125 replies to this topic

[Wintersdark]

Dee Eight, on 12 September 2016 - 12:01 PM, said:

I can't believe people keep bothering with the PTS thinking PGI will ever get it right.

Oh, they'll probably screw it up no matter what. But they're NOT going to screw it up worse because people tested and generated some data; they'll probably just screw it up less.

Testing might not help, but it doesn't hurt, and it may indeed help - even if only helping them screw it up less. Not doing anything except b***hing and moaning is just useless.

Dee Eight, on 12 September 2016 - 12:13 PM, said:

Myself I don't understand why its so hard for PGI to have the dissipation of heat sinks be correct to their names ? 0.1 for SHS, and 0.2 for DHS, and a flat 1.0 increase in capacity for both single and doubles. Thus it really does become the balance that was TT, do you trade crit spaces for better efficiency or not. Also the extra cooling of leg heat sinks in shallow water... essentially doubling their rating...thus an IS mech with 4 leg heat sinks can dissipate 0.8 heat per second with those sinks while a clan with 2 DHS can also dissipate 0.8 from those sinks, but other IS mechs with DHS don't get that ability since the sinks won't fit the legs.

It's relatively correct in Live right now. We effectively have 2.0 DHS thanks to pilot skills and 2.0 in engine heat sinks. But MWO's heat system is trashy, and mirroring TT isn't going to fix it, because everything else is different too. You don't have all weapons firing on 10s cooldowns, after all.

[Dee Eight]

Wintersdark, on 12 September 2016 - 12:15 PM, said:

You don't have all weapons firing on 10s cooldowns, after all.

Maybe we should test that.

[Felbombling]

Sounds to me that their investigation into the hard 30 or 40 heat cap was half-hearted. If they were going to make it work, it would need other factors involved that don't appear to have been investigated heavily. The one outlier was energy based builds? Tweak energy weapon values, then, just like you've been doing since this public test started.

Wasted opportunity there.

[Pepito Sbazzeguti]

Gauss charge was originally disigned to prevent high alpha adding desinc, I though you introduce the new system just to prevent instances like this, seem wrong to me, charge mechanics have to go with energy draw.

[jaxjace]

So why cant we have all of these changes without energy draw?

please?

[Mystere]

InnerSphereNews, on 12 September 2016 - 09:31 AM, said:

Heat Sinks will therefore still add to the total Heat Sink Threshold, but Double Heat Sinks will now only add 1 Threshold per Heat Sink. This will put the Total Heat Threshold at levels which long-time players will be familiar with from the days before Double Heat Sinks were introduced.

What in Hades' name are you talking about? Most of those people have already left. Only a few stragglers remain, no thanks to you I may add.

InnerSphereNews, on 12 September 2016 - 09:31 AM, said:

Single Heat Sinks
• Heat Capacity: 1.2

Double Heat Sinks (Inner Sphere and Clan)
• Heat Capacity: 1

Bupkis!

InnerSphereNews, on 12 September 2016 - 09:31 AM, said:

Clan ERPPC
• Splash Damage has been restored.

Boo!

Edited by Mystere, 12 September 2016 - 01:15 PM.

[Mystere]

xe N on, on 12 September 2016 - 10:15 AM, said:

It's not. You can simply macro the Gauss. Therefore the whole charge thing was always a bad idea anyways.

Meh! The typical gauss macro is garbage.

Only a few know how to write the real deal, and we're not talking -- unless you're using a joystick.

[Merit Lef]

Pgi, thx for reading our post and suggestions. Can't please everyone but glad to see you're trying to explore ideas and options. Overall I think it's step in dynamics for the game. And testing it out in PTS is the right move.

[Exard3k]

I love the unification of engine and external heat sinks. And I as a player like to have options and std heat sinks never were an option because of the engine double heat sinks nullifying any std heat sink options. Will test on PTS

And IS mechs can benefit from water now \o/


Tested: IS STD HS Mechs allow for more tonnage for HS and play like live servers in terms of capacity (if you put around 25 SHS). DHS IS Mechs feel like current Clan mechs and Clan mechs get very challenging. 17 DHS 4x C-MPL 38% Heat. This will be fun

Edited by Exard3k, 12 September 2016 - 02:29 PM.

[-Ramrod-]

Honestly. I'm leaning towards the "I don't like this" side. But I will say one thing. Whether you like the system or not. PGI is going to shoot themselves in the foot with this one. People are going to quit out and out. We old TT players can call them immature CoD players or whatnot. Fact is that they make up a good portion of the player base. We need them. PGI...do not do this Energy Draw system. If you want to grow your player base this is going to be detrimental to that effort. Don't just try to please us old TT players. We have to look at this realistically guys.

[MovinTarget]

I, for one, am VEHEMENTLY AGAINST the buffing of shs!!!










...because i just sold off 100+ shs last week b/c i figured i would never need them.

[MovinTarget]

Ramrod AI, on 12 September 2016 - 02:04 PM, said:

Honestly. I'm leaning towards the "I don't like this" side. But I will say one thing. Whether you like the system or not. PGI is going to shoot themselves in the foot with this one. People are going to quit out and out. We old TT players can call them immature CoD players or whatnot. Fact is that they make up a good portion of the player base. We need them. PGI...do not do this Energy Draw system. If you want to grow your player base this is going to be detrimental to that effort. Don't just try to please us old TT players. We have to look at this realistically guys.

This is the crux of the problem. If i was ever accused of white knighting it was because i saw that this game would inherently struggle to satisfy different fan bases and as i support an off-the-shelf software system myself, i can sympathize with them trying to please everyone.

[FupDup]

Something broad to say is that the "Energy Draw" system by itself isn't causing most of the problems, it's that PGI is trying to rebalance everything in the game around the ED system.

In PGI terms, this involves nerfing a lot of things that arguably don't need it, like the IS Large Laser (which arguably is one of the most balanced weapons in the game on live server).

It's good that PGI is finally making continuous changes rather than stagnation, but now the issue is that the changes are often derpy ones.

[Jack Shayu Walker]

Hahaha! Good changes to see all around. Now if we could just get a test of those dynamic cooldown modules!
#DynamicCooldownModuled

[Nightmare1]

@PGI: When you say that Clan CERPPCs have been reduced to 10 damage and splash damage reintroduced, do you mean that it's 10+2.5+2.5 (15 damage total) like it used to be, or is it just a flat 10 now that's split between three components?

Also, the Gauss Charge-up mechanic really needs to go. Increase the Global Cooldown if you need to, but the charge up is a poor design and ruins the weapon for many Mechs. I was actually looking forward to bringing my 1xGauss, 1xCERPPC Summoner back out of storage until I saw this reversion.

Overall, it looks like lasers are getting a small buff. I can't say that's a good idea at this point.

Nice to see PPCs getting some love with regards to ED, anti-ECM, and Cooldown.

Heat sink changes will be interesting.

The new Skill Tree nerf is a horrible idea. I understand that it's to better test the heat sinks, but I really, really want to say now, that it needs to be restored after the heat sink test is complete. This kind of nerf really isn't needed in the long run and just makes leveling Mechs that much more frustrating.

Overall, I thought LRMs were at an okay spot and didn't really need tweaking.

Overall thoughts: Positive changes to PPCs, but a step backwards overall given the Gauss charge-up and the shortened burn/cooldown times on lasers.

FupDup, on 12 September 2016 - 02:48 PM, said:

Something broad to say is that the "Energy Draw" system by itself isn't causing most of the problems, it's that PGI is trying to rebalance everything in the game around the ED system.

In PGI terms, this involves nerfing a lot of things that arguably don't need it, like the IS Large Laser (which arguably is one of the most balanced weapons in the game on live server).

It's good that PGI is finally making continuous changes rather than stagnation, but now the issue is that the changes are often derpy ones.

This ^2.

...It's math, so it can't be argued.

[TankBadger42]

For me this is the change I've been always wanting...

Thank you PGI.

However just the wrong word or wrong number?

InnerSphereNews, on 12 September 2016 - 09:31 AM, said:

LRM 10
• Inner Sphere LRM 10 Cooldown Duration increased to 4.3 (from 4.6)

Edited by TankBadger42, 12 September 2016 - 03:19 PM.

[Tombs Clawtooth]

So if I have a single cUAC20 I basically can count on the majority of close range encounters being a total and complete loss due to a 10 second jam penalty?

This isn't a table top game, you can kill a mech in far less than 10 seconds. So that means instead of running a single UAC20 I should boat 3x UAC5s and take 5 less damage in favor of playing the odds of always having at least 1 gun running?

Bleh this sounds boring and bland. If you're going forward with this you should at least give the CAC20 the same stats as the UAC20 just without the ability to jam.

Edited by Tombs Clawtooth, 12 September 2016 - 03:34 PM.

[TankBadger42]

Tombs Clawtooth, on 12 September 2016 - 03:33 PM, said:

This isn't a table top game, you can kill a mech in far less than 10 seconds. So that means instead of running a single UAC20 I should boat 3x UAC5s and take 5 less damage in favor of playing the odds of always having at least 1 gun running?

Remember, it only draws 18 energy and only takes up one hardpoint. Also, it had got a better cooldown in comparison to the other ACs after the PTS 2 I think...

[Tombs Clawtooth]

TankBadger42, on 12 September 2016 - 03:59 PM, said:

Remember, it only draws 18 energy and only takes up one hardpoint. Also, it had got a better cooldown in comparison to the other ACs after the PTS 2 I think...

I'd just much rather see a mechanic that's based on skill and knowable outcomes to its use rather than RNG mechanics.


It's blatantly unbalanced about 3/4 of the time and annoying to use the rest of the time.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Sephrus Shanadar, on 12 September 2016 - 09:59 AM, said:

The real eye opener was the decrease in spread of the lrm20 to just 1 meter more than the lrm5.

Yes, yes. The salt must flow.

yeah lrms arent allowed to be even remotely viable.