214 replies to this topic

[Damia Savon]

Bud Crue, on 18 February 2016 - 04:54 AM, said:

Forgive my ignorance, but is this another T1 vs the rest of us problem?

Saw a lot of flamers last night in the underhive, including on my mechs. Only managed to use them to successfully lock down more than one enemy, on one match. Rest of the time I just got blasted by a teammate of the enemy I was trying to shut down. Same happened in every case I saw, when someone else was doing it. The extended time at close range makes this a pretty hard weapon for most of us crappier players to use effectively. At lower levels (where the vast majority of us are) I just don't see the flamer "exploit" (or its intended performance) being a big deal.

So is the fear of the exploit (or whatever) a concern for those at the top? If so, why? You guys presumably use teamwork better than us scrubs. From what I have seen only teamwork can make em work effectively but it is also the best way to counter them. Yet, if us scrub players aren't having a problem (at least I am not seeing any) why would anyone?

You got it in one. It is only an exploit among the Tier 1 twits who want to kill off the game with their insane demands. Since they already exploit, twist, and shred the game in their never ending quest for compensate for the self loathing brought about by tiny generative organ syndrome the safest bet is to utterly ignore them and pray they go off to destroy something else.

[Troutmonkey]

Bud Crue, on 18 February 2016 - 04:54 AM, said:

So is the fear of the exploit (or whatever) a concern for those at the top? If so, why? You guys presumably use teamwork better than us scrubs. From what I have seen only teamwork can make em work effectively but it is also the best way to counter them. Yet, if us scrub players aren't having a problem (at least I am not seeing any) why would anyone?

I don't fear the exploit at all, I just want a game where if there's something broken it's fixed. The flamer mechanics are 100% borked and need fixing. If 0 heat flamers are fine (going by Russes comments) than 0 heat flamers should be fine for everyone. If this was some other weapon that was being exploited for 0 heat there'd be such outrage

Damia Savon, on 18 February 2016 - 05:03 AM, said:

Bad players generally get better over time or they leave to find an easy mode game. Comp arses don't want anything to screw up their precious meta which is why LRMs have been nerfed and countered more than any other weapon system in the game, to the point where they disappear for no good reason except comp players wanting them too.

Competitive games should always be balanced around the top tier players, but it shouldn't be dictated by them. But that's off topic so maybe try another thread

[Damia Savon]

Widowmaker1981, on 18 February 2016 - 05:08 AM, said:

Ah, personal attacks on people and insinuations that comp players have small genitalia. Really showing your age and maturity there buddy.

I speak to the young and immature in a language they understand. One you grow up a little and realize that everyone deserves to enjoy the game and not the elite few then I can engage you in real discourse.

[Koniving]

I originally told PGI about this bug October 2012. These videos are uploaded January 29th, 2013.


The only real way 'stunlocking' could occur beyond multiple flamer mechs stacking flamers on... is this exploit. The original reason flamers got nerfed like made... is because of this exploit (and the one before it shown here).

Forgive sound quality and laughter... but killing two Atlases with flamers at sub 90 kph speeds in a JENNER... is just...omg.

[Widowmaker1981]

To all the people saying 'I'm not seeing a problem in game'

Can you not look at the mechanics and understand the problem, without seeing it in action? Its NOT really a problem for the solo queue, because of the predominant playstyle there making it extremely difficult to stay within 90m without dying. That is much less of a problem in the much more aggressive group queue, so we are seeing it a bit there, but its not terrible.

However. Solaris and CW 4v4 are coming. In Solaris 1v1 format the ONLY viable build will be UAC5s + flamers, since it will allow you to prevent your opponent from returning fire (unless he bought Gauss or UACs as well) while being free to DPS yourself, even if he is flaming you back. Do we really want only one viable build for that? Or maybe, should flamers NOT be 100% essential for 1v1 builds?

[Damia Savon]

Troutmonkey, on 18 February 2016 - 05:13 AM, said:

Competitive games should always be balanced around the top tier players, but it shouldn't be dictated by them. But that's off topic so maybe try another thread

There is a difference between a competitive game and ultra competitive players. No all top tier players are "win at all costs no matter what and I will do anything and everything to win". Plenty of top tier players avoid laser vomit, pure meta builds, enjoy the game and have fun. They don't come to the forums and *****, whine, cry, howl, sob and so forth because some change messes up their ability to compensate for their fragile egos. A game tuned so only the best can benefit is detrimental to those who will never, nor want to be, among the absolute best in a game. It is the large amount of lower tier players that keep the lights running and not a few "win at all costs" tier 1, comp players.

FFS, the patch has been out not even 48 hours. Try seeing where things are in a month and then you can start crying in your Cheerios to Russ and Paul. Frankly there are other things more important than flamers out there.

[Widowmaker1981]

Damia Savon, on 18 February 2016 - 05:14 AM, said:

I speak to the young and immature in a language they understand. One you grow up a little and realize that everyone deserves to enjoy the game and not the elite few then I can engage you in real discourse.

Lol.

Im not exactly young either. This game has an old playerbase.

Also, bye. Will no longer be seeing your posts.

Edited by Widowmaker1981, 18 February 2016 - 05:20 AM.

[Koniving]

Also for those confused about flamers and exactly what is being talked about (as I'm seeing people lobbing personal attacks to make a point as if that makes any argument valid, as well as people throwing around the word 'nerf this' or 'should we nerf that too'... when it is very clear the people speaking these things do not even comprehend what the actual issue is)... I suggest watching the videos; at the very least the first one I posted. This will explain the issue in its entirety.

Chain fire. Zero heat (even if you were using 8 flamers and at any instant you're always firing 4 flamers, ZERO heat...)
Fire 1 flamer... shut down from overheating yourself.
Fire lots of flamers.... shut down faster from overheating yourself.
But chain fire 16 flamers (with up to 8 flamers firing at the same time) and you have ZERO heat. Never overheat, never shut down, never stop firing.
See issue?

Edited by Koniving, 18 February 2016 - 05:23 AM.

[Damia Savon]

Widowmaker1981, on 18 February 2016 - 05:18 AM, said:

To all the people saying 'I'm not seeing a problem in game'

Can you not look at the mechanics and understand the problem, without seeing it in action? Its NOT really a problem for the solo queue, because of the predominant playstyle there making it extremely difficult to stay within 90m without dying. That is much less of a problem in the much more aggressive group queue, so we are seeing it a bit there, but its not terrible.

However. Solaris and CW 4v4 are coming. In Solaris 1v1 format the ONLY viable build will be UAC5s + flamers, since it will allow you to prevent your opponent from returning fire (unless he bought Gauss or UACs as well) while being free to DPS yourself, even if he is flaming you back. Do we really want only one viable build for that? Or maybe, should flamers NOT be 100% essential for 1v1 builds?

No, we are all incredibly stupid and cannot possibly fathom the implications of such things. However to worry about its possible implications in modes that are not in the game yet and perhaps may never be despite the best intentions of PGI is premature at best.

Let people who like flamers have some fun time using flamers. If said modes enter the game and flamers are abused then push PGI about it. Don't blow up the forums and twitter for something less than 48 hours old that is not a serious problem.

It will be easy enough to fix by reducing how fast flamers build up heat on an opposing mech to give said mech a chance to fight back.

[Pjwned]

Damia Savon, on 18 February 2016 - 05:07 AM, said:

Too nice to have to deal with getting flamed, insulted, misogynistic comments and the other BS in these forums. Frankly there is very little in these forums to benefit a community manager because it is dominated by the most toxic, whiny, bitchy children that MWO has. Sadly there is no real way for sane players who make up the majority of the game, the ones the self titled "elite" look down upon to provide real feedback.

So no, I think Tina does her job just fine. PGI can't pay her enough if she had to spend all day listening to people toss insults at her because they are immature f**kw**s.

There's zero reason to believe that the community manager would have to deal with "getting flamed, insulted, misogynistic comments and the other BS in these forums," and even if that were true it would be pretty bad if nothing was done about it.

Nobody acts like that except in your imagination so stop being a drama queen. You just want to get up on a soapbox and have a shitfit tirade to deflect the issues because you're a childish moron in denial of reality.

[Troutmonkey]

Damia Savon, on 18 February 2016 - 05:19 AM, said:

There is a difference between a competitive game and ultra competitive players. No all top tier players are "win at all costs no matter what and I will do anything and everything to win". Plenty of top tier players avoid laser vomit, pure meta builds, enjoy the game and have fun

You have to balance the game around those :ultra competitive anti-fun" players, because if it's getting overused there it means it's too powerful. Ideally you'd have a variety of builds at the top tier, but the over abundance of lasers there mean there's something wrong. If you tried to balanced around these "non-meta competitive" players you'd completely miss that lasers are too powerful. As I said before, you don't balance FOR them you balance AROUND them. Now please that's enough about this.

Edited by Troutmonkey, 18 February 2016 - 05:31 AM.

[NeoCodex]

NeoCodex, on 18 February 2016 - 01:53 AM, said:

Remember guys, counter with AC or SRM.

Widowmaker1981, on 18 February 2016 - 02:09 AM, said:

AC5 or Gauss. Mechs without 2+ B hardpoints are SOL.
FTFY

Was sarcastically quoting Russ actually, fix was not needed

Edited by NeoCodex, 18 February 2016 - 06:06 AM.

[Macksheen]

Heh. It's no YLW, but maybe Solaris turns into: http://mwo.smurfy-ne...76ca16d4f7e5b89

Probably better on the D; it has a generic 30% cooldown on the ballistics

Edited by Macksheen, 18 February 2016 - 06:41 AM.

[Col Jaime Wolf]

Troutmonkey, on 18 February 2016 - 05:30 AM, said:

You have to balance the game around those :ultra competitive anti-fun" players, because if it's getting overused there it means it's too powerful. Ideally you'd have a variety of builds at the top tier, but the over abundance of lasers there mean there's something wrong. If you tried to balanced around these "non-meta competitive" players you'd completely miss that lasers are too powerful. As I said before, you don't balance FOR them you balance AROUND them. Now please that's enough about this.

so whats wrong with flamers literally countering the laser meta?

well?

you think maybe PGI made flamers "exploitable" like this on purpose? would that not make sense looking at Russ's response?


why does everyone act like they know better then the people that make this game?

I have a feeling it was done on purpose exactly to provide a proper "anti energy boat" weapon that has extremely high risk for possibly a high reward.

90m gents, not 91, not 92..... 90m hard cap (without module/quirks) compared to 68+ damage laser alphas that can be shot twice? i think you need to cool your jets, let it go you obviously don't have your priorities straight.

SO many things need to be fixed that i couldn't care less about a weapon with a 90m range, its not like it does damage, its not like you can mount it without hard points. you are acting like its a "wonder weapon" with no drawbacks, while hammering exclusively away at some "exploit".

1v1? if you let someone with flamers get within 90m of you, you deserve to lose that match.

but the most relevant thing. im not seeing flamers all that often, and when i do its not "game breaking" in any way despite the efforts of some pilots to "spread the word" of the exploit. just not seeing it in game.

so stop crying because you are children to get this upset over something that is so good for countering the laser meta.

and im willing to bet that if PGI simply muted about a half dozen VERY vocal pilots we really wouldn't see any complaints.

Edited by Mellifluer, 18 February 2016 - 06:43 AM.

[Prof RJ Gumby]

Damia Savon, on 18 February 2016 - 05:25 AM, said:

No, we are all incredibly stupid and cannot possibly fathom the implications of such things. However to worry about its possible implications in modes that are not in the game yet and perhaps may never be despite the best intentions of PGI is premature at best.

Let people who like flamers have some fun time using flamers. If said modes enter the game and flamers are abused then push PGI about it. Don't blow up the forums and twitter for something less than 48 hours old that is not a serious problem.

It will be easy enough to fix by reducing how fast flamers build up heat on an opposing mech to give said mech a chance to fight back.

Dude, the flamer problem is already here. In team play. 2 flamers on a fast med + coordination on who and when to turn off won my team nearly every game we played yesterday. And that was without any chainfiring exploits used. We lost once and it was because other team had more flamers than us.
I'm already in love with flamers and want to see them viable, but even I cannot turn a blind eye to the future implications. Better let PGI balance flamers now, because when the actual whinefest starts, they may just nerf it to hell like they did so many times with so many weapons.

Edited by Prof RJ Gumby, 18 February 2016 - 06:46 AM.

[Col Jaime Wolf]

Prof RJ Gumby, on 18 February 2016 - 06:44 AM, said:

Dude, the flamer problem is already here. In team play. 2 flamers on a fast med + coordination on who and when to turn off won my team nearly every game we played yesterday. And that was without any chainfiring exploits used. We lost once and it was because other team had more flamers than us.
I'm already in love with flamers and want to see them viable, but even I cannot turn a blind eye to the future implications. Better let PGI balance flamers now, because when the actual whinefest starts, they may just nerf it to hell like they did so many times with so many weapons.

i for one welcome our new flamer overlords if what you say is true.

your saying it changed the meta wholesale? forced you to bring different builds and consider different tactics?

what a shocker.

It takes skill and out thinking your opponent to even get within 90m that by definition is not broken.

a broken weapon is a weapon that lets YOU win when YOU have been outsmarted by the opponent, when your enemy OUTPLAYS YOU but YOUR weapons still let you win.

Edited by Mellifluer, 18 February 2016 - 06:53 AM.

[Widowmaker1981]

Mellifluer, on 18 February 2016 - 06:40 AM, said:

1v1? if you let someone with flamers get within 90m of you, you deserve to lose that match.

Ill play an ACH. You play an assault or heavy. 10 private matches. If you can stop me getting within 90 meters more than one time in ten, ill buy you any pack of your choosing.

If i get a 100% success rate (get within 90m and get you to heatcap), you buy me a pack of my choosing.

Edited by Widowmaker1981, 18 February 2016 - 06:53 AM.

[Bud Crue]

Koniving, on 18 February 2016 - 05:20 AM, said:

Also for those confused about flamers and exactly what is being talked about (as I'm seeing people lobbing personal attacks to make a point as if that makes any argument valid, as well as people throwing around the word 'nerf this' or 'should we nerf that too'... when it is very clear the people speaking these things do not even comprehend what the actual issue is)... I suggest watching the videos; at the very least the first one I posted. This will explain the issue in its entirety.

Chain fire. Zero heat (even if you were using 8 flamers and at any instant you're always firing 4 flamers, ZERO heat...)
Fire 1 flamer... shut down from overheating yourself.
Fire lots of flamers.... shut down faster from overheating yourself.
But chain fire 16 flamers (with up to 8 flamers firing at the same time) and you have ZERO heat. Never overheat, never shut down, never stop firing.
See issue?

I get it, I just don't see this as any big problem. To take advantage of the "exploit" or "broken" aspect of the flamer seems to require serious close range face time AND teamwork to pull off. Having the skill and organization to pull that off is what "comp" level play is all about right? So what's the big deal?

Maybe I will see the horror of this broken mechanic at some point but so far, at my (low) level someone running flamers is going to get shot by a team mate. At the high level of play this doesn't happen?

IMO flamers are no more "broken" than the fact that some mechs can boat lasers or LRMS or whatever game mechanic you care to mention that people have kvetched about on these here forums. Moreover, based on Russ' tweets it appears that what many here are calling a broken feature, is what he is calling a feature that is functioning as intended.

[nehebkau]

ZenFool, on 17 February 2016 - 10:07 PM, said:

3. How many people have actual in game experience with them and what do they say? Hard to use/sacrificial.

Stunlocked in an ebon jag small laser AC10 build by a BJ. he was able to fire his medium lasers and pulse his flamers and I was left with the crappy AC10 burst only (then wait to cool down) while the BJ was able to keep pulsing his flamers while firing his medium lasers. Had I an Innersphere AC (rather than clan) I could have fared better but close-in small target combat with the clan AC is horribad on faster targets.

Popped A coolant pod to at least get some SML fire off and the cool-shot 9 was instantly negated.

I have already created some flamer troll ACs and am just putting on the macros to exploit this thing as much as I possibly can. Only way things get fixed by PGI is if we exploit the crap out of it.

So, everyone EXPLOIT THIS LIKE CRAZY!

Edited by nehebkau, 18 February 2016 - 06:56 AM.

[H I A S]

Damia Savon, on 18 February 2016 - 05:19 AM, said:

There is a difference between a competitive game and ultra competitive players. No all top tier players are "win at all costs no matter what and I will do anything and everything to win". Plenty of top tier players avoid laser vomit, pure meta builds, enjoy the game and have fun. They don't come to the forums and *****, whine, cry, howl, sob and so forth because some change messes up their ability to compensate for their fragile egos. A game tuned so only the best can benefit is detrimental to those who will never, nor want to be, among the absolute best in a game. It is the large amount of lower tier players that keep the lights running and not a few "win at all costs" tier 1, comp players.

FFS, the patch has been out not even 48 hours. Try seeing where things are in a month and then you can start crying in your Cheerios to Russ and Paul. Frankly there are other things more important than flamers out there.

I think your ego is a little bit fragile.
You are the only one that attacks other personally. All other do it to a game mechanic and maybe some opinions.

Btw: when a game is top/down balanced everyone have an balanced game. A topplayer will find broken mechanics faster than a bad.

Edited by arivio, 18 February 2016 - 07:15 AM.