81 replies to this topic

[davoodoo]

Alistair Winter, on 24 August 2016 - 02:15 AM, said:

I don't get why people want to keep increasing armour instead of nerfing firepower. It's basically the same thing. What's so bad about nerfing?

We're going to have triple TT values for armour now? Quadruple?

Reducing alphas breaks canonical designs like idk 12 ermed nova, 2ac20 kgc or shitton of 3ppc assault mechs whcih simply cant use their weaponry like they are supposed to

Increasing armor on the other hand simply increases ttk without any drawbacks...
Is it more ******** to have 4x armor than to have x2 one?? yea, its bandaid, easy to implement bandaid, requires little messing with xmls...

Edited by davoodoo, 24 August 2016 - 02:50 AM.

[Alistair Winter]

davoodoo, on 24 August 2016 - 02:50 AM, said:

Reducing alphas breaks canonical designs like idk 12 ermed nova, 2ac20 kgc or shitton of 3ppc assault mechs whcih simply cant use their weaponry like they are supposed to

Increasing armor on the other hand simply increases ttk without any drawbacks...
Is it more ******** to have 4x armor than to have x2 one?? yea, its bandaid, easy to implement bandaid, requires little messing with xmls...

I guess you could do it. Another way would be to increase cooldown, so the point of having 12 cERML, 2 AC20 or 3 PPCs would be to maintain a higher rate of fire. A Nova could fire 4 cERMLs in 3 bursts, for example, to maintain high dps despite long cooldowns.

I guess it makes sense to increase armour since weapons in MWO basically have a lot lower "cooldown" than TT does (where each turn represented 10 seconds, I think). Just depends if you want a higher or lower pace for the game.

Did the Nova really continually alpha strike in TT though? Seems like that would be too hot.

[Widowmaker1981]

Alistair Winter, on 24 August 2016 - 02:03 AM, said:

Sorry, it was just a manner of saying "The very thing you're complaining about is exactly what I've been missing from this game". It didn't mean to come off as spiteful. It's just that this game has 50,000 or so players, and the stuff one player wants is exactly the opposite of what another player wants.

So just to reiterate in a very neutral way: If it's increasingly hard to find builds that can alpha strike to victory, I consider that a good thing. "Too weak for Mechwarrior" is not a thought that has ever occurred to me while playing MWO.

Do you not feel that strictly limiting the amount of firepower mechs can put out, based on a flat value (that doesn't change with mech weight or engine size), removes any reason for taking heavy slow mechs like the Dire Wolf, ever - because whats the point of being a slow gunbag when you cant make use of the guns? Surely that just makes you a slow bag of fail?

[Marmon Rzohr]

Monkey Lover, on 24 August 2016 - 12:47 AM, said:

Alpha warriors are not happy lol

Are you guys really trying to say you can't peak and poke firing two shots 1 second apart?

Oh so you want the Even-More-Rushing-Facetank-Meta ?



Sure. Go ahead. Enjoy.

It's fine wanting to tone down excessive alpha strikes that one-shot lights and make missteps far to punishing, but it's quite another thing to not consider that there should be more ways to play than facetanking and rushing people with SRMs.

Yeah sure, that's not what's going to be the meta on the current build of the PTS. The meta is going to be IS LPLs. Again. I just wanted to warn you what you're wishing for this game.

[Tiantara]

- Its not even restrictive so much... Update have some good things like cooldowns... and heat penalty. And some bad, which works not well with other. Even bad in some cases.

It's good to force pilots split alpha in smaller parts. But now that idea was broken.
It's good to make higher penalty for some weapons or energy draw. But not both in same time.
It's good to add time to cooldown for longrange. But not with Energy Draw.
It's good to add SRM spread... but not add random hit to mech parts which even wasn't targeted.

Some of changes do great impact to mech with less hardpoints and make them back into dusty shelves.
Adding so many tweaks in one patch wasn't good idea.

Tweaking regeneration rate of ED and some cooldown of longrange-medium - better choice.

Edited by Tiantara, 24 August 2016 - 03:17 AM.

[Alistair Winter]

Widowmaker1981, on 24 August 2016 - 02:59 AM, said:

Do you not feel that strictly limiting the amount of firepower mechs can put out, based on a flat value (that doesn't change with mech weight or engine size), removes any reason for taking heavy slow mechs like the Dire Wolf, ever - because whats the point of being a slow gunbag when you cant make use of the guns? Surely that just makes you a slow bag of fail?

You know, sometimes I lose track of my own point of view, either from playing devil's advocate too much or from trying to win arguments on the internet.

The bottom line is this:
I don't like Energy draw. At all. I think it's a failed attempt to reduce the number of alpha strikes, but it's effectively taking one step back to take one step forward, because it's also killing what little weapon synergy this game had. In other words, it seems to just result in boating, with a number of other unfortunate side effects.

I don't think Ghost heat was perfect. I think there are other solutions. I don't know that this game needs an extra game mechanic like Ghost heat or Energy draw to be balanced. But I've learned to live with Ghost heat and I think it's better than most of the other cheap alternatives that don't require years of testing and tweaking for PGI to get right.

With Ghost heat, we have something that kind of works, but the current build has too low TTK, for my liking. So what I really want is to go back to Ghost heat, make some global changes to increase TTK (whether it's by slightly increasing cooldown or reducing heat dissipation or both) and then move the f*ck on with the game and start delivering new content, like PVE or Solaris.

Maybe a different team of game developers would be able to come up with a better system, but I think PGI has done basically as much as they can. It's time to live with imperfection and move on.

#GhostHeat2017

[Karl Streiger]

Well I always said - we don't need Energy Draw because the limit is there already - heat and ammunition

When you consider the heatsinks as the "size" of the energy bar - you already have the "size/class" of the Mech considered - no additional calculation necessary.

The idea to take damage rather then heat is only based on the "broken Gauss" - it is the epic fail of CBT to get a gun with 1 heat and superior range and damage

Fix this and fix the ammunition by limiting the total number of shots a mech can carry - hell take the MW4 example if you have to - ammunition is directly linked with the weapon and ammunition is stored in the same or near torso location as the gun. if this means a Atlas may have 3tons of ammo for his Defiance MechKiller AC20 in its RT plus CASE... why not.

Edited by Karl Streiger, 24 August 2016 - 03:59 AM.

[davoodoo]

i wouldnt really consider gauss as failure

llaser weights 5 tons and deals 8 dmg in tt at cost of 8 heat
so 2 llas is 16 dmg 16 heat and 10 tons
Now add 8 dhs to it(10 built in engine btw) and you have 16 dmg 0 heat and 18 tons.

Gauss on the other hand?? 15 tons of weapon, at least 1 ton for ammo and 1 dhs to negate heat.
15 dmg 0 heat 17 tons and ammo for only 8 shots also it can explode if shot at.

If you want to talk about tt failure i would rather look at medlas and ac20...

4 medlas each doing 5 dmg at 3 heat.
20 dmg total for 4 tons + 6 tons for dhs to negate heat. 20 dmg for 10 tons, less than ac20 which would require ammo and 4 dhs to negate its heat.

And ammo explosion isnt a small thing in tt, ac20 can take 5 shots per ton, if they are explode they deal total of dmg this ammo would do if fired, so were looking at 100 dmg, enough to blow up mech if its st.

Also funniest thing even, mg ammo. 200 per ton, which in tt is equivalent to 200dmg, if this thing explodes you got equivalent of tactical nuke... and good luck playing for 200 turns to expend that ammo.

Edited by davoodoo, 24 August 2016 - 04:20 AM.

[Karl Streiger]

in CBT the AC 20 or the large laser were in a fine place before the Gauss appeared.

Considering your heat calculation doesn't get off the ground - because the gauss hit one spot - while the large laser will spread their damage over two locations.

you might compare gauss with AC 10 just to see that it is wrong somehow. more damage, much more range, less heat. Well there are lots of discrepancies in CBT Clan and SL Tech - and we can see them now live in a FPS

[Gas Guzzler]

Monkey Lover, on 24 August 2016 - 12:47 AM, said:

Alpha warriors are not happy lol

Are you guys really trying to say you can't peak and poke firing two shots 1 second apart?

It's not a question of what I CAN do. That's an easy thing to do. But for a build already characterized by limited DPS and high heat, not being able to at least be able to play defensively without being heat capped instantly is kind of a kick in the nuts.

It's just TOO limiting, especially for 35 damage, that isn't really earth shattering.

[gloowa]

Karl Streiger, on 24 August 2016 - 05:09 AM, said:

in CBT the AC 20 or the large laser were in a fine place before the Gauss appeared.

Considering your heat calculation doesn't get off the ground - because the gauss hit one spot - while the large laser will spread their damage over two locations.

you might compare gauss with AC 10 just to see that it is wrong somehow. more damage, much more range, less heat. Well there are lots of discrepancies in CBT Clan and SL Tech - and we can see them now live in a FPS

Not that i disagree with you overall, but in the case of gauss, the AC10 had an obvious benefit of not having minimum range. Somthing impossible to emulate in fps unless perfect accuracy goes away. Also, in TT, that gauss rifle explosion was a MASSIVE threat - it's HUGE, any component that has gauss rifle in it, (even if fully padded with other stuff) has at last 50% chance to crit the gauss on critical hit. Usually more, ~70%. So, yeah, it had it's drawbacks in TT. It lost all of them in all MW games, leading to MW4 gauss/ppc sniping meta retardedness. (enybody remembers how that game "fixed" the issue? - they made you unable to destroy any one component with single hit - an alpha of 2x gauss + 2xppc would not kill even commando's arm, if it had not been damaged before. so silly...)

[Mystere]

Widowmaker1981, on 24 August 2016 - 12:43 AM, said:

You prefer some kind of honorable circling while we blast each other, yes? None of this cowardly using cover business?

Circling? I think you've got me pegged all wrong:





Text Version: There is just too much peeking and poking going on right now on live.

And you were the one who called the playstyle "cowardly", not me.

Edited by Mystere, 24 August 2016 - 07:22 AM.

[Cy Mitchell]

I am not in favor of adding additional armor. From what I have seen with about 3 hours of testing last night this latest build of ED has succeeded in limiting Alphas which is something that Ghost Heat was meant to do but failed to do. I do not think the build is perfect yet. More adjustment need to be made. Things like slightly bigger energy pools for Assaults should get some consideration and testing.

From the testing that I have done so far, it seems like the boating problem and the Gauss/ERPPC meta that was developing has been reigned in by the latest changes. I still need to do more testing on the mixed load-outs. I ran my typical mixed UAC/Laser builds last night and they seemed OK although I do have to watch my heat closer now that exceeding the threshold makes 1 heat for each 1 point over. That was the most notable difference from this build to the last. It is also probably what gets the most credit for slowing down repeatable Alphas.

Now, I need to start experimenting with mixed builds like laser/LRMs and SRMs/UACs on Mad Dogs.

[Monkey Lover]

Gas Guzzler, on 24 August 2016 - 06:13 AM, said:

It's not a question of what I CAN do. That's an easy thing to do. But for a build already characterized by limited DPS and high heat, not being able to at least be able to play defensively without being heat capped instantly is kind of a kick in the nuts.

It's just TOO limiting, especially for 35 damage, that isn't really earth shattering.

Its not limiting at all you can still alpha. Its you can't alpha as much as you used to be able to. This is the whole reason for the system. When it hits 12v12 focus fire even with 30-50 alphas will still kill mechs in seconds.

Marmon Rzohr, on 24 August 2016 - 03:00 AM, said:

Oh so you want the Even-More-Rushing-Facetank-Meta ?



Sure. Go ahead. Enjoy.

It's fine wanting to tone down excessive alpha strikes that one-shot lights and make missteps far to punishing, but it's quite another thing to not consider that there should be more ways to play than facetanking and rushing people with SRMs.

Yeah sure, that's not what's going to be the meta on the current build of the PTS. The meta is going to be IS LPLs. Again. I just wanted to warn you what you're wishing for this game.

If lpl get to powerful nerf lpl.. Its called balance. 4v4 meta will never be the same as 12v12 meta anyway.

Edited by Monkey Lover, 24 August 2016 - 09:20 AM.

[Gas Guzzler]

Monkey Lover, on 24 August 2016 - 09:17 AM, said:

Its not limiting at all you can still alpha. Its you can't alpha as much as you used to be able to. This is the whole reason for the system. When it hits 12v12 focus fire even with 30-50 alphas will still kill mechs in seconds.

Its a 35 damage alpha that incurs a 20 heat penalty.

Its too harsh. Let me emphasize that its a build that has low DPS and high heat ALREADY.

Edited by Gas Guzzler, 24 August 2016 - 09:21 AM.

[TLBFestus]

Alistair Winter, on 24 August 2016 - 02:15 AM, said:

That doesn't mean it was malicious, intended to humiliate or any of the other things in your definition. We're just people who play video game and we have different preferences. Some people want mechs to be faster, other people want them to be slower. There's nothing personal or malicious about those disagreements. We just have different ideas for what the game should be like.

Some people just can't take commentary or a differing opinion as NOT being insulting, especially on the internets. Toss in that the printed word does not very well convey the "emotion" behind its intent and you get this all the time.

Hence, SMILEY FACES!

(Which don't always work either)

[davoodoo]

TLBFestus, on 24 August 2016 - 09:50 AM, said:

Some people just can't take commentary or a differing opinion as NOT being insulting, especially on the internets. Toss in that the printed word does not very well convey the "emotion" behind its intent and you get this all the time.

Hence, SMILEY FACES!

(Which don't always work either)

If im telling im gonna do something that person im directing it at wouldnt like then by definition im doing it out of spite...

Seriously.
imagine that, x doesnt like pricing on mech pack.

And ill go "well thx for info x, now im gonna buy myself that mech pack" then hardly it can be interpreted as me enjoying what is to offer. Im not hiding my intention of trying to piss x.

Thx tlbfestus, now im gonna tell all how they shouldnt put smiley faces...

Edited by davoodoo, 24 August 2016 - 10:13 AM.

[Monkey Lover]

Gas Guzzler, on 24 August 2016 - 09:20 AM, said:

Its a 35 damage alpha that incurs a 20 heat penalty.

Its too harsh. Let me emphasize that its a build that has low DPS and high heat ALREADY.

At the same time it has a high range and pinpoint damage.

[Gas Guzzler]

Monkey Lover, on 24 August 2016 - 10:35 AM, said:

At the same time it has a high range and pinpoint damage.

The damage is only pinpoint at range if you fire the ER PPC and Gauss separately, which you know have to wait a whole second in between shots to do.

Edited by Gas Guzzler, 24 August 2016 - 10:43 AM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Monkey Lover, on 24 August 2016 - 10:35 AM, said:

At the same time it has a high range and pinpoint damage.

You know what else does, but actually has low heat and high DPS? AC5s.
2 cERPPC/Gauss = 35 damage and 51 heat
2 PPC/Gauss = 35 damage and 34 heat
5 AC5 = 25 damage and 7.5 heat
2 Gauss = 30 damage and 12 heat
3 PPC = 30 damage and 36 heat
1 cERPPC/Gauss = 25 damage and 21 heat
1 PPC/Gauss = 25 damage and 11 heat

Notice a problem? I do, no will ever use PPC/Gauss, they will just run AC5 boats and if they can't do that, just run Gauss boats. PPCs will be back to the trash bin, which is sad because they just started to come back into the meta.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 24 August 2016 - 12:39 PM.