241 replies to this topic

[Deathlike]

Mcgral18, on 02 September 2016 - 10:14 AM, said:

How about 3 KM/s isERPPCs?


That's a unique and powerful buff.


Laughably powerful, but for 10 damage and 14/15 heat? That's a cost.

I could be down for a insta-hit ERPPC velocity buff.. I'd rather have altered damage, but this would be something.

[Vincent Quatermain]

PTS3 review:

Reducing laser draw to 0.9x and ballistic draw to 1.2x: Great! It preserves the relative balance from PTS2, while allowing for more viable builds.

Clan regular ACs: Whatever. As others have noted, they aren't needed in the game.

UAC jam duration and chance: Moved the opposite of the correct direction. Jam chances are too high on the big guns, and jam duration is too high on the small guns. Recommend 12% chance for all UACs and jam duration equal to double the cooldown.

PPCs: I like the changes in isolation. However, combined with the large laser nerfs, these are a problem. I really think large pulse and PPCs should be comparable weapons with slightly different specialties. The current test build makes ERPPC strictly superior to LPL for Clans, and regular PPC strictly superior to LPL for IS. Recommend fixing by adjusting large lasers. See below.

Large Lasers: I am OK with the damage nerf and draw buff, but the duration nerfs are a bad idea. The whole reason for lower draw on lasers is that they are way less likely to do all their damage to a single component. As you increase burn duration, that becomes even less likely. Thus, the duration nerfs basically cancel out the draw buff. I personally think that no laser should have a burn duration longer than 1 second, except maybe ER Larges. Recommend adjusting all laser burn times downward, leaving damage and draw unchanged.

Gauss: Looks fine.

***

In general, the ED PTS keeps getting closer to the mark. But there definitely need to be several more iterations before PGI should even think about taking it live.

[Honiara]

Vincent Quatermain, on 02 September 2016 - 10:31 AM, said:

Clan regular ACs: Whatever. As others have noted, they aren't needed in the game.

UAC jam duration and chance: Moved the opposite of the correct direction. Jam chances are too high on the big guns, and jam duration is too high on the small guns. Recommend 12% chance for all UACs and jam duration equal to double the cooldown.

This is exactly what i had said on page 8.

It is probably also worth mentioning again, that cAC just need to be removed from the game, there is literally no reason to have them and they are n00b traps.

If you set all UACs to have the same jam chance and a jam time based on the cool down time, then you could re-do cUACs to have a single shot like isUAC but just increase the jam change to say 25%, this would make them so much better than they are now, it would give them pin point damage, but the advantages of crit slot and weight over the isUAC is countered by the jam chance. you could then give cUACs a 1:1 ED:Damage ratio and SIMPLIFY the mechanic.

Then you get very simple balance mechanic, is cUAC is > isUAC just adjust the jam chance % across the board, or visa-versa if IS > C.

Then you can SIMPLY tune 2/5/10/20 balance against each other with range/heat/velocity, again SIMPLE is best. No one wants to have to visit multiple websites to find this info, it all needs to be in game in 1 place and it needs to be SIMPLE and logical.

[C E Dwyer]

Jman5, on 01 September 2016 - 03:20 PM, said:

Those PPC buffs are making me nervous.

yes lol, ok average guy is still going to take scan weapons, but people that can shoot straight ouch lol

[C E Dwyer]

Appuagab, on 01 September 2016 - 09:20 PM, said:

Summary: «we didn't read your feedback, but have these random tweaks to energy consumption and damage nerfs to underused large lasers».

yeah seems pretty certain they are using their in game data and not paying much attention to what people are saying unless it's positive

[Reno Blade]

Preliminary feedback to the changes. I will test these in detail later (and update the graphs).

AC/UAC changes:
Seems ok.
Other option would be to have short, but more frequent Jam (higher chance, but only 2-4 sec duration)

M Laser changes:
Seem OK.
6 (no pen.) to 7ML (0-2 penalty)
5 (no pen.) to 6MP (0-3 penalty)
4 cMP (no pen.)
4 (no pen.) to 5 cERML (0-2 penalty)

LL Laser changes:
Reducing dmg will bring the LL down to 8dmg / 7heat (and ERLL 8dmg / 8heat)
4 LL (no pen.) can be fired together now, but thats 20 tons of weapons for 32 dmg / 28 heat
4 ERLL (no pen.) can be fired together now, but thats 20 tons of weapons for 32 dmg / 32 heat
3 cERLL (no pen.) using 12 tons for 30 dmg / 27 heat

LP Laser changes:
3 LP (no pen.) using 21 tons for 27 dmg / 21 heat
4 LP (2.4 pen.) using 28 tons for 36 dmg / 28 heat
3 cLP (no pen.) using 18 tons for 33 dmg / 30 heat

PPC changes:
3x PPC (no pen.) using 21 tons for 30 dmg / 30 heat
3x erPPC (no pen.) using 21 tons for 30 dmg / 37.5 heat (EDITED for 9/2 hotfix)
2x cERPPC (no pen.) using 12 tons for 30 dmg / 30 heat

overall, these weapon all are close to 1:1 rate of dmg/heat, but it seems the LL and LP changes look like they will not be very useful compared to ML and cERML anymore.

While LL/LP and PPCs are now closer to each other in regards to ton, dmg, heat and draw,... the PPC wil be better than the lasers.
I think the Large laser class could get -1 heat to balance this out .


Comparing low vs high dmg/heat/draw LL/LP:
Mechs like the Wolverine 6K can use 4x LL or 3x LP or just 2x LP and 2x ML and a different engine.
Or Stalkers using 4-6 LL/LP.
I rather see mechs only using 2x LL/LP because they are strong, but hot (draw a lot).
This would make single/dual more efficient than to use 4-6 of them.
On the other hand, having the LL/LP "weaker" will also reduce the efficiency of 3-6 LL boats as the tonnage/dmg ratio is not so good compared to other weapons (ML, SRM, AC, LBX).

So we need to see if the LL is still useful with the damage/tonage ratio and dmg/heat compared to the rest.

Edited by Reno Blade, 03 September 2016 - 01:51 AM.

[DarthPeanut]

I said this on Reddit and will repost here...


You know I realized it in talking to Solahma... this PTS3 does NOTHING to change or tweak anything in the actual ED system mechanics itself.

It is all weapons value tweaks!

So are we getting distracted by the weapons value tweaks and making that more of the focus than the base fundamental way ED system is being proposed to work? If that is the case then we are not testing ED at all but accepting it as the new system and already moving on to weapons balance under that system of ED.

I know I was initially distracted by weapon value balance and it is a part of this but I don't think we should lose sight of also testing the core mechanics of ED being proposed. Why are we not seeing any changes to that before they seemingly attempt to dial in weapons values.

Edited by DarthPeanut, 02 September 2016 - 11:51 AM.

[Hunter Watzas]

I feel like the game went backwards a little bit but its a test so I am not super mad.

First going back to a 1 to 1 scaling of damage to weapon is bad. Yes it is easier to understand but it didn't take long to get used to the knew values with some matches.

UAC jam duration is good and I agree change it per specific weapon groups. Some kind of function of basic cooldown. UACs have always had nearly 1.5x the damage potential of most other ballistic weapons. However, i wonder if lowering the jam chance is going to negate that penalty of increased jam duration.

LL losing some damage is fine but again people are going to be able to fire more of them so losing 1 point of damage but now firing 3 instead of two isn't solving the issue.

But i am glad you are willing to adjust all values of the weapon (Heat, damage, range, and energy) as that could lead us to a better balancing state. My only concern is that you are looking at a single weapon to single weapon balancing instead of groups of weapons. Once you start grouping weaopns, tonnage and slots become a more important influence on capabilities

[Andi Nagasia]

DarthPeanut, on 02 September 2016 - 11:51 AM, said:

I said this on Reddit and will repost here...


You know I realized it in talking to Solahma... this PTS3 does NOTHING to change or tweak anything in the actual ED system mechanics itself.

It is all weapons value tweaks!

So are we getting distracted by the weapons value tweaks and making that more of the focus than the base fundamental way ED system is being proposed to work? If that is the case then we are not testing ED at all but accepting it as the new system and already moving on to weapons balance under that system of ED.

I know I was initially distracted by weapon value balance and it is a part of this but I don't think we should lose sight of also testing the core mechanics of ED being proposed. Why are we not seeing any changes to that before they seemingly attempt to dial in weapons values.

well some weapons Values to ED have changed, the system seems to be testing well,
so these changes are to fix some out liners that are posing abit of a problem,

[Mcgral18]

Hey!

They hotfixed the Weapons.XML, the cUAC20 now has 18 E Draw instead of 28!




Now, why does the MG still have 0.8 DPS and a 3M CoF?
Why don't we get these changes monthly on the Live server?!
#PGIPLZ
Iterative balance is important, not months of stagnation

[SpiralFace]

Technically, MG's got a fairly decent buff by virtue of their "cooldown" being untouched. (since they are a Damage over Time weapon.)

So while the DPS of nearly every other weapon in the game went down by 15% plus the module cool-down values, MG's remain in the exact same spot they where.

Which makes it a relative buff in comparison to the other weapons.

Not much, but it is something.

Edited by SpiralFace, 02 September 2016 - 03:54 PM.

[DrxAbstract]

ScarecrowES, on 01 September 2016 - 03:32 PM, said:

I didn't miss the duration nerfs... they just don't really mean much at that size - it's a negligible increase. And yeah, it doesn't help mixed builds very much, if at all... but nothing about ED helps mixed builds. Everyone is boating now anyway, and this is a direct buff to boats. IS LPL was 30 damage for 30 draw... now it's 27 damage for 24 draw. I think we can safely draw 2 over the limit and fire 4x LPL without too much concern, so 36 damage for 32 draw plus 2 extra heat. Should we not expect to see even MORE LPL boats now?

Massive laser buffs? Heavy Ballistic nerfs? What is this, I dont even...

I know math is hard, but try doing some of it within the context of the entirety instead of assumption-based hyperbole. The only assertion you've made that's remotely accurate is that you can fire more lasers than before - That's technically true. However if you'd bothered to take into account other conveniently omitted factors, such as the relative numeric difference, you'd have realized you would need, for example, 9 Small Lasers before actually gaining the benefit of a being able to use a 10th... Or 2 Large Pulse Lasers now have the option of adding 1 Small Pulse laser. Of course this is completely ignoring the straight damage (And duration if applicable) nerf of Large-Class lasers... Wow, such a massive buff! (Warning: Sarcasm)

As for your LPL comparison, again, math is hard; 3 IS LPL indeed were 30 dmg for 30 draw, and yes 4 IS LPL will be 36 dmg for 32+2 ED heat with the new change... Emphasis on FOUR. That would be 7 more tons, 1 more energy hardpoint, 2 more crit slots, 7 additional heat for a grand bonus of 3 extra damage to achieve what 3 IS LPL already do on Live servers at 33 dmg and 27 heat with no ghost heat penalty.

So did you have any legitimate complaints? As much as I'd love to argue with you over fantastically exaggerated and false information, it's not really that constructive.

Edited by DrxAbstract, 02 September 2016 - 03:57 PM.

[Sereglach]

Mcgral18, on 02 September 2016 - 03:42 PM, said:

Hey!

They hotfixed the Weapons.XML, the cUAC20 now has 18 E Draw instead of 28!




Now, why does the MG still have 0.8 DPS and a 3M CoF?
Why don't we get these changes monthly on the Live server?!
#PGIPLZ
Iterative balance is important, not months of stagnation

. . . and Flamers and LBX Autocannons and LRM's and Jump Jets . . . Oh the little things that PGI could have been doing every patch, for the past several years, to help with continual game balance. It would have gone so far in making people feel better about game balance and overall faith in PGI/MWO.

PGI actually does have an opportunity to help fix that if they actually manage to get some serious weapons balancing done during the ED PTS series. We'll have to see if they succeed in the end.

Edited by Sereglach, 02 September 2016 - 07:29 PM.

[Túatha Dé Danann]

L3mming2, on 02 September 2016 - 04:22 AM, said:

CERLL 1.5s burn time so thats 30 draw regenerated during firing + 30 draw capacity thats 60 draw... u can alpha with this weapon if the draw is used on a tick by tick basis..

your idea sounded realy nice, but it would make pulse lasers horible and ERlasers extreamly boatable...

ps even a laser with only 1 s burn time would end up with having 50 draw available... a penalty less 50 damage laser alpha is just to high...

it would translate to giving the med laser a draw of 0.6 / 1 damage... i think we can all agrea opon thats a bad idea..

I think you are misunderstanding me a little. I'm not saying that we take the actual values, but new ones. Let put it in a simple way:

Lets say, a Clan ER-LL has 10 ticks and 10 damage (1 damage per tick) and a 1s duration. Now, over the time of 1s, we can draw 30 energy + another 30 energy because of the regeneration. If we take 2-ER-LL before overshooting, thats 3 Energy per 1 damage then per ER-LL. Sounds a little high, but its an arbitrary example anyway. If we say 3-ER-LL should be the limit, thats 2 energy drawn per damage- tick. This is going into more reasonable values now. Still a little high, but we get there.

You see the pattern? Now, if we increase the duration, we also spread the damage more (thus higher TTK) and we don't have to change damage nor heat nor range values and the duration itself balances itself out with the ED. For lasers, this becomes a damage-throughput per tick limitation.

Now its your personal choice. Do you want to have all your energy be used up in a short burst, or do you have a longer burn but can have a "higher alpha" - this is exactly what ED tries to accomplish - to limit high pinpoint alphas in one hitbox.

If we take a medium-laser, the energy drawn should obviously be lower, but from the ED/damage-tick you can still limit the maximum alpha via both the duration and the Energy pool+regen. So without changing the base values of the weapon, you can still tweak it towards a better balancing point of how many of them you can boat at the same time.

Pulse-Lasers follow the same rule, they have just fewer ticks, but the math doesn't change.

And with this, you have a proper fundament to start from and on which you can adapt further towards tweaking the firepower of mechs - like the assault problem, that they have the same ED limit as a light and cannot bring in the firepower they stand for. But thats another story.

In the end, we have to put in ALL the numbers (range, heat, tonnage, slots, damage, duration, the need to lead the shot etc) and we should not touch those at all (beside the duration) before the fundament of the ED-system is done. Right now, we are touching those values, while the ED-system is not even finished, which is like building a roof before foundation is done.

Edited by Túatha Dé Danann, 03 September 2016 - 12:31 AM.

[impar]

This video hasnt been posted enough:

[Znail]

The changes to the ED system seems fine. I am still missing an energy regen increase to alow for larger mechs with lots of weapons. But the weapon balance changes seems rather off. We got some massive nerfs to IS energy weapons and a massive buff to Clan PPC. This seems really bad and likely to cause balance issues.

[L3mming2]

Mcgral18, on 02 September 2016 - 07:13 AM, said:

...Data which has been used for years, and failed miserably?


cUAC nerfs dont' work, because cUACs aren't equal. The UAC2 is absolute rubbish with a 5 second jam, and will be rubbish at 8 seconds. The 14>7% jam chance doesn't make up for it, because a jam is devastating no matter what.
A 2 second jam would be devastating, in that it costs 3+ cycles of the cannon, let alone 11


They're nerfed because cACs are not taken...but cACs have been trash tier since the beginning, having less DPS than normal fired cUACs, at no benefit.


cACs need buffs, cUACs don't need nerfs. some cUACs need BUFFs FFS

Here's something I made a year ago


Some things have changed since then...but very little. Notice what I do to cACs? Give them velocity, and un-gimp their recycles?

That's what needs to be done.
Let them be standalone viable weapons, competing against doubled damage, and not just worthless place holders.

about the CUAC2, on PTS1 with a chainfire macro (for the 6CUA2 dire) i clould not even come close to dps fast enoug to draw my ED bar empty, now on pts 3 i can do that with ease.. so yes they have been buffed in comparison to before. just test it.. (i'm not saying they have become good all of a sudden but they did get buffed significantly wile most other things got nerfed)

(there average dps loss due to jam went down by ~ 20% i think ) this would equate to around + 20% dps

Edited by L3mming2, 03 September 2016 - 03:32 AM.

[Mystere]

Paul Inouye, on 01 September 2016 - 02:47 PM, said:

• Second UAC shot no longer causes energy draw in the event of a weapon jam.

Meh! I actually think it should cost more ED while trying to unjam itself. It's not as if gremlins magically appear inside the barrel to chew off the jammed shells.

[Marmon Rzohr]

Paul Inouye, on 01 September 2016 - 02:47 PM, said:

A new updat to the PTS client to include the following:

PTS Changelog 9/2

Weapon Tuning:

• 
  
  • Clan ER-PPC cooldown duration increased to 6.8 seconds (from 6)
    
  • IS ER-PPC heat generation reduced to 13.5 (from 15)

It is my strong opinion that a huge damage, very long cooldown CERPPC is a very wrong direction of the weapon. Designed as it is, it encourages an alpha-hide playstyle that I feel goes against what the Energy Draw system is trying to accomplish !

Such a weapon will be very annoying to play against, but very boring to use due to the prohibitively long cooldown. The worst combination of traits that will leave the weapon underused or the meta toxic.

Please remove the added damage from the CERPPC or lessen it. Leaving it at 15 pinpoint damage is a strictly worse situation that one that is present on the live servers !

Thank you for reading, if you did and replying should you so choose.

[Wintersdark]

Marmon Rzohr, on 03 September 2016 - 05:37 AM, said:

It is my strong opinion that a huge damage, very long cooldown CERPPC is a very wrong direction of the weapon. Designed as it is, it encourages an alpha-hide playstyle that I feel goes against what the Energy Draw system is trying to accomplish !

Such a weapon will be very annoying to play against, but very boring to use due to the prohibitively long cooldown. The worst combination of traits that will leave the weapon underused or the meta toxic.

Please remove the added damage from the CERPPC or lessen it. Leaving it at 15 pinpoint damage is a strictly worse situation that one that is present on the live servers !

Thank you for reading, if you did and replying should you so choose.

I like it. Poke and hide is not the same with a weapon like this, it leaves you VERY vulnerable up close, which was not the case with other weapons.

Makes the cERPPC interesting and fairly unique. Tradeoffs in it's usage.