January 2016 - 03:11 PM, said:

FLD is the issue when it comes to PPD and instant convergence.

Sandpit, on 05 January 2016 - 03:58 PM, said:

as far as "laser vomit" goes? I dont' see it. I see combinations of lasers and dakka more often than not.

So because you don't see it, it isn't a threat or not the best around until a month ago? You realize the fallacy with that right? Dakka hasn't been a serious threat until maybe recently, and even then I fear a BJ (laser vomit) more than I fear a Dakka mech or a Boomjager.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 05 January 2016 - 04:35 PM.

[Sandpit]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 January 2016 - 04:34 PM, said:

So because you don't see it, it isn't a threat or not the best around until a month ago? You realize the fallacy with that right? Dakka hasn't been a serious threat until maybe recently, and even then I fear a BJ (laser vomit) more than I fear a Dakka mech or a Boomjager.

No, because I don't see it, it means that maybe
just maybe
your experience isn't the only experience had and maybe
just maybe
it's not as big of a problem as you think it is

Did you really say dakka hasn't been a serious threat until maybe recently?
You're either very disingenuous or signed up in 2011 and never played the game until recently...

Edited by Sandpit, 05 January 2016 - 05:44 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Sandpit, on 05 January 2016 - 05:44 PM, said:

Did you really say dakka hasn't been a serious threat until maybe recently?
You're either very disingenuous or signed up in 2011 and never played the game until recently...

Or maybe I play against better players that don't just stand there while you dakka them straight in the CT. Dakka hasn't been a serious threat at all during the course of the MWO, at least not for any large amount of time.

We went from the glory days of CB, to the brawl meta, to Jumptarts, then to Laser Vomit, and now we have a weird mix of the brawl and laser vomit meta.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 05 January 2016 - 05:58 PM.

[MrJeffers]

Sandpit, on 05 January 2016 - 10:11 AM, said:

balancing against boating is handled by ghost heat.
Now your opinion on ghost heat or the number of a weapon needed to trigger ghost heat are a different conversation all the way around but irrelevant to that being the mechanic used to balance boating in MWO.

Ghost heat doesn't fix it, and doesn't even address weapon synergies of dissimilar weapons.

Not to mention it violates your:

Sandpit, on 04 January 2016 - 03:31 PM, said:

A player should be able to look at a large laser and know "it does x heat, x damage, and has x range" and that's it. Nothing more. Now a player, especially new players, have to do a LOT of math, research, etc. to determine the "optimal" mech for a specific weapon loadout beyond simply looking at it's hardpoints.

Quirks are infinitely more intuitive and understandable than Ghost heat. They are simple percentages or additions that are presented to you in the interface. Clear, concise, and in the interface. Everything ghost heat isn't.

Sandpit, on 05 January 2016 - 10:11 AM, said:

Again, you balance a weapon based on it's place against other weapon systems, then you use quirks, ghost heat, etc. to balance the individual "exploits" of those weapons and mitigate the min/max boating and builds.

Point being, you can't balance like you're discussing because if you nerf a weapon based on the boating output, you wind up completely ruining that weapon when it isn't boated.

Point being you are completely wrong. Boating MPLs a problem on mech X? Mech X gets a negative MPL quirk. Has *zero* effect on every other mech in the game. Focused, addresses the root problem scope of the change is limited to one chassis (or if the problem exists on a few chassis you can apply if there also) and has zero unintended consequence on the weapon or any other mech in the game.

Sandpit, on 05 January 2016 - 10:11 AM, said:

That's just one example of why trying to balance like that is a bad idea. We've seen it here in the past. Ok great, now (insert weapon here) is balanced when you boar 5 of them, but what about the builds which only use one?

So your bad example that doesn't prove anything is great?

How about a real example using your "solution". Pre-quirks.

PPC/Gauss meta and the Dragon Slayer. Ghost heat doesn't do anything since they are different weapon types. The best solution seems to be desync the speeds of the PPC and the Gauss by reducing the PPC speeds.

Fixes that problem.
Creates two new ones both unintentional consequences:
1 ) New PPC speed is synced with AC5.
2 ) PPC usage in general goes down because it's no longer as good at long range due to the velocity nerf.

New Meta PPC / AC 5

Further Desync the speeds by dropping the PPC speeds even further.
Fixes the problem.
Unintential consequence:
PPCs practically removed from the game. Usage goes to near zero.

And that's where we are at today. Unless the mechs have velocity quirks, PPC and ERPPC is pratically non-existant.


Quirk Fix:

Dragon Slayer
-50% PPC velocity.

Problem solved. Zero unintended consequence. Everyone else can continue to use PPCs

Simple, far less testing required.

Other mechs that have the same capability? Get creative, maybe apply the velocity nerf to the gauss.


3 LPLs a problem? Easy - negative quirk the mechs that can run 3 LPLs with either duration nerfs, increased heat gen, or increase cooldown. And you can do each solution as it fits the host chassis - e.g. on an assault make the duration longer so it can't twist away if it want's to do the damage. A heavy increase the heat gen, etc.

Sandpit, on 05 January 2016 - 10:11 AM, said:

A weapon balance is based on that individual weapon, not "what if" scenarios

And yet, all you provide is "what if"...

Here is your fundamental problem. Weapon balance in MWO isnt *game* balance. If all the weapons are balanced to each other, then what you are left with is a handful of mechs that have the optimum hardpoints and dozens or hundreds of variants that are garbage. A fact you continue to ignore.

In MWO - the mechs *ARE* the weapons, the chassis need to be balanced to get *GAME* balance. Individual weapon balance is important, more inportant in an FPS where players are limited to one or two weapons. The mechs are weapon plaforms. The collection of their hardpoints (up to 19 weapons at a time) is what make them useful or not, it's not just the individual weapons.

So yes, you can play spreadsheet warrior and normalize the weapons. It won't balance the game because the mech chassis won't be balanced - it will be a matter of which mech has the optimum hardpoints. Until you can recognize that there isn't any point continuing this discussion.

Edited by MrJeffers, 05 January 2016 - 06:24 PM.

[Sandpit]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 January 2016 - 05:58 PM, said:

Or maybe I play against better players that don't just stand there while you dakka them straight in the CT. Dakka hasn't been a serious threat at all during the course of the MWO, at least not for any large amount of time.

We went from the glory days of CB, to the brawl meta, to Jumptarts, then to Laser Vomit, and now we have a weird mix of the brawl and laser vomit meta.

so hang on
it was "balanced" in the "glory days" when it was nothing but brawling
but now

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 January 2016 - 05:58 PM, said:

mix of the brawl and laser vomit meta.

is less balanced...

I'm starting to see why PGI doesn't listen to a lot of the balance talk here on the forums...

MrJeffers, on 05 January 2016 - 06:21 PM, said:

Ghost heat doesn't fix it, and doesn't even address weapon synergies of dissimilar weapons.

Not to mention it violates your:


Quirks are infinitely more intuitive and understandable than Ghost heat. They are simple percentages or additions that are presented to you in the interface. Clear, concise, and in the interface. Everything ghost heat isn't.



Point being you are completely wrong. Boating MPLs a problem on mech X? Mech X gets a negative MPL quirk. Has *zero* effect on every other mech in the game. Focused, addresses the root problem scope of the change is limited to one chassis (or if the problem exists on a few chassis you can apply if there also) and has zero unintended consequence on the weapon or any other mech in the game.


So your bad example that doesn't prove anything is great?

How about a real example using your "solution". Pre-quirks.

PPC/Gauss meta and the Dragon Slayer. Ghost heat doesn't do anything since they are different weapon types. The best solution seems to be desync the speeds of the PPC and the Gauss by reducing the PPC speeds.

Fixes that problem.
Creates two new ones both unintentional consequences:
1 ) New PPC speed is synced with AC5.
2 ) PPC usage in general goes down because it's no longer as good at long range due to the velocity nerf.

New Meta PPC / AC 5

Further Desync the speeds by dropping the PPC speeds even further.
Fixes the problem.
Unintential consequence:
PPCs practically removed from the game. Usage goes to near zero.

And that's where we are at today. Unless the mechs have velocity quirks, PPC and ERPPC is pratically non-existant.


Quirk Fix:

Dragon Slayer
-50% PPC velocity.

Problem solved. Zero unintended consequence. Everyone else can continue to use PPCs

Simple, far less testing required.

Other mechs that have the same capability? Get creative, maybe apply the velocity nerf to the gauss.


3 LPLs a problem? Easy - negative quirk the mechs that can run 3 LPLs with either duration nerfs, increased heat gen, or increase cooldown. And you can do each solution as it fits the host chassis - e.g. on an assault make the duration longer so it can't twist away if it want's to do the damage. A heavy increase the heat gen, etc.



And yet, all you provide is "what if"...

Here is your fundamental problem. Weapon balance in MWO isnt *game* balance. If all the weapons are balanced to each other, then what you are left with is a handful of mechs that have the optimum hardpoints and dozens or hundreds of variants that are garbage. A fact you continue to ignore.

In MWO - the mechs *ARE* the weapons, the chassis need to be balanced to get *GAME* balance. Individual weapon balance is important, more inportant in an FPS where players are limited to one or two weapons. The mechs are weapon plaforms. The collection of their hardpoints (up to 19 weapons at a time) is what make them useful or not, it's not just the individual weapons.

So yes, you can play spreadsheet warrior and normalize the weapons. It won't balance the game because the mech chassis won't be balanced - it will be a matter of which mech has the optimum hardpoints. Until you can recognize that there isn't any point continuing this discussion.

all I provide is what if?
Uhm no, sorry,
I gave specific numbers to your "millions" of combination example and you ignored it, then completely forgot about it apparently.

I'm not doing what if, I don't have to.
I have 3 years of examples as proof it doesn't work because after 3 years of using it.

[MrJeffers]

Sandpit, on 05 January 2016 - 06:33 PM, said:

all I provide is what if?
Uhm no, sorry,
I gave specific numbers to your "millions" of combination example and you ignored it, then completely forgot about it apparently.

I'm not doing what if, I don't have to.
I have 3 years of examples as proof it doesn't work because after 3 years of using it.

You have given zero examples. All conjecture and "what if's". And the millions of combinations have have addressed in every one of my posts. Every weapon "normalization" game that goes on with spreadsheet warrior weapon balance has millions, if not billions of permutations that create undesired consequences. As I displayed in my real history Dragon Slayer example that *IS* the "3 years or proof" that you keep harping on. Its three years of not working BECAUSE YOU CAN'T ONLY BALANCE WEAPONS AND EXPECT THE GAME TO BE BALANCED.

One more very simple example because you can't seem to grasp any others:

How could the game the game ever be balanced, even with *perfect* weapon balance, when two light mechs are *exactly* the same, but one has 6 energy hard points and the other has 5. When would you *ever* take the one with 5? The weapons are perfectly balanced so 6 > 5.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Sandpit, on 05 January 2016 - 06:33 PM, said:

so hang on
it was "balanced" in the "glory days" when it was nothing but brawling
but now

The "glory" days refers to the Closed Beta days when both the Gaussapult and Lunchback were considered meta which was definitely more than brawling. Back before DHS were even a thing, which once they were, Splatapults and Boomapults started to begin their reign.

Sandpit, on 05 January 2016 - 06:33 PM, said:

I'm starting to see why PGI doesn't listen to a lot of the balance talk here on the forums...

You know that means you as well right? PGI having no input into their decisions has also been seen to be terrible, lest we forget about having to lock for lasers in the first phases of the PTS.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 06 January 2016 - 09:50 AM.

[Sandpit]

MrJeffers, on 05 January 2016 - 09:44 PM, said:

You have given zero examples. All conjecture and "what if's". And the millions of combinations have have addressed in every one of my posts. Every weapon "normalization" game that goes on with spreadsheet warrior weapon balance has millions, if not billions of permutations that create undesired consequences. As I displayed in my real history Dragon Slayer example that *IS* the "3 years or proof" that you keep harping on. Its three years of not working BECAUSE YOU CAN'T ONLY BALANCE WEAPONS AND EXPECT THE GAME TO BE BALANCED.

One more very simple example because you can't seem to grasp any others:

How could the game the game ever be balanced, even with *perfect* weapon balance, when two light mechs are *exactly* the same, but one has 6 energy hard points and the other has 5. When would you *ever* take the one with 5? The weapons are perfectly balanced so 6 > 5.

Eamples
CB
OB
Launch
CW
Steam Launch

There
like i said, 3 years worth of examples because the current system HAS NOT WORKED for 3 years, it's not going to magically just start working one day...

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 06 January 2016 - 09:52 AM, said:

The "glory" days refers to the Closed Beta days when both the Gaussapult and Lunchback were considered meta which was definitely more than brawling. Back before DHS were even a thing, which once they were, Splatapults and Boomapults started to begin their reign.


You know that means you as well right? PGI having no input into their decisions has also been seen to be terrible, lest we forget about having to lock for lasers in the first phases of the PTS.

Sorry, brawling was pushed and pushed and pushed for years. It was even specifically stated by Russ that the "ideal" combat range was under 400 meters IIRC (not sure about exact range but it was in that area)

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Sandpit, on 06 January 2016 - 11:31 AM, said:

Sorry, brawling was pushed and pushed and pushed for years. It was even specifically stated by Russ that the "ideal" combat range was under 400 meters IIRC (not sure about exact range but it was in that area)

Just because that was their "goal" does not mean that was actually the case, even during the CB days. Brawling was the go to thing once DHS came into play and before HSR allowed for the rise of poptarts.

Also, 400m is not brawling range.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 06 January 2016 - 12:44 PM.

[MrJeffers]

Sandpit, on 06 January 2016 - 11:31 AM, said:

Eamples
CB
OB
Launch
CW
Steam Launch

There
like i said, 3 years worth of examples because the current system HAS NOT WORKED for 3 years, it's not going to magically just start working one day...

What are you trying to show?

Your solution is spreadsheet warrior weapon normalization.

Eamples
CB - spreadsheet warrior weapon normalization [your solution]
OB - spreadsheet warrior weapon normalization [your solution]
Launch - spreadsheet warrior weapon normalization [your solution]
CW - Quirks
Steam Launch - Quirks

Two of the three years are your nonworking solution. We are at a "good spot" balance wise *because* of quirks.

TL:DR I have provided specific rebuttals for every one of your arguments and you have provided zero for mine. I'm done.



Full version.
You - we need weapons balanced against each other. [You have yet to explain what that even means or how to get there]
--Me Rebuttal: Weapons balance requires play testing because of the sheer volume of change effects even a small numbers change brings.
---You - we don't care about that because it doesn't matter what mech hard points are the weapons themselves are balanced [So it must be spreadsheet warrior since it doesn't require any playtesting - the spreadsheet doesn't lie]
----Me Rebuttal : Then you are left with weapon hardpoint optimal mechs and the rest are garbage and underpowered
----- You - Nothing.

Me - Quirks address the edge cases because you can provide focused fixes that only apply to the root cause
-- You - That creates too many test cases to deal with
--- Me - It creates less test cases than a single global change on a weapon and the results are easy to identify because the scope is so small. Far eaiser to balance than making global weapon changes.
---- You - Nothing

Me - You can't do spreadsheet warrior and expect game balance because of the vast differences between mechs and their hardpoints
- You - Boating Edge cases are handled by Ghost heat
-- Rebuttals - Yours:

Sandpit, on 04 January 2016 - 03:31 PM, said:

A player should be able to look at a large laser and know "it does x heat, x damage, and has x range" and that's it. Nothing more. Now a player, especially new players, have to do a LOT of math, research, etc. to determine the "optimal" mech for a specific weapon loadout beyond simply looking at it's hardpoints.

Ghost heat isnt even documented in game. Good luck figuring out how much heat 7 MPLs generates in game.
-- Rebuttal Me - Ghost heat doesn't control boating [it only limits high alphas, you can still carry and use them all] and doesn't even address dissimilar weapons systems. Quirks address boating, dissimilar weapons synergies, and perhaps more importantly buff under performing or hard point handicapped mechs.
--- You - Nothing.

I have asked specific questions that continue to avoid answering. Because you don't have an answer that isn't rebutted already.

Edited by MrJeffers, 06 January 2016 - 08:40 PM.