75 replies to this topic

[Andi Nagasia]

IS PPC.............-0.5Heat.....+100Velocity,
ER PPCs(all).....-1Heat......+100Velocity,

Discuss?

Edit- title Change, Weak to Mediocre
Special Thanks to Cazidin for (Mediocre)

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 01 April 2016 - 06:32 PM.

[RebJohhny]

April fools joke ?

[Mcgral18]

Something is better than months of nothing.
Maybe it will even be iterative! (lolno?)

[Tristan Winter]

I think it says a lot about the PPC and ERPPC that the only mechs using it are the ones who are quirked for it.

People are like "hey bro, PPCs are fine, I use them on my AWS-9M all the time"

Well, let me know when I can put PPCs on my un-quirked mechs and see my projectiles hit their target before the match is over.

[cazidin]

They're not weak, they're mediocre.

Edited by cazidin, 01 April 2016 - 06:06 PM.

[Lukoi Banacek]

Andi Nagasia, on 01 April 2016 - 05:57 PM, said:

IS PPC.............-0.5Heat.....+100Velocity,
ER PPCs(all).....-1Heat......+100Velocity,

Discuss?

Edit- title Change, Weak to Mediocre
Special Thanks to Cazidin for (Mediocre)

Incremental changes that can be examined and further tweaked gradually are better than the pendulum swings balance typically takes around here, so I'm all for it. Start slow, build up to "balanced" and move the **** on.

Always something to ***** about around here on the forums.

[Mcgral18]

Lukoi Banacek, on 01 April 2016 - 06:13 PM, said:

Incremental changes that can be examined and further tweaked gradually are better than the pendulum swings balance typically takes around here, so I'm all for it. Start slow, build up to "balanced" and move the **** on.

Always something to ***** about around here on the forums.

Some of us still remember "Aggressive Balance Changes" circa open beta...where Pulse Lasers were nerfed Normalized and kept the better part of worthless for over a year.

That was with bi-weekly patches. These monthly ones had better have a change each patch, iteratively (nice if they would ever actually do that)...but past experience says they'll stay like this for a few months before the next "iteration".

Edited by Mcgral18, 01 April 2016 - 07:24 PM.

[Zoid]

No, this is good, this is what we want to see. Small changes that are evaluated again later. If it doesn't help, they can always add another notch.

What we don't want to see is them accidentally buffed into ridiculousness and then nerfed back down again.

[Lukoi Banacek]

Mcgral18, on 01 April 2016 - 06:15 PM, said:

Some of us still remember "Aggressive Balance Changes" circa open beta...where Pulse Lasers were nerfed and kept the better part of worthless for over a year.

That was with bi-weekly patches. These monthly ones had better have a change each patch, iteratively (nice if they would ever actually do that)...but past experience says they'll stay like this for a few months before the next "iteration".

Aye, but I still prefer slow and steady over the past techniques. So while meh, it's meh in the right direction.

[Deathlike]

MyInnerWhiteKnight said:

Be happy you're getting something!

MyInnerBlackKnight said:

6 more months of no changes... at least 60 to 90 days!

[Mcgral18]

Lukoi Banacek, on 01 April 2016 - 06:17 PM, said:

Aye, but I still prefer slow and steady over the past techniques. So while meh, it's meh in the right direction.

Summoner can get 2KM/s ERPPCs at this point, at least.

[Andi Nagasia]

i agree small Changes are better, but 0.5 heat on a PPC thats almost negligible,
also i wouldnt mind if this where reexamined in a couple weeks to a month,

but PGI seems to take the Change it, and forget it,
leaving it unchanged for several Months, even if its not as it should be,
Just look at the MG Changes, and where they are today,

[Pjwned]

PPC heat: If it needs to be less hot so that people actually use it then fine, but other changes would be better.

PPC velocity: It really shouldn't be any faster than it is right now, why does it need to be faster than 1100 m/s other than whining from bads?

(C-)ER PPC heat: Same thing as PPCs, if it needs to be less hot so that people actually use it then fine, but other changes (particularly a C-LPL range nerf) would be better.

(C-)ER PPC velocity: Still not nearly fast enough, the ER PPC needs to be significantly faster both so that it can fly fast enough to use its high optimal range and so that it's more distinct from PPCs; ~1750 m/s for ER PPCs would be good

PPCs also need to have their minimum range profile reverted back to the way it was a while ago, so that a PPC shot doesn't do 0 damage at 89m.

Overall PPCs are still not where they should be, and regular PPCs get a needless velocity buff because PGI are too lazy to make changes that make sense.

[El Bandito]

Pjwned, on 01 April 2016 - 06:37 PM, said:

(C-)ER PPC heat: Same thing as PPCs, if it needs to be less hot so that people actually use it then fine, but other changes (particularly a C-LPL range nerf) would be better.

(C-)ER PPC velocity: Still not nearly fast enough, the ER PPC needs to be significantly faster both so that it can fly fast enough to use its high optimal range and so that it's more distinct from PPCs; ~1750 m/s for ER PPCs would be good

My Timbie-A would love the **** outta that change.

[Matthew Ace]

Pleased that the change is finally going to happen, but flabbergasted why this change was delayed since Feb/Mar 2016 patch.Without understanding the rest of the process, we know only it's a .xml change.

Next, we just need to keep our fingers crossed for something done to minimum range on the IS PPC? Personally, I would want to see that, plus all PPCs hitting harder at the cost of longer cooldown time.

Edited by Matthew Ace, 01 April 2016 - 07:07 PM.

[FupDup]

Matthew Ace, on 01 April 2016 - 07:06 PM, said:

Pleased that the change is finally going to happen, but flabbergasted why this change was delayed since Feb/Mar 2016 patch.Without understanding the rest of the process, we know only it's a .xml change.

One of the devs, I think it was Mike Frost Forst, said that it would take 4 hours (or was it 8 hours?) to fully implement a patch that only changes a single weapon stat.

Even assuming the 8 hour estimate, that still doesn't leave much room for excuses here.

Edited by FupDup, 01 April 2016 - 07:08 PM.

[cazidin]

FupDup, on 01 April 2016 - 07:08 PM, said:

One of the devs, I think it was Mike Frost Forst, said that it would take 4 hours (or was it 8 hours?) to fully implement a patch that only changes a single weapon stat.

Even assuming the 8 hour estimate, that still doesn't leave much room for excuses here.

I'm not a Game Developer but did he explain why that is?

[FupDup]

cazidin, on 01 April 2016 - 07:14 PM, said:

I'm not a Game Developer but did he explain why that is?

I don't remember it word for word, but it wasn't because of the XML line change. It had something to do with getting it to the live servers, testing, maintenance downtimes, stuff like that.

[S 0 L E N Y A]

They are dead to me and have been for such a long time that frankly they may as well not exist

[cazidin]

FupDup, on 01 April 2016 - 07:15 PM, said:

I don't remember it word for word, but it wasn't because of the XML line change. It had something to do with getting it to the live servers, testing, maintenance downtimes, stuff like that.

That's reasonable. Would the time be multiplicative or additive? That is to say, would it take 16 hours for 2 weapon stat changes or just 8+?