59 replies to this topic

[Sereglach]

Aside from the arguments that are exploding in this thread, I think it's also worth noting (as mentioned by both sides of the debate) that highest support was during the earliest testing of Energy Draw, before weapon changes got too involved. For all we know all that'd hit a "Live PTS Event" would be the base Energy Draw system, with next to none of the weapon changes that we've seen though the PTS phases . . . if anything just so Russ/PGI can get more desirable data on a highly populated PTS setting.

Also, for all we know, they've collected a bunch of data from all the PTS (since each iteration hit on different focal points) and are currently bastardizing everything to create a new PTS version that'll be more in line with player feedback (I can hope).

To top it off, there's still apparently a LOT of UI work -especially in the front end- that's yet to be done. PGI may very well be spending time to get all that UI work done before another PTS run so they can get more in-depth feedback on a more overall refined system.

Right now, I think people should take a step back and cool down, because we're ALL getting antsy over the fact that there's been no updates and no PTS news from PGI for over two weeks. Whatever we're getting is going to be a huge change and PGI has said November at the earliest and that there IS an open-ended-non-deadlined development scheme for this. PGI wants whatever replaces Ghost Heat to be better than Ghost Heat and well received by the players . . . I'm willing to at least take their word on that much. Otherwise we wouldn't have seen 5 phases of PTS already.

Ghost Heat will be replaced, period. Whether people like it or not the current meta is going to be dethroned, period. PGI has made it clear that Ghost Heat is too flawed for them to want to keep it and it will be replaced, period. Whether it's with exact Energy Draw or not we have no idea, but things are going to change.

The best we can do is hold our horses, try to be patient, wait for PGI to give us something, and continue to give the best and most constructive feedback we can and PRAY that PGI listens to us.

Those of us who are fans of the Battletech IP don't want to see MWO fail (even if we're taking a hiatus from playing the live game and/or spending money), because if it fails the IP is basically screwed for the future (even HBS is dependent on PGI and their art staff at the very least). PGI doesn't want to see MWO fail, because if it fails they go under as a company. Thusly, the better feedback we can give and the more constructive we can be without pointless bickering, the better MWO will be for it in the long run.

. . . I hope . . .

[Taxxian]

I read through all the stuff and the only valid argument against ED that is a proven fact and not fearmongering is that it will not enforce weapon diversity...

But what ghostheat enforced weapon diversity do we have at the moment?

LaserVomit? Red with green and blue with yellow... will hardly miss that kind of diversity...

GaussVomit? Boating Heatsinks is in fact limited, the Gauss provides heatneutral DPS, it wont vanish...

AC20/SRM? If the heat efficiency of the AC20 is outpaced by ease of use this may vanish... But we already combined those weapons before Ghostheat...

PPC/AC5? Only PPCs will prove too hot, I hope...

So no I dont think Ghostheat was that much better at enforcing weapon diversity, but it failed at limiting alphas... utterly...

[Widowmaker1981]

Taxxian, on 02 October 2016 - 03:42 PM, said:

I read through all the stuff and the only valid argument against ED that is a proven fact and not fearmongering is that it will not enforce weapon diversity...

But what ghostheat enforced weapon diversity do we have at the moment?

LaserVomit? Red with green and blue with yellow... will hardly miss that kind of diversity...

GaussVomit? Boating Heatsinks is in fact limited, the Gauss provides heatneutral DPS, it wont vanish...

AC20/SRM? If the heat efficiency of the AC20 is outpaced by ease of use this may vanish... But we already combined those weapons before Ghostheat...

PPC/AC5? Only PPCs will prove too hot, I hope...

So no I dont think Ghostheat was that much better at enforcing weapon diversity, but it failed at limiting alphas... utterly...

Laservomit - i can get behind not caring if the vomit is all one colour or not, fair enough.. its really only massive alphas that lasers are good for at all though, so tbh if you stop laser alphas laser use will die out, except for scrubs that can't hit anything unless they use hitscan.

GaussVomit - yeah, if laser use doesnt die out completely (see above) then this might continue to be a thing, since no heat. But i think lasers will just die, and thus not be combined with anything.

AC20/SRM - this will definitely die. People will just bring SRMs only, on smaller, faster, more manauverable mechs. Bye Bye Atlas, except for diehards who will complain that their pet mech now sucks. and suck it will. If the brawler assault cannot fire and twist, it will cease to exist, i promise.

PPC/AC5 - this will also die out and be replaced by PPC boating. 2xAC5 + ammo is ~20 tons. 1 PPC is 7 tons, so thats 13 extra DHS/tons spent on engine... i think the heat will be fine.

[Taxxian]

Yes you have some valid points there...

Why PGI nerfed AC5ish guns and (ER)Large(Pulse)Lasers the most is completely beyond me... but I am not arguing for all the weapon changes only for ED...

You hardly see any Atlas right now so thats not a big change...

I honestly dont know how to limit alphas another way... all suggestions I read so far are inherently flawed...

And then there still is the Clan<->IS problem growing with each new ClanMech at the time, and the "Oh my god, they took a light lance, now the red team has 300 tons more than we do!" problem... and so many more...

In the end they may either have to throw lore out of the window to make all weapons usefull, or we need Battlevalue with variable group size... :-)

[Widowmaker1981]

Taxxian, on 03 October 2016 - 02:08 AM, said:

I honestly dont know how to limit alphas another way... all suggestions I read so far are inherently flawed...

1) Individual targeted nerfs to specific weapon systems that over-perform (LPLs, on current live stats)

2) Sensible adjustments to Ghost Heat groups (Link C-UAC10 and C-UAC5, link LPLs and MLs, you could even have C-ERPPCs do 15 pinpoint, and then set the max fired at once to one, so firing two put you nearly at heat cap...)

3) Increase armour per ton (which would basically be the equivalent of reducing alphas, since damage is just an arbitrary number to be compared against defensive numbers)

Its really not hard, and does not need a pointless new mechanic which does more harm than it does good.

[Leopardo]

pfff - mmmm okay - ED - we need a good penalties for overheating and some weapons heat rebalace - not the NERF! i really dont like the NERF of weapons - and bring back the MGs and the LBX give a live to them plz....stop that NERFING ALL TO DEATH
and yeah a battle value-they (pgi ) just miss that posts and sugestions

about the vommit - guys why - i mean give them to fire 100 lasers and then cool down longer!!!!!!!
i like to see all weapons on field i like to see different mechs damn - dont kill the build population!!!!!!

Edited by Leopardo, 03 October 2016 - 03:02 AM.

[Reno Blade]

ED on pts and the weapon changes need to be discussed separately.
and saying that the weapon changes were tested because ED doesnt work alone is just ignorantly trying to see it the worst wherever you can.

the ED system can stand alone (to limit alpha dmg), but the weapon nerfs help to increase TTK over the board.

GH did help, but its definitely not enough anymore. (it was a bandaid, as ppl keep calling it)
I still see ppl asking for GH improvement over ED, but let me tell you again:
1. GH can technically not evolve as far as ED
2. If GH would be improved it would just turn out to become ED anyway
3. the current ED is already very close to GH if you look at the penalties for each weapon.

none of the proposed heat-only solutions are any better in my opition, because they usually come with (often severe) side effects.



imho the best way to go forward is to use the ED system and just see it as GH evolution, then do the weapon balancing and possible changes later.
i think too many ppl are hurt because of weapon and skill nerfs instead of just trying to assess the effect of ED.

[Widowmaker1981]

Reno Blade, on 03 October 2016 - 03:22 AM, said:

ED on pts and the weapon changes need to be discussed separately.
and saying that the weapon changes were tested because ED doesnt work alone is just ignorantly trying to see it the worst wherever you can.

the ED system can stand alone (to limit alpha dmg), but the weapon nerfs help to increase TTK over the board.

GH did help, but its definitely not enough anymore. (it was a bandaid, as ppl keep calling it)
I still see ppl asking for GH improvement over ED, but let me tell you again:
1. GH can technically not evolve as far as ED
2. If GH would be improved it would just turn out to become ED anyway
3. the current ED is already very close to GH if you look at the penalties for each weapon.

There is absolutely no need ever to be linking things like SRMs with non SRMs, ACs with lasers and LRMs with anything. All doing so (like ED) does is make it so people wont use those types of mixed builds.

Example: I currently run 2xLPL and 2xUAC5 on my Night Gyr C, all with LAAs. Its not an amazing build, but i enjoy it. Make it so that firing the UAC5s too close to the LPLs shuts me down with extra heat and it becomes a complete nightmare to play, and means that i will instantly shelve the build and run something else, something that DOESNT shut down like that (like 2xUAC10 + UAC5, or 4xUAC5).

Edited by Widowmaker1981, 03 October 2016 - 03:33 AM.

[Reno Blade]

Widowmaker1981, on 03 October 2016 - 03:32 AM, said:

There is absolutely no need ever to be linking things like SRMs with non SRMs, ACs with lasers and LRMs with anything. All doing so (like ED) does is make it so people wont use those types of mixed builds.

Example: I currently run 2xLPL and 2xUAC5 on my Night Gyr C, all with LAAs. Its not an amazing build, but i enjoy it. Make it so that firing the UAC5s too close to the LPLs shuts me down with extra heat and it becomes a complete nightmare to play, and means that i will instantly shelve the build and run something else, something that DOESNT shut down like that (like 2xUAC10 + UAC5, or 4xUAC5).

I think this is not the case.
Just because you cant alpha everything on your Atlas or Orion doesnt mean it will be useless builds.
If everyone will need to space the AC and SRM volleys, evryone is equally affected.
and if you need to space half of your boated weapons (e.g 6x laser) the boat wont have an advantage.

your build will be as affected as others, and even if you might need to wait some time. the uacs will give you more dps if you need to cool off.
i already play that way with 2x cerppc 2x uac5 Nightgyr. i cant keep firing ppcs as long as you can your LP.
so i dont see a problem here after all i just said.

edit
yes 4x uac5 will be quite strong, but ac5 nerf is already reducing this advantage a bit.
and having a mixed build which can react to multiple situations and ranges will provide more flexibility without being always worse than boats now.

Edited by Reno Blade, 03 October 2016 - 04:32 AM.

[Widowmaker1981]

Reno Blade, on 03 October 2016 - 04:09 AM, said:

I think this is not the case.
Just because you cant alpha everything on your Atlas or Orion doesnt mean it will be useless builds.
If everyone will need to space the AC and SRM volleys, evryone is equally affected.
and if you need to space half of your boated weapons (e.g 6x laser) the boat wont have an advantage.

your build will be as affected as others, and even if you might need to wait some time. the uacs will give you more dps if you need to cool off.
i already play that way with 2x cerppc 2x uac5 Nightgyr. i cant keep firing ppcs as long as you can your LP.
so i dont see a problem here after all i just said.

Everyone WONT need to space the SRM volleys, SRM brawling will just get relegated to things like Griffins that only mount the SRMs, and are much faster and can jump. Slow things will not be used, because their one and only advantage of higher firepower is much much less useful when it cannot be alphad.

The point is that 2xLPL + 2xUAC5 is a fairly flawed build in the first place, because the aiming mechanics of the two weapons are really different (hitscan vs slowish burst projectile lead). It CURRENTLY gets a small boost that helps it compared to builds like 4xLPL, in that it doesnt need to be careful about trigger discipline, as it cannot activate GH. If you remove its advantage over those types of builds.. im just not going to run it anymore. Its ALREADY not entirely optimal.

The PPC / UAC5 JK version is different, and may survive for a few reasons - synergy is better as both weapon types have projectile lead. C-ERPPCs generate pretty unmanageable amounts of heat and thus cant be fired that often anyway, and it has a unique combination of a 25% ERPPC velocity quirk along with the 100% heat transfer immunity, making it a great PPC sniper for hot CW maps (2015 m/s PPCs if you mount a TC5, and no heat malus when sniping on Vitric)

Edited by Widowmaker1981, 03 October 2016 - 04:57 AM.

[Taxxian]

Widowmaker1981, on 03 October 2016 - 02:27 AM, said:

1) Individual targeted nerfs to specific weapon systems that over-perform (LPLs, on current live stats)

2) Sensible adjustments to Ghost Heat groups (Link C-UAC10 and C-UAC5, link LPLs and MLs, you could even have C-ERPPCs do 15 pinpoint, and then set the max fired at once to one, so firing two put you nearly at heat cap...)

3) Increase armour per ton (which would basically be the equivalent of reducing alphas, since damage is just an arbitrary number to be compared against defensive numbers)

Its really not hard, and does not need a pointless new mechanic which does more harm than it does good.

I dont think that will work...

1) That would be nerfing LPL solely because of Ghostheat... It does 4% DPS/Ton more than LL and is around 20% more heat efficient, but we loose range... nerfing it in a meaningful way would just make us use Large Laser, that one is rather close to it...
The only reason everyone had 3 of them is Ghostheat, 4 LL would be fine too, but Ghostheat alone makes it worse. And poor little 1 LPL Spider would suffer for no reason^^
I write "had", because everyone uses UACs now, LPL was yesterday (in lots of gamemodes at least)^^


2) You cant link more groups that is the BIG flaw of Ghostheat.
Link LPL an ML?
If you fire 1 LPL and 3ML you would get GhostHeat as if you fired 4 LPL... Using 1 LPL sets the limit to 3 Weapons and any occuring Ghostheat will be LPL Ghostheat, every ML fired within 0.5s counts as LPL for Ghostheat purposes...
The same "********" (sorry) happens everytime you link big and small weapons together... this will enforce boating far more than ED does.

3) Increasing armor per ton may work, but we have "Stock Mech" mode now... We will be out of ammo before we even stripped someones armor :-)

I dont think we will get anywhere with Ghostheat...

Edited by Taxxian, 03 October 2016 - 09:07 AM.

[Leopardo]

nerfing weapons and make them not viable compared to other is part of that ED ?

Edited by Leopardo, 03 October 2016 - 08:56 AM.

[Widowmaker1981]

Taxxian, on 03 October 2016 - 08:21 AM, said:

I dont think that will work...

1) That would be nerfing LPL solely because of Ghostheat... It does 4% DPS/Ton more than LL and is around 20% more heat efficient, but we loose range... nerfing it in a meaningful way would just make us use Large Laser, that one is rather close to it...
The only reason everyone had 3 of them is Ghostheat, 4 LL would be fine too, but Ghostheat alone makes it worse. And poor little 1 LPL Spider would suffer for no reason^^
I write "had", because everyone uses UACs now, LPL was yesterday (in lots of gamemodes at least)^^

you are completely ignoring the duration of IS LPLs, which is absolutely their selling point because its practically impossible to reaction twist off any damage from them. And ive been away for a while, i must admit that the few days ive been back there does seem to be a lot less LPL use, so maybe they dont need nerfing, much at least.

It honestly seems balance is pretty good right now, i dont see the point of throwing a huge spanner in the works. Increasing facetime (the stated goal of ED) probably wont even increase TTK, since more people are going to get caught out staring too long trying to get their dmg in and get cored out by 3 people at once.

Edited by Widowmaker1981, 03 October 2016 - 10:13 AM.

[Chuck Jager]

With some of the big swings I saw on PTS, it looked like PGI was loading some mechanics while nerfing others to create an environment where they could get a set of stats that would more easily show the impact of the change. They would then finesse them upon going live. It also seemed to make sense with the number of events, but then I remembered all of the mech releases.

The reason PGI/Russ post on twitter is because it is supposed to be a conversation not a statement of fact. The world works better for me if I wait until I see more than one short statement on the internet to see something as fact.

Oh yeah there will probably be a new meta. Balance is a lie. Balance with too many options to juggle (asymmetric and close to TT options in builds) is a lie worthy of a US presidential candidate.

[Remover of Obstacles]

Thanks, your post made me laugh.

Based on the reaction from my unit playing stock mode, I really doubt that ED will be welcomed with open arms.

The complaining about not being able to fire their ****ing weapons during stock mode was epic. We have not had a stock mode unit match since.

ScarecrowES, on 01 October 2016 - 02:40 PM, said:

Last week (or the week before), Russ basically said he thought most people had a positive opinion of ED...

[ScarecrowES]

Remover of Obstacles, on 04 October 2016 - 09:43 AM, said:

Thanks, your post made me laugh.

Based on the reaction from my unit playing stock mode, I really doubt that ED will be welcomed with open arms.

The complaining about not being able to fire their ****ing weapons during stock mode was epic. We have not had a stock mode unit match since.

Well, obviously it points to a fairly significant problem when the guy at the top has a belief about what his players think about his game, and takes actions based on that belief, without even bothering to look at what those players are actually saying.

Like... can NOONE be bothered to check in here on their official test forums and read what people actually have to say - positive or negative?

#testinginavacuum

[Alteran]

Remover of Obstacles, on 04 October 2016 - 09:43 AM, said:

Thanks, your post made me laugh.

Based on the reaction from my unit playing stock mode, I really doubt that ED will be welcomed with open arms.

The complaining about not being able to fire their ****ing weapons during stock mode was epic. We have not had a stock mode unit match since.

This is what PGI and ED forum warriors should focus on.

I had a similar chat during an EK FP game. ED was brought up and pointed out that the max damage strike will be approx 30pts. A few guys went WHAT??? Are you kidding??? No....

@*&# THAT!!! Do they want to kill the game??

That's the typical kind of responses I get when I talk about ED.

Now, there are those that are just fine with it. They'll adjust to the changes and make due with whatever is thrown at them, but they don't see exactly what PGI is trying to eliminate and/or fix. A good portion of those people don't see the big Alpha Strike as as such a big issue, they deal with in-game mechanics as it is now, just fine. Others are ready to uninstall.

I have told the guys, to get onto the PTS to test it out for themselves. Get heard, but most don't.

This is why I heavily recommend a Test Server event for PGI to get a good reading on what the majority of players think of ED and the weapon rebalance that is going on. DO NOT use this forum or any PM as a way to gauge the PTS. Poo Poo a Test Server Event all you want, but if you want the final nail in the coffin that some are looking for.... well this could be it, if it goes Live.

[Leopardo]

tottally agree....and as my opinion - guys okay we going to have ED but ...i want to say - im a light driver and basicly im suffer from that power creeping .... but i dont feel that a thing - i live with that . big alphas all araund me is the part of enviroment....i plaing coz its fun....and if i we have that nerfs and heat cap - and low alpha builds - the game become less dangerous. im not a power creep but i want that if the pilot want to fire 100500 lasers he must have the option to do that and have the penalties for it!!!!!!!!very hard penalties! - but plz PGI this game is abut "like some one sayd" stompin and pew pew pew booom! booom! we need o keep an option to fire all weapons at once!!!!!!! god dammit i dont like it coz it hurts)) but its FUN!!!

[Remover of Obstacles]

I thought the updates stopped because Russ wasn't going to waste any more time or resources on it.


The 30 alpha cap is almost as popular as the 10 second long UAC jam time.


I think PGI needs to figure out what makes a game fun.

Leopardo, on 04 October 2016 - 11:42 AM, said:

its FUN!!!

Edited by Remover of Obstacles, 04 October 2016 - 03:05 PM.

[Leopardo]

We need a post like - stop the nerfs - save builds population !!!!