271 replies to this topic

[PocketYoda]

coe7, on 17 February 2016 - 03:51 AM, said:

Thanks. That is my intention as well. Doing comp matches like MRBC with these flamers in will result in really bad gameplay, scout lights meeting will just burn each other and neither will take real damage or die, nor skill won't play a factor anymore. Or brawl becomes a full on flaming fest, etc.

More people we have abusing these mechanics in pub que, faster PGI will understand that they just screwed up not only brawling but skill based lights and mediums. Any derp can just burn them to the point of not being able to finnish the job and putting two flamers on pretty much any build is easy and does not compromise the build.

And Russ did say flamers are fine and "someone getting under 100m is so rare anyway" in twitter, soo... I guess all of this is not only legit but endorsed.

Are they actually playing the game they make, every match i play people are under 100m EVERY SINGLE MATCH... jesus i think i need a new game, roll on the division.. get me out of this madhouse for a while..

These devs are nothing short of useless..

Edited by Samial, 17 February 2016 - 05:59 PM.

[S 0 L E N Y A]

Samial, on 17 February 2016 - 05:58 PM, said:

Are they actually playing the game they make,

not gonna name and shame, and it is completely anecdotal, but on the couple of times I have dropped with or against PGI employees they always got aced first and did very little for their team.
Again, only happened a couple times, so for all I know they were just having bad matches. On the other hand, it is plausible that when they test the game in house they are not up to the skill level of your typical MWO die hard.

[Sereglach]

Ok, seeing Russ's recent twitters make me want to bang my head into a wall. They're currently planning to make the Flamer mechanics more convoluted to fix the problem when the proper solution is simple, elegant, and right in front of their faces. Come on, PGI:

1. Nix the acceleration/scaling mechanic in Flamer Heat generation.

2. Set the Flamer to reasonable, fixed values. While I'm still standing by 1.0 DPS, 1.0 Heat Dam., and 0.5 Heat Gen . . . any reasonable value set would be acceptable.

3. Flamers are now fixed. No convoluted mechanics, no obscene mechanisms, no "minimum burn time". NONE OF IT!

The solution is so simple . . . come on, PGI, just reach out and grab it!!!!

Edited by Sereglach, 17 February 2016 - 07:16 PM.

[wanderer]

The PGI solution to a problem is to break it.

What did you expect, common sense? Knowledge of the game it's based on in any sense of the word?

I should not be able to do Paul's job better than he does.

But I bet I would. Even with zero coding experience. Common sense + some knowledge of the games Mechwarrior is based on + enjoying the game. Not much, you say? Yes. That's what scares me.

Personally, given what I see I'd say Paul at this point loathes it, but it's easy money.

[Eider]

wanderer, on 17 February 2016 - 07:19 PM, said:

The PGI solution to a problem is to break it.

What did you expect, common sense? Knowledge of the game it's based on in any sense of the word?

I should not be able to do Paul's job better than he does.

But I bet I would. Even with zero coding experience. Common sense + some knowledge of the games Mechwarrior is based on + enjoying the game. Not much, you say? Yes. That's what scares me.

Personally, given what I see I'd say Paul at this point loathes it, but it's easy money.

I dont think its broken, again range and damage etc. Most people however just dont make builds to be balanced but high alpha. Having flamed since patch i have found few players who will actually change tactics once i apply the burn notice. Its actually easy to counter.. dont run around alone.

[wanderer]

https://www.reddit.c...al_and_flamers/

When you've seriously got comp players going "should we ban flamers?" when a week ago that'd have been met with derisive laughter...

...trust me. A heat-neutral heatgun build is gonna make a mark. When a mechanic is broken (flamers not really generating heat when firing, but able to heat the target), there will be people who find a way to maximize that advantage. A flamer isn't about dealing damage any more than lobbing a slow spell in an MMO is. It's about mitigating damage.

[Sereglach]

wanderer, on 17 February 2016 - 07:31 PM, said:

https://www.reddit.c...al_and_flamers/

When you've seriously got comp players going "should we ban flamers?" when a week ago that'd have been met with derisive laughter...

...trust me. A heat-neutral heatgun build is gonna make a mark. When a mechanic is broken (flamers not really generating heat when firing, but able to heat the target), there will be people who find a way to maximize that advantage. A flamer isn't about dealing damage any more than lobbing a slow spell in an MMO is. It's about mitigating damage.

You know an exploit situation is bad when the independent competitions are talking about banning them from their leagues. Man . . . PGI . . . just reach out and grab the simple solution . . . it's right there.

We're all human, we all make mistakes. It'd be better to just admit the mistake and implement the simple fix, especially over a more convoluted and complex answer (that's not really an answer but just another layer for the mess). Sometimes the best solution really is the simple one, and the simple one about nixing the convoluted heat acceleration/scaling mechanics -and using flat reasonable values- has been suggested numerous times in this thread.

Edited by Sereglach, 17 February 2016 - 11:11 PM.

[Wildstreak]

Would like to point out 2 things.

1 - For those who do not know, Russ said in the last Town Hall he has alt accounts. Not really surprised and would not be if other PGI employees do it too. Probably so they can covertly learn how the game is played without players going, "Oh, look, a PGI employee, let me play different because they showed up." So you may have been in a match with one and never realized it because it was an alt with no PGI identifier.

2 - See a lot of talk about Lights using Flamers, should really expand to other Mechs. Given the OP showed using 4 for stunlock, look at any IS or Clan Mech that can run 4 Flamers and some other weapons. Recently, I posted 2 Top Dogs in this thread, both this Dog and this Dog can:
- stunlock an opponent.
- have an effect on the whole enemy team depending on how they react.
- tank damage like a Light cannot while holding the stunlock.
- shoot the stunlocked target with good heat handling.

This is gonna take time for everyone to go over all the Mechs, builds and effects for.

[Col Jaime Wolf]

Samial, on 17 February 2016 - 05:58 PM, said:

Are they actually playing the game they make, every match i play people are under 100m EVERY SINGLE MATCH... jesus i think i need a new game, roll on the division.. get me out of this madhouse for a while..

These devs are nothing short of useless..

good, no one will miss you. have fun in your future endeavors.

[Scout Derek]

Bilbo, on 17 February 2016 - 03:53 PM, said:

It's been a "feature" since Artemis was introduced. I assume because of shared code. Whether they will ever fix it or not is anyone's guess.

Huh, that makes me wonder then, if PGI or the Fanbase really wants to fix it... *shrugs*

Deathlike, on 17 February 2016 - 04:13 PM, said:

There are no intents to fix it AFAIK, and for the most part... it's like the LBX code.... it became Lostech.

Lostech... becoming a more widely spread terms these days....

But anyhow, I think there IS a way to fix it, per say, the LBX ammo code, but, it'd take some crafty rerouting in some coding and stuff, basically, you'd have to not just rewrite the LBX code, but other codes that coincide with it.... that's a theory I have believe it or not, and I don't blame them, because having to rewrite more than one code means you may have to rewrite all codes of all the functions in the game....

In short, they might have to rewrite the entire game's code for functions just to change one function. And that takes time.

[Deathlike]

Scout Derek, on 18 February 2016 - 07:53 AM, said:

Huh, that makes me wonder then, if PGI or the Fanbase really wants to fix it... *shrugs*


Lostech... becoming a more widely spread terms these days....

But anyhow, I think there IS a way to fix it, per say, the LBX ammo code, but, it'd take some crafty rerouting in some coding and stuff, basically, you'd have to not just rewrite the LBX code, but other codes that coincide with it.... that's a theory I have believe it or not, and I don't blame them, because having to rewrite more than one code means you may have to rewrite all codes of all the functions in the game....

In short, they might have to rewrite the entire game's code for functions just to change one function. And that takes time.

At some point, you have to actually dig in and rewrite code... just like UI 2.0.

The thing is, the longer the older less-understood code is there, the worse it gets when ultimately trying to make it better.

[Ultimax]

The problem is zero heat-cost perma stun-locks with no method of break free, and extremely few actual weapon choices to counter it - unlike Russ' completely misinformed suggestion of "SRMs" - which is just silly and ridiculous and wrong.

We ran 12 mans in group queue with our lights just perma-locking targets helpless while the rest of us took free shots.

2 flamers has basically become an auto-include on brawl rush decks.

You have to get within 100m? Yeah, duh, that's what brawl lights do pretty much all of the time.

Now add 6 of them per 12 man because there is only 600 tons available, this doesn't take a degree in rocket science to figure out what kind of issue this is.



Just as with every other successful PvP game, ever, if you want to add things like crowd control you also need to add things like immunities, or resistance or cleanses.

Do we really want World of Mechbots or League of Robbits?

Edited by Ultimax, 18 February 2016 - 09:44 AM.

[Deathlike]

Ultimax, on 18 February 2016 - 09:42 AM, said:

Do we really want World of Mechbots or League of Robbits?

Both, because there's no logical reason.

[Vlad Striker]

This restrictions can resolve Flamers abuse:
1. Flamer must have limited number of charges (7-10).
2. Flamer must work on burst mode: 2-3 seconds of the burst duration.
3. Number of flamers does not matter to producing of heat.
4. Cap of heat 80%.

[Scout Derek]

Deathlike, on 18 February 2016 - 09:12 AM, said:

At some point, you have to actually dig in and rewrite code... just like UI 2.0.

The thing is, the longer the older less-understood code is there, the worse it gets when ultimately trying to make it better.

Problem 101 with a lot of games today usually.

[wanderer]

Tabletop does it very simply- there's a maximum amount of heat you can apply over time.

15 points/10 sec, which comes out to 1.5 heat/sec from external sources- which includes flamers and other heat-inflicting weaponry.

It doesn't prevent you from adding heat to a 'Mech regardless of it's current overheat, either. It DOES prevent you from totally stunlocking targets. It also means you can slow down a restart, given that you can add heat regardless of where a 'Mech is on the bar. Stupid opponent pushes too far and goes 100%+? You can hold them there longer, which in MWO means they'll take more overheat damage before dropping below 100% again.

[pwnface]

Flamer bug is being fixed in the hotfix!

[Mystere]

pwnface, on 18 February 2016 - 11:43 AM, said:

Flamer bug is being fixed in the hotfix!

And that is all that should be changed.

[Mcgral18]

pwnface, on 18 February 2016 - 11:43 AM, said:

Flamer bug is being fixed in the hotfix!

Maybe...

I fear they took the wrong route (because PGI), but info will clarify
Soon™

Edited by Mcgral18, 18 February 2016 - 12:41 PM.

[Roadkill]

pwnface, on 18 February 2016 - 11:43 AM, said:

Flamer bug is being fixed in the hotfix!

The only bug was the fact that destroyed flamers were still adding heat to flamer-equipped Mechs. I suspect that's what's been fixed, and ONLY that.