111 replies to this topic

[Honiara]

Ultimax, on 16 September 2016 - 05:40 PM, said:

I'm really just stunned at this change, how can the dev team possibly justify a SEVEN TON WEAPON doing 8 damage for 8 heat, when the Clan Medium Pulse at TWO TONS does 8 damage for 6 heat?

Clearly PGI is paying no attention to IS/Clan balance at any point. Perhaps PGI should actually play their game because if they did most of the PGI suggestions on the PTS would have never gone live, just looking over some of these suggestions is clear they actually don't really 'get it'. Shame really.

Edit: Rather than just giving some rant on the issue, let me give a positive approach the the underlying issue.

PGI: You must decide on at least the below BEFORE you try to balance a weapon archetype, please keep in mind that in this case we are talking above the laser archetype, balance within the same weapon archetype first then apply a multiplier to balance vs the other weapon archetypes (Lasers, Missiles, Ballistics), do not try to balance all weapons at the same time as it will not work.

Rules:
Which laser type is going to be the base line? I would suggest Standard Lasers
The penalty from a Standard to a Pulse laser is weight and ....? I would suggest reduced range and increased heat
The penalty from a Standard to an ER is ....? I would suggest heat.
The benefits from a Standard to Pulse laser is....? I would suggest burn duration
The benefits from a Standard to an ER is .....? Clearly range
What stat within the weapon class would not change? I suggest damage, cool down and crit slots.

Once you have determined the above stick to the above rules, this makes things simple.

With this in mind, and looking at the IS Large laser class weapon you could start with stats such as:

Large Laser
Damage: 10
Heat: 7
Cool Down: 3.5
Range: 450/900
Burn Duration: 1
Crit Slots: 2
Weight: 5

Large Pulse Laser
Damage: 10
Heat: 9
Cool Down: 3.5
Range 350/700
Burn Duration: 0.75
Crit Slots: 2
Weight: 7

ER Large Laser
Damage:10
Heat: 9
Cool Down: 3.5
Range: 700/1400
Burn Duration:1
Crit Slots: 2
Weight: 5

Now take the above Large Laser class weapons within a vacume, and you now have a clear choice. If you want range over a standard Large Laser you take an ER at the cost of hear per shot, if you want faster burn time take a Large Pulse Laser.

Comparing the LPL and the ERLL, you are keeping the same heat, but your trade off is reduced range at the cost of burn time and weight (a fair compromise)

In reference to the above. The IS PPC/ERPPC which would be the obvious 'option' to a Large Laser Class you would have: (keeping the same rules, of damage etc outlined above.)

ER PPC
Damage:10
Heat:13
Cool Down: 3.5
Range: 800/1600
Velocity: 1500
Crit Slots: 3
Weight: 7

PPC
Damage:10
Heat:9
Cool Down: 3.5
Range: 90 - 540/1080
Velocity: 1500
Crit Slots: 3
Weight: 7

Please note all ER/PPC velocity quirks should be removed from the game, and if ER/PPC quirks are needed those velocity quirks should be re-allocated to either heat or cool-down (or both)

Now compare the LPL to the ERPPC and PPC you get:

Same weight and a trade off between instant pin-point damage of the ERPPC vs a cooler LPL. Of if you compare the LPL to the PPC you are trading a minimum range for the pin-point damage of the PPC over no minimum range and a burn duration of the LPL

Edited by Honiara, 18 September 2016 - 01:03 PM.

[Hotthedd]

Cathy, on 18 September 2016 - 06:58 AM, said:

I've said it before PTs started and I have said it durring it and I'm saying it now.

Stop putting events on during PTS sessions.

Better yet, put the events on the PTS.

[Mr Inconsistent]

Honiara, on 18 September 2016 - 11:06 AM, said:

Rules:
Which laser type is going to be the base line? I would suggest Standard Lasers
The penalty from a Standard to a Pulse laser is weight and ....? I would suggest reduced range and increased heat
The penalty from a Standard to an ER is ....? I would suggest heat.
The benefits from a Standard to Pulse laser is....? I would suggest burn duration
The benefits from a Standard to an ER is .....? Clearly range
What stat within the weapon class would not change? I suggest damage, cool down and crit slots.

Once you have determined the above stick to the above rules, this makes things simple.

With this in mind, and looking at the IS Large laser class weapon you could start with stats such as:

Large Laser
Damage: 10
Heat: 7
Cool Down: 3.5
Range: 450/900
Burn Duration: 1
Crit Slots: 2
Weight: 5

Large Pulse Laser
Damage: 10
Heat: 9
Cool Down: 3.5
Range 350/700
Burn Duration: 0.75
Crit Slots: 2
Weight: 7

ER Large Laser
Damage:10
Heat: 9
Cool Down: 3.5
Range: 700/1400
Burn Duration:1
Crit Slots: 2
Weight: 5

Right concept, agree with what you've proposed. I disagree that the pulse laser should be heavier though. It already has the disadvantage of shorter range for only a fraction shorter burn time at significantly higher heat (in your baseline). It should not also suffer the additional slots and weight in my opinion.

Think you are hitting the nail on the head though.

[Mr Inconsistent]

In terms of my testing, I still am firmly of the believe brawling is the hardest hit with the ED system. I run a 4xSRM6A and 2LB10X Mauler that I can alpha away fairly readily on live. In any of the ED PTS builds including the latest, it is barely usable - it just runs too hot. Now this is a build that is very risky to use. You have to be within 150-200m range to really make it deadly and it runs at 56kph with speed tweak. Now tell me in what universe it is not risky to travel that slowly to close the gap and pack that kind of punch? It is risk versus reward. I've chosen close range firepower over range and mobility. In the PTS this is completely broken, even firing in separate weapon groups, the heat is substantial, the cooldown is worse, etc. Was this the goal? To render brawling dead?

Warhammer 6D running the common 3lpl 4medlas laser vomit build can alpha once only for a ~90% heat. Still runs very hot using the LPLs and the meds in separate groups. Really feels far less deadly than a 70 tonne heavy should. Was this the goal? To neuter energy heavy mechs? To what end?

Still really unsure if the PTS is taking the direction the majority of the community want or is based on false perceptions. I think the time and energy (no pun intended) spent on the ED system and latest balance has been a waste that could have been better spent on new player retention such as proper in game tutorials for all aspects including mech lab, faction warfare, skill tree, adding a PVE mode for new players and experienced to practice against and creating new game modes, eg, asynchronous assault.

Where will this new system actually take us in terms of improvement over what we have?

[Honiara]

Mr Inconsistent, on 19 September 2016 - 03:12 AM, said:

Right concept, agree with what you've proposed. I disagree that the pulse laser should be heavier though. It already has the disadvantage of shorter range for only a fraction shorter burn time at significantly higher heat (in your baseline). It should not also suffer the additional slots and weight in my opinion.

Think you are hitting the nail on the head though.

The only reason the LPL in the stats above is heavier, is because that seems to be one of the stats that PGI will not change, and this comes from the Table Top.

[Kieva]

I REALLY don't understand why PGI wants to make Ghost Heat 2.0...

This system is a joke, it's lazy, and it is straying even further from being a proper Battletech title. Why doesn't PGI just swallow their pride, and take a page out of the old MechWarrior games? Increase the recycle times on all the big punch weapons?
E.G.
Name: GAUSS RIFLE
Technology: Clan
Range: 800 meters
Damage: 17
Heat: 1
Recycle rate: 8
Size: 3
Weight: 13 tons
Ammo per ton: 24
Cost: 593'770 C-Bills

Of course we notice the increased damage of 17, but we also see a recycle time of 8. The slower the firing rate the lower the DPS, generally speaking.

The problems that really come in to play with Ghost Heat 2.0 are the absolute invalidation of energy heavy mechs, such as the Black Knight, Warhammer 6D, Arctic Cheetah, and most brawling clan mechs. The clans are less affected by the E.D. system(Yes, I made a joke), because of their omnipods, and ease of building variety mechs, but this build going live would not only see the end of Brawlers, but of actual balance to the game. Every match will become a trade fest with little strategy, and of course, in a trade fest, the clans will automatically win due to a (Duh) range advantage.

Edited by Kieva, 19 September 2016 - 06:36 PM.

[Chados]

I've been testing some mechs in the Academy. And I don't think PTS5 is as bad as advertised.

Example 1:

A mastered-out Marauder running a standard 280, two PPCs, one uAC/5, and two medium lasers can run the PPCs and uAC/5 all day long without hitting the heat cap. And it can alpha the whole weapon suite three or four times without having to back up and cool off.

Example 2:

I was able to run a dead stock, unbasiced Quickdraw 5K without Heat Containment or Cool Run checked off through two alpha strikes without maxing it out, and you can one-two it in three weapon groups for a good long while. Same with the QKD IV-4.

I think that SRMs need to be looked at, they run awful hot for what you got. But the smaller lasers and 5-class autocannon don't feel too bad so far. I'd hate to see IS structure or mobility quirks go away but running quirkless is not a bad idea for gathering intel.

[Ialdabaoth]

I'm liking this more than I thought I would.

A few suggestions:

1. Remove the ridiculous restriction on multiple Gauss Rifles; instead allow only one Gauss Rifle to charge at a time.

2. Remove the ridiculous splash damage on Clan ER PPCs. It might actually be more interesting if PPCs, ER PPCs, and Gauss Rifles all had the charge mechanic, with only one allowed to charge at a time. IF YOU DO THIS, you need to fix Chain Fire so that it automatically charges the next-in-line weapon up to full charge, then immediately shoots it, then immediately begins charging the next-in-line weapon. (Also charge times should probably be adjusted - 0.1 second for PPC, 0.25 for ER PPC, 0.5 for C ER PPC and 0.75 for Gauss / C Gauss seems reasonable)

3. Auditory feedback for my current charge rate would be awesome. perhaps some sort of 'reactor idle' ambient sound that slightly increases in pitch and volume as my energy bar depletes?

[burning wisky]

the ghostcapacity of the heatsinks in the engine are still there

ownly 10 shs in the engine
1x PPC heat 9 = on the scala round 20 % on the heatscala
2x PPC heat 18 = on the scala round 40 % on the heatscala

nerf and buff weapons are not usefull, if you have a wrong working heatsystem

fix ghostcapacity, for a clear base, to build the heat system
bring it on the testserver
and you will fix the TTK at the same time.

Edited by burning wisky, 21 September 2016 - 01:17 AM.

[Kael Posavatz]

These PTS...

I feel like it is less and less about testing Energy Draw, and more and more about testing changes to weapons, heatsinks, and every other thing in the game.

[Osis]

Hail,

Need more fanboy posts, seems like all the diehard types are on vacation.

Seyla,

[Y E O N N E]

Kael Posavatz, on 23 September 2016 - 08:29 AM, said:

These PTS...

I feel like it is less and less about testing Energy Draw, and more and more about testing changes to weapons, heatsinks, and every other thing in the game.

You mean those things that have been needed for at least two and a half years, now?

Edited by Yeonne Greene, 23 September 2016 - 06:00 PM.

[Ultimax]

Mcgral18, on 16 September 2016 - 04:19 PM, said:

I sincerely hope these changes never touch the live server...

This is where I am now, I hope this never goes live.

I can live with the ED system OR I can live with Ghost Heat as it exists.

I won't put up with the rest of the pile of nerfs that are just dropping meteors onto current balance - which is currently in a place where multiple styles of play and builds are viable and competitive.




I repeat, right now on the live servers most Ballistics, Gauss, PPCs, most Lasers & SRMs are all in a good place and competitive - do not destroy the current balance.


LRMs need to be re-designed.

- Remove Auto-Aim
- Hugely increase spread on Indirect Fire (i.e. you do not personally see your target) to cover an area and not have all missiles hit a single mech.

+ Allow for snapshot style firing with low tracking
+ Reward the user for keeping reticle over target before firing by improved tracking/homing (similar to laser burn times - max lock on time should be in 0.5 to 1s area, with excellent homing for maxing it out)
+ Fire and forget
+ Massively increase flight speed when firing directly (i.e. user sees target) - around 750m to 1000m per second.


SSRMs need a redesign

They could function more like SRMs and would borrow from the lock on mechanics listed for LRMs


There are other weapons that need improvement, some need tweaks & some need bigger improvements.

But only these two really need a full redesign and most are in a good place right now.

Edited by Ultimax, 23 September 2016 - 07:03 PM.

[AnTi90d]

Ultimax, on 23 September 2016 - 07:02 PM, said:

This is where I am now, I hope this never goes live.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news.. but Russ has had so many white-knights, arse-kissers and yes-men tell him that Energy Draw is awesome.. and, now..

Energy Draw and all the rebalace BS is coming to the LIVE server sometime around November.

(That's a Twitter pic, so read it from bottom to top.)

RIP:MWO

Edited by AnTi90d, 23 September 2016 - 07:15 PM.

[FupDup]

AnTi90d, on 23 September 2016 - 07:12 PM, said:

I hate to be the bearer of bad news.. but Russ has had so many white-knights, arse-kissers and yes-men tell him that Energy Draw is awesome.. and, now..

(That's a Twitter pic, so read it from bottom to top.)

RIP:MWO

I just hope that when he says he's gonna add ED, he means only ED and not all of the random weapon nerfs from the PTS.

[Ultimax]

AnTi90d, on 23 September 2016 - 07:12 PM, said:

I hate to be the bearer of bad news.. but Russ has had so many white-knights, arse-kissers and yes-men tell him that Energy Draw is awesome.. and, now..

Energy Draw and all the rebalace BS is coming to the LIVE server sometime around November.

All of those tweets are about ED.

I can live with ED, ED isn't what I have issue with.


The weapons nerfs should not go live.

[BLOOD WOLF]

If the weapon balances make the game better than They are welcome. I don't believe that the PTS should on pertain to it's initial iteration if other things can be tested

[FupDup]

BLOOD WOLF, on 23 September 2016 - 07:35 PM, said:

If the weapon balances make the game better...

The ones that PGI are testing out right now aren't going to.

[BLOOD WOLF]

Ultimax, on 23 September 2016 - 07:31 PM, said:

All of those tweets are about ED.

I can live with ED, ED isn't what I have issue with.


The weapons nerfs should not go live.

why? Its not about nerfs it's about what the feedback from the testers are.

Also I don't know why "nerfs" have a auto-negative reaction. Should they only buff everything?

FupDup, on 23 September 2016 - 07:36 PM, said:

The ones that PGI are testing out right now aren't going to.

well, you say that but others say something different.

I was in the PTS with you when we were running with sader quaiff? I didn't hear that the balances where making things worse. As a matter of fact it still came down to the teams more then the weapons.

A

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 23 September 2016 - 07:43 PM.

[FupDup]

BLOOD WOLF, on 23 September 2016 - 07:39 PM, said:

Also I don't know why "nerfs" have a auto-negative reaction. Should they only buff everything?

In this game, many if not most of the nerfs being made are to weapons/mechs that are either already balanced decently or even mildly underpowered. Nerfs being made to actual top-performing things are far less common than nerfs to things that are only average.

Always nerfing is just as much of an extreme as always buffing.

BLOOD WOLF, on 23 September 2016 - 07:39 PM, said:

well, you say that but others say something different.

I was in the PTS with you when we were running with sader quaiff? I didn't hear that the balances where making things worse. As a matter of fact it still came down to the teams more then the weapons.

A

I don't remember you...that was probably in an older version of the PTS where the weapon nerfs weren't yet added.

It's not about "teams versus weapons" making an impact. It's about trying to fix things that aren't broken, and making some of those things broken as a result.

Edited by FupDup, 23 September 2016 - 07:50 PM.