This Update Is Too Restrictive
#1
Posted 23 August 2016 - 07:44 PM
#2
Posted 23 August 2016 - 08:11 PM
Gas Guzzler, on 23 August 2016 - 07:44 PM, said:
Just curious, what builds were you running where the severity of the penalty was hampering your playstyle? and why?
Edited by Dracol, 23 August 2016 - 08:11 PM.
#3
Posted 23 August 2016 - 08:47 PM
Dracol, on 23 August 2016 - 08:11 PM, said:
My laser vomit Executioner is done, but I've accepted and moved on from that.
The 2 ER PPC Gauss Timber Wolf goes to 81% heat with alpha which is excessive. Yeah, you can fire in two groups now, but the peak and poke playstyle with that one is hampered sadly. I think the eR PPCs shouldn't incur extra energy because of their splash damage. They should just lose the splash damage and just do the 10 pinpoint and lose the extra energy.
Constantly trigger bonus heat when firing 2 UAC10s and trying to mix lasers in as well.
AS7-S with the AC20 and SRM6s... really hurt by not being able to alpha and twist.
And then future mechs like the MAD-IIC and Night Gyr.. can't think of any builds that won't be hampered there. At least the MAD-IIC can take a nice big engine, but the Night Gyr... meh.
Its just a shame we have to go to these lengths, for literally no benefit (to me anyway).
#7
Posted 23 August 2016 - 09:02 PM
Mystere, on 23 August 2016 - 08:54 PM, said:
I don't know about you, but I think that is a good thing.
Yup, it would be a good thing, if other mechs couldnt do it perfectly fine. Peek and poke will always be meta so long as not taking damage (which is always true) is as important as dealing it.
#11
Posted 24 August 2016 - 12:47 AM
Are you guys really trying to say you can't peak and poke firing two shots 1 second apart?
Edited by Monkey Lover, 24 August 2016 - 12:53 AM.
#13
Posted 24 August 2016 - 01:18 AM
#14
Posted 24 August 2016 - 01:44 AM
Alistair Winter, on 24 August 2016 - 01:18 AM, said:
Spite
"a malicious, usually petty, desire to harm, annoy, frustrate, or humiliate another person; bitter ill will; malice."
Proper response to criticism...not directed at your person...
Edited by davoodoo, 24 August 2016 - 01:46 AM.
#15
Posted 24 August 2016 - 02:03 AM
davoodoo, on 24 August 2016 - 01:44 AM, said:
"a malicious, usually petty, desire to harm, annoy, frustrate, or humiliate another person; bitter ill will; malice."
Proper response to criticism...not directed at your person...
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.
#16
Posted 24 August 2016 - 02:11 AM
Alistair Winter, on 24 August 2016 - 02:03 AM, said:
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.
You directed response at op.
Ofc it will come off as spiteful.
And yeah i disagree. Low ttk could fixed in thousand other ways easiest of which would be to increase armor but instead we break how mechs function.
#17
Posted 24 August 2016 - 02:15 AM
davoodoo, on 24 August 2016 - 02:11 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?
davoodoo, on 24 August 2016 - 02:11 AM, said:
Ofc it will come off as spiteful.
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.
Edited by Alistair Winter, 24 August 2016 - 02:17 AM.
#18
Posted 24 August 2016 - 02:16 AM
but a slow clumsy assault with its 3 PPC and a boat load of heat sinks....again gets energy draw and because of the failings of the heat system - the tons and tons of equipment (30 or more) the Mech uses are not as much of worth as those tiny 6t on your 35t 150kph squirrel.
Really we need this tonnage factor - when the combat efficency of a 80t mech = 30t Mech - you also have to reduce the costs for the 80t Mech - and last not least - don't use tonnage as a modificator in either drop deck or group gameplay
Edited by Karl Streiger, 24 August 2016 - 02:17 AM.
#19
Posted 24 August 2016 - 02:31 AM
Gas Guzzler, on 23 August 2016 - 08:47 PM, said:
The 2 ER PPC Gauss Timber Wolf goes to 81% heat with alpha which is excessive. Yeah, you can fire in two groups now, but the peak and poke playstyle with that one is hampered sadly.
Edited by gloowa, 24 August 2016 - 02:32 AM.
#20
Posted 24 August 2016 - 02:38 AM
Karl Streiger, on 24 August 2016 - 02:16 AM, said:
Not a problem imho. The goal should be to balance the weight class queues to 25% each. So far, light mechs have always been less popular (unless there is a challenge going on). So a slight buff here seems tolerable.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users