241 replies to this topic

[Widowmaker1981]

BLOOD WOLF, on 02 September 2016 - 02:54 AM, said:

funny, Boating seems to be the norm under GH, do you play the game?

Boating UACs maybe. Not other weapons.

What reason do i have to play my 2xUAC10 + 2xC-LPL HGN-IIC, where i cant fire the weapons together due to ED anyway? Better off bringing a mech with all LPLs, or all UAC10s, since its easier to use and there is no benefit to the mix anymore (under GH you can fire everything with no extra heat..) That is far from the only example.. 2xERPPC+Gauss, etc.

[BLOOD WOLF]

Widowmaker1981, on 02 September 2016 - 03:02 AM, said:

Boating UACs maybe. Not other weapons.

What reason do i have to play my 2xUAC10 + 2xC-LPL HGN-IIC, where i cant fire the weapons together due to ED anyway? Better off bringing a mech with all LPLs, or all UAC10s, since its easier to use and there is no benefit to the mix anymore (under GH you can fire everything with no extra heat..) That is far from the only example.. 2xERPPC+Gauss, etc.

Under ED, I don't think you would have a good time firing LPL's and Uac10's with ease.

Unless you slowed your rate of fire.

wait? all LPL's and UAC10's? you really need to use the pts to justify your claims. I use to run dual UAC10's on my ebon jaguar. Now I run that same build on the pt's and the only real change is the rate of fire.

LPL's you are gonna have to slow the rate of fire as well, especially if they change the energy recharge rate to 0.75 per second.

It's not just damage values. They also are adjusting cool downs

Keep in mind, if you were the kind of guy, who spaced their firing or fired in chain or group fire. Then the new system or old system probably didn't affect you.

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 02 September 2016 - 03:26 AM.

[kapusta11]

BLOOD WOLF, on 02 September 2016 - 02:59 AM, said:

lol, can't beat with an argument, just start insulting.

just provide evidence, and then i will consider what youa re saying. Play the PTS, then provide feedback in the correct channels. Other players will either relate or rebuke. Don't get salty because you are speculating in the general threads

Alright, log into the game, I'll add you as a friend and we'll drop a couple of times.

[BLOOD WOLF]

kapusta11, on 02 September 2016 - 03:27 AM, said:

Alright, log into the game, I'll add you as a friend and we'll drop a couple of times.

If your talking about the PTS, then sure

[Yellonet]

AnTi90d, on 01 September 2016 - 03:24 PM, said:

The ED system discourages build diversity.

Discouraging build diversity leads to less viable playstyles.

Less viable playstyles leads to less enjoyable matches in MWO.

Less enjoyable matches in MWO leads to less players in MWO.

..I guess I'll play the hell out of MWO until they destroy it with this system when they shove it into the live server, against the wishes of ~45% of the playerbase.

The whole Energy Draw concept..

Slippery slope much?

[Zionkan]

Meanwhile my new Dire

DWF-W

Cause Range matters

[L3mming2]

Túatha Dé Danann, on 02 September 2016 - 01:23 AM, said:

A lot of those weapons don't make any sense anymore. Why would you put in 7 tons worth of equipment (IS-LPL) for less damage than a PPC, for less range, with no pinpoint with a pretty long duration? Sorry, you are forgetting a lot of cross-balancing aspects here.

You would have to reduce the heat on those weapons to justify the change, that they are not "hot" anymore, because the range is still rather low, the burn time is rather high and the tonnage for those weapons is also pretty high.

Also: Its unintuitive, why your energy recharges while the laser is still firing. Make it tick-based. Yes, it will become a regeneration vs. burn-time vs. ED-per-tick thing that will be harder to balance, but here, an increased duration would have a direct effect on how well you can wield a weapon vs. pinpoint-ish behavior. This is exactly the core of why you introduced ED - to reduce a massive alpha to one component. Increasing the duration would have already done the trick w/o ED.

Please re-evaluate the base mechanic.

the clan ER large would brake that system it would be able to fire 60 damage alphas before penalty..

[Túatha Dé Danann]

Thats why you adjust the ED per tick, so you cannot fire a 60-burst. An ER-LL would have a high amount of ED for every damage-tick it puts out compared to weapons with shorter range. The burn time could be a cross-balancing value that can be used to adjust a weapon potential together with it ED instead of both working against each other. Right now, any burn time in light of the ED is completely de-coupled from the system, making it un-intuitive. If you couple both, you can make a pretty damn awesome base-mechanic out of it that is far easier to balance and to tweak until the weapon "feels right".

Is the burn-time so long that it has no impact on the ED? Something is wrong. Is the ED-per-tick too high compared to other weapons? Something is wrong. Do both match each other? You hit the right spot.

And if you build upon those a tonnage-energy-pool, you can even introduce stuff like: A 100 ton mech can now fire 4 ER-LL simultaneously, but a medium-mech still has to fire it in brackets... and so on.

[L3mming2]

Túatha Dé Danann, on 02 September 2016 - 04:14 AM, said:

Thats why you adjust the ED per tick, so you cannot fire a 60-burst. An ER-LL would have a high amount of ED for every damage-tick it puts out compared to weapons with shorter range. The burn time could be a cross-balancing value that can be used to adjust a weapon potential together with it ED instead of both working against each other. Right now, any burn time in light of the ED is completely de-coupled from the system, making it un-intuitive. If you couple both, you can make a pretty damn awesome base-mechanic out of it that is far easier to balance and to tweak until the weapon "feels right".

Is the burn-time so long that it has no impact on the ED? Something is wrong. Is the ED-per-tick too high compared to other weapons? Something is wrong. Do both match each other? You hit the right spot.

And if you build upon those a tonnage-energy-pool, you can even introduce stuff like: A 100 ton mech can now fire 4 ER-LL simultaneously, but a medium-mech still has to fire it in brackets... and so on.

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..

Edited by L3mming2, 02 September 2016 - 04:26 AM.

[Honiara]

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

• Weapon Value Changes:
  
• 
  
• Ultra Autocannons:
  
• 
  
• 
  
  • Global UAC jam time increased to 8 seconds (From 5 Seconds.)
    
  • UAC/5
    
    • Jam chance reduced to 12% (From 15%)
      
    • Energy Consumption decreased to 5 Energy total (from 6)
  • C UAC/2
    
    • Jam chance reduced to 7% (From 14%)
      
    • Energy Consumption decreased to 2 Energy total (from 2.4)
  • C UAC/5
    
    • Energy Consumption decreased to 5 Energy total (from 6)
  • C UAC/10
    
    • Jam chance increased to 17% (from 15%)
      
    • Energy Consumption decreased to 9 (from 10)
  • C UAC/20
    
    • Jam chance increased to 20% (From 15%)
      
    • Energy Consumption decreased to 18 (From 20)
      

I thought 1 of the design goals for Energy Draw was to make things simpler? And to also be more transparent to the user, without having to go look everything up again on 3rd party websites.



Why do weapons with vastly different rate of fire all have the same 8 seconds worth of jam duration?

Why do UACs not have a jam duration based on the rate or fire? 1.5x or 2x the cool down would be allot simpler and would scale instantly when PGI make later changes to the rate of fire of these weapons!

Once you make this change then the jam change should be the same for every c/UAC and should be a fixed percentage if you do anything other than this you are artificially handicapping more weapons and again making people look this stuff up on 3rd party websites.

It would be SO SIMPLE if you set it like this, then everyone would know that if you UAC is jammed you loose x amount of fire rate. SIMPLE, SIMPLE, SIMPLE.

Try the below for an example of SIMPLE

Weapon Value Changes:

Ultra Autocannons:

Global UAC jam time has been modified to be a multiplier of the rate of fire for each weapon, the jam time is now set at 2 times the cool down (From 5 Seconds.)

Energy draw has been modified to reflect the 1 energy to 1 damage design we are aiming for. The advantage of clan balistic weapons weight and size is still reflected in the multishot/cluster fire approach that has been implimented since the Clan invasion.

UAC/5
Jam chance remains the same at 15% (From 15%)
Energy Consumption decreased to 5 Energy total (from 6)

C UAC/2
Jam chance increased to 15% (From 14%)
Energy Consumption decreased to 2 Energy total (from 2.4)

C UAC/5
Jam chance remains the same at 15% (from 15%)
Energy Consumption decreased to 5 Energy total (from 6)

C UAC/10
Jam chance remains the same at 15% (from 15%)
Energy Consumption remains at 10 (from 10)

C UAC/20
Jam chance remains the same at 15% (From 15%)
Energy Consumption remains at 20 (From 20)

Edited by Honiara, 02 September 2016 - 05:01 AM.

[Leopardo]

Okay we need a penalty list for overheating!!!! And implant it into a pts

[MovinTarget]

Never thought I'd see so many guys excited about ED...

[process]

With such long un-jamming times, I really wish we go (back?) to a system where the double tap happens from holding down the fire button, instead of pressing it again. By making it a second click, you can double tap unintentionally when you're really just mistiming the cooldown. I would like to at least have the option to use my ultra ACs reliably even if it's at the cost of DPS.

[Astrocanis]

Zoeff, on 01 September 2016 - 03:23 PM, said:

[/list][/list][/list] First the Gauss charge is removed, now this?! O__O

A 50% increase in pinpoint damage over IS with a 20% increase in cooldown? So much for balancing weapons. Watch the C-Gauss / C-ERPPC take over the peek and poke world. You are going to see an overwhelming number of jump-snipers on the clan now. That's 25 damage with no energy or heat penalty. On a max 6 second cooldown. Clan poptarts rejoice.

[Mcgral18]

BLOOD WOLF, on 02 September 2016 - 01:45 AM, said:

What some people don't get and you would have thought by now, There is more to balancing than theoretical post's about ED. You have to also demonstrate why their is a flaw.

If you haven't noticed by now, paul has been taking data from the PTS.

Just want to mention that.

...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.

[Wintersdark]

cAC's don't need buffs, they need flat out removal. They serve no purpose in the game because you're not required to doubletap UAC's. Ever since the doubletap change that made doubletapping require a deliberate act rather than automatically happening, cAC's have had no place in the game at all.

And while I don't like spouting TT rules (different game and all) in this case it's apt: They don't exist in Battletech. If you want to add new weapons whole cloth, at least add something useful and unique.

[Erik Krieger]

I play MWO since 1 year very often and also spended not few amount of money on it. I like it as it is and worked on 50-60 Mechs over many months to master them and build them "perfect" for my playstyle. If i can work on all of them again and if i am forced to rebuild them completely because of such big changes by this new system... then i would be... how to say it in english... then i would be pissed?! (Not happy...)

[Cato Zilks]

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

We are rolling back a little bit of the Gauss’ ED from the previous PTS to be consistent with the roll back in the other direct damage weapons, but we will be monitoring this change closely, as we do not wish to see it return to being a weapon that is taken to simply offset the effects of the heat penalties.

It is a 1 heat weapon. It is supposed to do exactly that. Stop penalizing it with heat.

[cazidin]

I for one welcome our C-ER PPC overlords.

Seriously, this is a welcome buff, the splash damage idea was mediocre™ thought I'm disappointed that IS ER PPCs didn't get a full 15 points of damage too. We'll see, through testing, if they need an even longer CD or energy draw.

[Mcgral18]

cazidin, on 02 September 2016 - 10:08 AM, said:

I for one welcome our C-ER PPC overlords.

Seriously, this is a welcome buff, the splash damage idea was mediocre™ thought I'm disappointed that IS ER PPCs didn't get a full 15 points of damage too. We'll see, through testing, if they need an even longer CD or energy draw.

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.