127 replies to this topic

[Wintersdark]

PitchBlackYeti, on 22 September 2016 - 09:21 AM, said:

So if you're saying the weapons need to be dialed back, why on earth start with IS LL? Who in heaven's name has asked for this? With 8 damage and longer burn it is nearly a hotter CERML for five times the tonnage and twice the space!!!!! So the next step should be to nerf the CERML to 5 dmg and 1.30 burn?

Put your big boy pants back on.

Start with the LL? They didn't start with the LL. The LL nerf happened AFTER the bulk of the weapon nerfs. Particularly the global cooldown nerf, which goes back to pts1.

And again, THE LL IS BROKEN ON THE PTS. I don't see anyone arguing that do you? I'm not, at least.

One broken weapon on the PTS doesn't mean everything is broken. (Well, to be fair, the lasers in general are kinda borked, but the LL does get it worse than most)

[Wintersdark]

So, one more time because people can't seem to get past "derp but the LL! It's borked!":

Overall, we NEED nerfs to all the weapons to counter years of continuous power creep. That is what's going to extend ttk, not ED. No, not all the weapon stats on pts5 are great, and some are borked, but overall, the reduced heat cap and globally nerfed weapons are a good thing for MWO.

[FupDup]

Wintersdark, on 22 September 2016 - 12:17 PM, said:

No, Fup. Seriously, am I being unclear or are you being deliberately obtuse?

The Large Laser didn't need to be nerfed; it is not op now and it IS underpowered on the PTS.

I'd go further and say the laser nerfs in general where unnecessary.

I was interpreting your posts as defending the LL nerfs, because the way they were worded they sorta did. Only just now have you specified that you're only happy with some of the nerfs rather than the whole bunch.

Wintersdark, on 22 September 2016 - 12:17 PM, said:

What WAS necessary though was the blanket cooldown nerf and such.

My point is that while there are borked SPECIFICS in the pts weapon stats, ALL weapons need to be somewhat weaker, to dial back the power creep that's happened continuously since the Clans dropped. In this, overall the weapon nerfs, while not all well done (particularly not the LL) are much needed for MWO.

I thought that ED itself was supposed to be reducing damage output across the board, at least in terms of burst damage? When there are a very large number of weapon-specific nerfs in the ED test, that's basically acknowledgement that ED doesn't really accomplish the goal of damage reduction.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Wintersdark, on 22 September 2016 - 12:21 PM, said:

This gets into semantics, and I don't really care either way. I prefer the idea of one type being higher DPS while the other is more pokey, though, because then you've got more interesting options.

It really just depends on whether you want lights to have easier access to pokey or DPS weapons. I feel the lighter weight just makes it easier to balance them rather than something like pulse and kinda matches up with the idea that pulse was supposed to be the more accurate weapon. That's really the only thing, it doesn't matter much as long as they are designed for different roles.

Speaking of which, I would love for the lasers to be redesigned as a whole so that there is more difference between Medium and Small lasers, more difference between standard and pulse, as well as making Clan lasers more in line with their ethos (shorter range than IS ER lasers, but higher damage potential).

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 22 September 2016 - 12:43 PM.

[Wintersdark]

FupDup, on 22 September 2016 - 12:36 PM, said:

I was interpreting your posts as defending the LL nerfs, because the way they were worded they sorta did. Only just now have you specified that you're only happy with some of the nerfs rather than the whole bunch.

That was not my intent. I merely responded to Ulimax's "Downward spiral of weapon nerfs" saying I felt that overall, nerfing the weapons was necessary. I wasn't speaking about any specifics at all; nor saying they were all great changes individually. Regardless, my apologies for not being clear enough.

Quote

I thought that ED itself was supposed to be reducing damage output across the board, at least in terms of burst damage? When there are a very large number of weapon-specific nerfs in the ED test, that's basically acknowledgement that ED doesn't really accomplish the goal of damage reduction.

Remember, I said in that post that I think ED is unnecessary given the weapon nerfs and heat cap reduction.

With that said, I DO think ED reduces alpha damage. It does, without a doubt. Without the nerfs, it was a lot easier to argue for it.

However, from my first days on this forum to now, I've argued that low cap/high dissipation is all we need. I fought tooth and nail for that when they were talking about ghost heat. I gave up on it come the initial PTS runs, because I'm done with fighting for anything here.

However, now that they've dipped their toes into lower heatcap, I'll voice my preference again of just doing that instead of ED/GH.

Not that it will matter.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 22 September 2016 - 12:41 PM, said:

It really just depends on whether you want lights to have easier access to pokey or DPS weapons. I feel the lighter weight just makes it easier to balance them rather than something like pulse and kinda matches up with the idea that pulse was supposed to be the more accurate weapon. That's really the only thing, it doesn't matter much as long as they are designed for different roles.

Speaking of which, I would love for the lasers to be redesigned as a whole so that there is more difference between Medium and Small lasers, more difference between standard and pulse, as well as making Clan lasers more in line with their ethos (shorter range than IS ER lasers, but higher damage potential).

definitely a good argument to go that way.

[Livaria]

Well, at least I can conclude one thing, people don't want to respond to posts that try to address multiple issues at once.

[JC Daxion]

Wintersdark, on 22 September 2016 - 08:50 AM, said:

Honestly, I'm kind of the other way around. I LIKE the weapon nerfs.

I'll be happy with weapon nerfs, when machine guys are in a good spot right how they are on live... So basically when a machine gun becomes worth using compared to all the other weapons.. I think the spot will be found.


I thought for years that long range weapons needed recharge nerfs, and medium ranged weapons needed more heat..

give people a reason to use short ranged weapons and mixed builds..

[ScarecrowES]

JC Daxion, on 22 September 2016 - 04:19 PM, said:

I'll be happy with weapon nerfs, when machine guys are in a good spot right how they are on live... So basically when a machine gun becomes worth using compared to all the other weapons.. I think the spot will be found.


I thought for years that long range weapons needed recharge nerfs, and medium ranged weapons needed more heat..

give people a reason to use short ranged weapons and mixed builds..

Not mixed builds, clearly, as those tend to be bracketed, and you just killed most of their brackets, haha.

Lots more reason to brawl though. Death ball for everyone.

[FupDup]

JC Daxion, on 22 September 2016 - 04:19 PM, said:

I'll be happy with weapon nerfs, when machine guys are in a good spot right how they are on live... So basically when a machine gun becomes worth using compared to all the other weapons.. I think the spot will be found.


I thought for years that long range weapons needed recharge nerfs, and medium ranged weapons needed more heat..

give people a reason to use short ranged weapons and mixed builds..

If we use the live server Machine Gun as the baseline weapon, we're gonna have a bad time. A really, really bad time.

Even the most frail mechs like the Mist Lynx would be as tanky as the Atlas, and mechs like the Atlas would take several minutes of constant fire from an entire lance.

[Deathlike]

FupDup, on 22 September 2016 - 05:36 PM, said:

If we use the live server Machine Gun as the baseline weapon, we're gonna have a bad time. A really, really bad time.

Even the most frail mechs like the Mist Lynx would be as tanky as the Atlas, and mechs like the Atlas would take several minutes of constant fire from an entire lance.

TTK is mostly irrelevant at that point. You'd just be staring at the target until the CT falls off... minutes later.

Maybe the 6MG Spider or the 3-sec Jenner has the secret sauce.

[ScarecrowES]

Deathlike, on 22 September 2016 - 05:54 PM, said:

TTK is mostly irrelevant at that point. You'd just be staring at the target until the CT falls off... minutes later.

Maybe the 6MG Spider or the 3-sec Jenner has the secret sauce.

Looks like we finally found a reason for the SHC-P to exist!

[Deathlike]

BRACE FOR IMPACT:

[FupDup]

Deathlike, on 22 September 2016 - 05:59 PM, said:

BRACE FOR IMPACT:

FupDup, on 22 September 2016 - 05:59 PM, said:

The question I have is, does bringing ED to the live server also include the dartboard barrage of nerfs to weapons and heatsinks? I can live with ED itself, it's not that big of a deal.

The Nerfinator's rampage in the PTS, on the other hand, is something far more sinister.

[ScarecrowES]

I gave him an emphatic response of "NO... ED is not better than Live." But the fact that he thinks that ED is trending even remotely in the neighborhood of "perfect" is disconcerting, to say the least. "Most perfect?" I'm not even sure "most minimally viable" is deprecating enough a description.

[Deathlike]

ScarecrowES, on 22 September 2016 - 06:05 PM, said:

I gave him an emphatic response of "NO... ED is not better than Live." But the fact that he thinks that ED is trending even remotely in the neighborhood of "perfect" is disconcerting, to say the least. "Most perfect?" I'm not even sure "most minimally viable" is deprecating enough a description.

Well... all his info is mostly coming from our balance overlord right? Full steam ahead!

[Ultimax]

Livaria, on 22 September 2016 - 09:56 AM, said:

I do not believe it's a downward spiral of nerfing weapons nor has it veered off-course. The pulse laser may have gone down in damage, but it's going upwards in cooldown reduction. If the cooldown is short enough to be good, then it could be said that the pulse laser is changed rather than nerfed.

Unfortunately you're assessment of the LPL changes are not only incorrect, they are misguided.

I'm not in the mood to post all the reasons the changes are bad, or why the other laser changes are bad.


Feel free to read my post here: http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__5397825

Livaria, on 22 September 2016 - 09:56 AM, said:

A change in plan is often necessary, even if the original plan was to only test the energy draw system.

Nonsense.

Energy Draw was supposed to improve TTK - if it's failing in this endeavor and they need to nerf a slew of weapons then it has no place.

Or, they design the system and stop nerfing the crap out of weapons.

Livaria, on 22 September 2016 - 09:56 AM, said:

There is a group of players who are on board with having less heat capacity, even overwhelmingly so.

That group is significantly smaller than you imagine, and its unlikely many of them them are upper skill level.

They're just loud, they aren't actually that numerous or as important as they think they are.

Edited by Ultimax, 25 September 2016 - 03:32 PM.

[ScarecrowES]

Ultimax, on 25 September 2016 - 03:18 PM, said:

That group is significantly smaller than you imagine, and its unlikely many of them them are upper skill level.

They're just loud, they aren't actually that numerous or as important as they think they are.

Difficult to gauge here. Doubtful most players actually understand what actual effects different types of changes will have. Only a handful really have solid understanding of the base systems and how they work to know what will happen when you change a given variable... and fewer still that can tell you what variables to change and in what way to reach a specified result.

We can try to work backward from the specified result, but have to be honest about what that result should be. Going by what people generally have said here during ED testing, players want slight reductions in (or perhaps merely metering out of) burst damage, small reductions in overt alphas (with special emphasis on specific types), more considered combat pacing (rather than merely spamming ever bit of firepower you have as soon as you have it), and tangible penalties for excessive output.

All 4 concerns are produced by the exact same set of factors, and they're all inherent to the base MWO heat system. Effective heat caps in the base system are too high, allowing both higher alphas and more burst damage. A lack of true progressive penalties allows for faster and less considered combat pacing, and players face no real incentive not to play this way.

If you work backward from the problem, the solutions are actually extremely obvious. You need a lower effective heat cap to start. You need to try to keep players within a smaller overall heat range than they are used to, which both reduces alphas and burst damage. However, merely dropping heat cap to extremely low levels isn't the answer, because it doesn't solve the matter of pacing and incentive. So you add a penalty system on top of that, with additional reserve cap that is penalized for use. This provides you with the more considered gameplay and risk/reward players are looking for.

Does the system that's shaping up sound familiar?

So I'm sure you're right... if you asked, you probably would not have a huge portion of the player base asking for lower caps. You might not have a lot of support for that. But if you ask them what they WANT, it may become obvious that some sort of system with lower cap and penalties would satisfy most.

[Kael Posavatz]

ScarecrowES, on 25 September 2016 - 04:06 PM, said:

We can try to work backward from the specified result, but have to be honest about what that result should be. Going by what people generally have said here during ED testing, players want slight reductions in (or perhaps merely metering out of) burst damage, small reductions in overt alphas (with special emphasis on specific types), more considered combat pacing (rather than merely spamming ever bit of firepower you have as soon as you have it), and tangible penalties for excessive output.

You missed one.

5) A system that is more user-friendly, both in concept and articulation in-game, so that it does not present a barrier for new players to struggle with.

This is one of the big problems with Ghost Heat, and it is an issue that--at least to me--a lot of the people commenting in the PTS feedback channel are overlooking.

[ScarecrowES]

Kael Posavatz, on 25 September 2016 - 05:02 PM, said:

You missed one.

5) A system that is more user-friendly, both in concept and articulation in-game, so that it does not present a barrier for new players to struggle with.

This is one of the big problems with Ghost Heat, and it is an issue that--at least to me--a lot of the people commenting in the PTS feedback channel are overlooking.

True... and another win for heat penalties as the control mechanic, rather than anything overt like GH or ED.

The great thing about penalties is that they really don't have to be explained. You'll get the gist of it just from the first experience of it.

And at least I can say, with the system I've proposed, the mechanics work universally now from mech to mech. Cool-off times are now the same for all mechs for both their individual heat scale (10-seconds from max) and the penalty scale (and additional 5 seconds from shutdown). Hop into any mech and the heat system will work exactly the same.

I'm not even sure my proposed variable cooldown for boating needs much explaination beyond a lil tooltip to show the reduction in the build menu. It doesn't actually affect anything but the cooldown, so it doesn't get into the build, balance, heat, etc mechanics. You can completely ignore it unless you're min-maxxing.

[Deathlike]

I think "we're done" with the PTS, based on Russ's tweets.