78 replies to this topic

[Gas Guzzler]

Pariah Devalis, on 08 June 2016 - 08:28 AM, said:

Buuutttt... I was under the impression MWO was supposed to be "the thinking man's shooter." Amirite?

You should know by now that the masses deem a thinking man's shooter to be a snails pace game filled with RNG and as little coordination and thought as possible, ironically.

[Pr8Dator]

Pariah Devalis, on 08 June 2016 - 08:28 AM, said:

Balance it based on top end play. If you balance it based on anything else, you're balancing weapon systems on suboptimal usage. You cannot, cannot balance a game based on the lowest common denominator because that just leads to homogenization of weapons and a very low skill ceiling. By making each weapon fill a specific niche at top end play, however, you vastly increase the skill cap and the value of each weapon system as they fill their various battlefield roles.

That said, the downside of that is a much steeper learning curve. Buuutttt... I was under the impression MWO was supposed to be "the thinking man's shooter." Amirite?

It was the "Boating Man's Shooter" since the days of green SplatterPults, remember those days? Those were the days Catapults were actually scary!

Edited by Pr8Dator, 08 June 2016 - 08:33 AM.

[Gas Guzzler]

Mcgral18, on 08 June 2016 - 08:13 AM, said:

Then you just need to pray to RNGeesus more often, it's not a viable solution IMO

I know how you feel about stomping around the public queue in this thing, but do you really think it is dominant at the competitive level?

[Pariah Devalis]

Gas Guzzler, on 08 June 2016 - 08:31 AM, said:

You should know by now that the masses deem a thinking man's shooter to be a snails pace game filled with RNG and as little coordination and thought as possible, ironically.

If only we had fixed convergence, a proper heat scale, rapid (and I mean bimonthly) iteration on suboptimal weapon systems with no end to the iterations until it is done right, a willingness to totally scrap obviously poor code regardless of the time and effort put in to make them in the first place, and a reversion to 8v8 on the current maps with a proper radar cross section based detection system, maybe we'd get there.



Edit: Why, yes, I actually did state some specific things that PGI could do to improve the game, instead of just complaining about it. Rare, I know!

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 08 June 2016 - 08:36 AM.

[The Great Bear]

i use the lbx cannons with pulse lasers so i say nurfing UAC is fine

[Pr8Dator]

The Great Bear, on 08 June 2016 - 08:34 AM, said:

i use the lbx cannons with pulse lasers so i say nurfing UAC is fine

Yeah, I currently run with 2 x MG + 2 x LBX20 and pulses... not great, just nice to hear the thunder roar of those LBX20s before I fall hahaha

[Aeon Veritas]

Gas Guzzler, on 08 June 2016 - 08:32 AM, said:

I know how you feel about stomping around the public queue in this thing, but do you really think it is dominant at the competitive level?

Since it's obviously not the to-go loadout for competitive play, why do so many bother?
I mean gauss+ppc is completely unaffected by this...

[Gas Guzzler]

Pr8Dator, on 08 June 2016 - 08:32 AM, said:

It was the "Boating Man's Shooter" since the days of green SplatterPults, remember those days?

2 cLPL, Gauss was a great non-boating build. Then PGI nerfed the Gauss to appease the underhive.

2 PPC 2 AC5 was a great non-boating build. Then PGI nerfed PPCs into the ground to appease the underhive.

2 ER PPC Gauss was a great non-boating build, then PGI nerfed the ER PPCs into the ground then Gauss too.

So yeah, we could have non-boating mechs but because of whiners it's a no go.

[Aleksandr Sergeyevich Kerensky]

If you want to nerf the kdk-3. The best way to do it, is not to touch it... But instead buff the kdk-1 and kdk-2 quirks. Give people incentive to pilot kodiaks other then the Sb and the kdk-3

[Jables McBarty]

iLLcapitan, on 08 June 2016 - 06:47 AM, said:

lol.
nerf every good thing out there, till all there is left is mediocrity.

Big Tin Man, on 08 June 2016 - 06:51 AM, said:

When all I see are matches with no less than 6 Kodiak 3's all running quad UAC10's, there's a balance issue.

And yes, I own the KDK. I've run the quad UAC10, and 5's and 10's together. It is a hair overpowered, but not devastatingly OP unless ignored. And you shouldn't ignore 100 ton mechs. This is why such a small quirk would bring balance.

There's a difference between balance by variety and balance by mediocrity.

Right now the KDK-3 is king of dakka, and is widely perceived to be OP. You can nerf UAC's (proposed in initial QQ topics), you can nerf the KDK's use of UAC's (proposed here), or you can nerf another aspect of the 'mech. Reduce twisting arc/speed, get rid of structure buffs, give negative structure buffs.

Nerfing all UAC's is idiotic, and we all seem to agree on that.

Nerfing UAC's on the Kodiak seems like a happy middle ground, but it just puts this 'mech back to a baseline of performance. By discouraging the UAC build you get rid of one of its unique strengths.

Nerfing something else allows the 'mech to keep its unique aspect (UAC boating) while making it less "OP". It also addresses the Gauss builds.

EDIT: Think about it this way--which is more hated? The Oxide or the JR7-IIC? The IIC has more than twice the alpha of the Oxide, and has a higher engine cap and c-XL, but the Oxide is the favorite both for playing and for QQing. Why? Because its structure quirks make it incredibly beefy, and its agility bonuses beat the IIC's engine boost. It has high firepower, high survivability, and great maneuverability. But if you make SRM-boating non-viable on the Oxide, it becomes an utterly useless 'mech. You would take away what makes it unique. A way to balance the game while still giving the Oxide it's purpose is to nerf either its mobility or its tankiness, not its ability to boat SRMs.

Edited by Jables McBarty, 08 June 2016 - 09:11 AM.

[Pariah Devalis]

As to the statement "it isn't big in comp, so what's the harm?"

If it isn't big in comp, there's a reason for it. Obviously it is less effective there, which indicates that there are counters. The very fact that it isn't big in comp is evidence enough that it isn't as exploitable against intelligent piloting than the loud voices scream it is.

[Pr8Dator]

Gas Guzzler, on 08 June 2016 - 08:36 AM, said:

2 cLPL, Gauss was a great non-boating build. Then PGI nerfed the Gauss to appease the underhive.

2 PPC 2 AC5 was a great non-boating build. Then PGI nerfed PPCs into the ground to appease the underhive.

2 ER PPC Gauss was a great non-boating build, then PGI nerfed the ER PPCs into the ground then Gauss too.

So yeah, we could have non-boating mechs but because of whiners it's a no go.

That and the fact that the hardpoints on many of these mechs actually encourage boating since it would be suboptimal DPS-wise or heat wise to fill mechs with many hardpoints with big weapons. Not filling all the hardpoints would then become a waste of the mech's potential and in some cases, the whole point of that chasiss... the design of the game itself encourages boating...

Aleksandr Sergeyevich Kerensky, on 08 June 2016 - 08:38 AM, said:

If you want to nerf the kdk-3. The best way to do it, is not to touch it... But instead buff the kdk-1 and kdk-2 quirks. Give people incentive to pilot kodiaks other then the Sb and the kdk-3

Indeed, I have since given up on the KDK3 and has found new fun in a Splatter Spirit Bear

[Pariah Devalis]

Jables McBarty, on 08 June 2016 - 08:39 AM, said:

There's a difference between balance by variety and balance by mediocrity.

Right now the KDK-3 is king of dakka, and is widely perceived to be OP. You can nerf UAC's (proposed in initial QQ topics), you can nerf the KDK's use of UAC's (proposed here), or you can nerf another aspect of the 'mech. Reduce twisting arc/speed, get rid of structure buffs, give negative structure buffs.

Nerfing all UAC's is idiotic, and we all seem to agree on that.

Nerfing UAC's on the Kodiak seems like a happy middle ground, but it just puts this 'mech back to a baseline of performance. By discouraging the UAC build you get rid of one of its unique strengths.

Nerfing something else allows the 'mech to keep its unique aspect (UAC boating) while making it less "OP". It also addresses the Gauss builds.

Making me think the KDK-3 could get its mobility quirks reduced or removed. It would still be a fine mech and retain its niche as the Clan ballistics platform for assaults.

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 08 June 2016 - 08:40 AM.

[Gas Guzzler]

Pariah Devalis, on 08 June 2016 - 08:34 AM, said:

If only we had fixed convergence, a proper heat scale, rapid (and I mean bimonthly) iteration on suboptimal weapon systems with no end to the iterations until it is done right, a willingness to totally scrap obviously poor code regardless of the time and effort put in to make them in the first place, and a reversion to 8v8 on the current maps with a proper radar cross section based detection system, maybe we'd get there.



Edit: Why, yes, I actually did state some specific things that PGI could do to improve the game, instead of just complaining about it. Rare, I know!

Heat scale... depending on what you do, it might not be a good fit for a game like this.

Fixed convergence... I like delayed convergence better, but still, things like this affect some mechs more then others which isn't great.

Otherwise yeah, I agree.

[Mole]

Big Tin Man, on 08 June 2016 - 06:51 AM, said:

When all I see are matches with no less than 6 Kodiak 3's all running quad UAC10's, there's a balance issue.

I haven't a clue what kind of matches you've been playing, man, but since the Kodiak frenzy of the initial release has died down a bit I get maybe 3 or 4 Kodiaks per match, and I'm talking about the entire match, not 3 to 4 Kodiaks per team. And even then not all of them are running quad UAC/10. I don't feel like it's a problem. I've been mastering Atlases lately too and I've stomped right up to multiple quad UAC/10 Kodiaks and smashed their faces in in an unelited Atlas pretty much without fail. We gonna nerf the Atlas too?

[Big Tin Man]

Pariah Devalis, on 08 June 2016 - 08:28 AM, said:

Balance it based on top end play. If you balance it based on anything else, you're balancing weapon systems on suboptimal usage. You cannot, cannot balance a game based on the lowest common denominator because that just leads to homogenization of weapons and a very low skill ceiling. By making each weapon fill a specific niche at top end play, however, you vastly increase the skill cap and the value of each weapon system as they fill their various battlefield roles.

So if quad 10's is not the top level play build, why is everyone all pissy about giving the KDK 3 and the KDK 3 only a 5% increase in UAC jam? Would you rather see Russ and Paul nerf it's structure, armor, or movement? What about the KDK4 that can run the same PPC/Gauss build sword and board style with the same quirks that you just don't see on the field? (oh yeah, nobody bought those).

A nerf is coming to the KDK3 and if you don't believe that you're a fool. PGI has a history here of overnerfing everything that you see in large quantities. Can we steer this toward a constructive and perhaps decent conversation, because the sheet numbers of KDK-3's out there putting up the damage they are putting up in QP is begging for a nerf. Let's steer it toward something we can live with, instead of killing the mech outright.

The underhive is crying about UAC10's. Top tier says it's fine because it's PPC/Gauss. So tweak the UAC's and leave it a good mech. Nerfing anything else would be uncivilized.

[Pariah Devalis]

Gas Guzzler, on 08 June 2016 - 08:40 AM, said:

Heat scale... depending on what you do, it might not be a good fit for a game like this.

Fixed convergence... I like delayed convergence better, but still, things like this affect some mechs more then others which isn't great.

Otherwise yeah, I agree.

TBF, I think I'd like a hybrid system. Fixed convergence on weapons unless it is on an arm with lower arm actuators, in which case it is pinpoint. Set to optimal range. Certain mechs would benefit from it more than others, but no mech would have 100% pinpoint damage output, aside from arm laser Clan mechs (risking the loss of the arms) or IS mechs with all the guns in their arms and locked LAA. Heat scale... honestly, if the convergence issue gets fixed, I feel like the heat issue would be less important.

[Pr8Dator]

Mole, on 08 June 2016 - 08:43 AM, said:

I haven't a clue what kind of matches you've been playing, man, but since the Kodiak frenzy of the initial release has died down a bit I get maybe 3 or 4 Kodiaks per match, and I'm talking about the entire match, not 3 to 4 Kodiaks per team. And even then not all of them are running quad UAC/10. I don't feel like it's a problem. I've been mastering Atlases lately too and I've stomped right up to multiple quad UAC/10 Kodiaks and smashed their faces in in an unelited Atlas pretty much without fail. We gonna nerf the Atlas too?

Yeah, 4UAC10 isn't competitive because it runs out of ammo so darn quickly. The other drawback is that Kodiaks are super crunchy face to face so having to point face front with an enemy for about 5 seconds that could potentially take it out in one volley just isn't that competitive.

[Pariah Devalis]

Big Tin Man, on 08 June 2016 - 08:44 AM, said:

So if quad 10's is not the top level play build, why is everyone all pissy about giving the KDK 3 and the KDK 3 only a 5% increase in UAC jam? Would you rather see Russ and Paul nerf it's structure, armor, or movement? What about the KDK4 that can run the same PPC/Gauss build sword and board style with the same quirks that you just don't see on the field? (oh yeah, nobody bought those).

A nerf is coming to the KDK3 and if you don't believe that you're a fool. PGI has a history here of overnerfing everything that you see in large quantities. Can we steer this toward a constructive and perhaps decent conversation, because the sheet numbers of KDK-3's out there putting up the damage they are putting up in QP is begging for a nerf. Let's steer it toward something we can live with, instead of killing the mech outright.

The underhive is crying about UAC10's. Top tier says it's fine because it's PPC/Gauss. So tweak the UAC's and leave it a good mech. Nerfing anything else would be uncivilized.

The underhive can cry in a corner for all I care, to be quite frank. They ruined the game in the past more often than the cries of the comp crowd. That said, self serving comp teams have worked to ruin balance by maintaining a status quo with bad states of balance before, too. Underperformers need to learn how to play the game properly before they can have the perspective necessary to appropriately critique the game's facets. Unless you know, understand, and do, you will never be in a position to accurately assess the situation.

It would be like a school teacher who did 15 minutes of research online claiming Vaccinations are evil. Despite the professionals and scientists who know what they are doing stating the exact opposite. With overwhelming proof.

Also, as I said, if UAC10 boating isn't the top solution in comp, THAN THERE IS CLEARLY A REASON FOR IT. Player skill leads to learning counters. You are not entitled to simplifying the game at the expense of other players' enjoyment. Especially when there is a reason it is already being passed on by the top tier.

There is a reason for that. Once you learn the reason for it, you learn how to counter it, the bogey man goes away. Personal skill increases. That should be its own reward.

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 08 June 2016 - 08:50 AM.

[Gas Guzzler]

Pr8Dator, on 08 June 2016 - 08:40 AM, said:

That and the fact that the hardpoints on many of these mechs actually encourage boating since it would be suboptimal DPS-wise or heat wise to fill mechs with many hardpoints with big weapons. Not filling all the hardpoints would then become a waste of the mech's potential and in some cases, the whole point of that chasiss... the design of the game itself encourages boating...

How do you define boating? Surely not 2 of a weapon, What about 3? 3 LPLS? 3 MLS? You will find that if you look at laser vomit for an example, the most efficient way to do things is as many big lasers as you can go without ghost heat, then fill in with medium lasers to taste.

If the masses have their way and we get some form of ghost heat to curb alphas, the medium lasers will disappear and people will bring as many big lasers as they can.

The Splat Cat is an example where the reason you boat is that you have 6 missile slots. Sure you could bring part SRMs and part LRMS, so you can take care of any range, but that's only if you want to play the game like a zombie and not care where you go or what the enemy does. If you want to be more of a credit to team, you specialize in long range or short range and then do what you can to put yourself in a position to do the most damage. So it's pretty obvious that you end up boating with mechs that have all of one type of hardpoint.