257 replies to this topic

[Davers]

BLOOD WOLF, on 23 October 2016 - 02:15 AM, said:

Thats not my job. I am not gonna debate a point that is irrelevant to the topic, because I don't know why they made those changes. My only job is to put facts and argument the merit of whats actually true. Because I am a person who cares about facts, I care about cause and effect. I care about correlation. I will say it again I care most about what I true.

The topic is why is ED winning, not the recent changes to UACS. As long as ED continues to plug the hole that the old system left wide open then I see no reason to believe that it is not doing its job. Balancing aside.

I was hoping for actual detailed video evidence of why ED would not affect all weapon systems and combinations. That was what I was looking. There is merit in a forum post, but how is anyone to verify it? how is anyone actually gonna know if the post is correct?

ED does "fix" all the loopholes. Every weapon is accounted for. Is that what you want to hear? Now that doesn't mean that it actually creates balance, or promotes build variety. Is 30 damage from lasers the same as 30 damage from PPFLD? ED seems to think so. Should LRMs and SRMs be treated exactly the same? ED thinks so. Should large SRM alphas cost double the heat as currently? ED thinks so. Should 4 PPC builds (one of the reasons for Ghost Heat in the first place) be cooler under ED than it is currently, by like 20 points? ED thinks so.

So, yes, all weapons are covered by ED. But PGI's insistence on normalizing and putting everything under the same system, even though they were balanced in different ways in lore, will have serious consequences for the next few years. The question "Is ED an improvement?" is much more important than "Does ED close loopholes?".

So, yes, everything is covered. But maybe not in

Deathlike, on 23 October 2016 - 03:49 AM, said:

LBX naturally provides a spread, but it's counted exactly like an AC10.. and anyone with a clue knows they aren't even in the same boat.

Actually LBX isn't treated the same as a regular AC (or UAC), it does get a lesser ED value. Should IS and Clan ACs be treated the same though? Not sure on that.


Edited- removed sentence fragment.

Edited by Davers, 23 October 2016 - 06:08 AM.

[BLOOD WOLF]

Davers, on 23 October 2016 - 06:02 AM, said:

ED does "fix" all the loopholes. Every weapon is accounted for. Is that what you want to hear? Now that doesn't mean that it actually creates balance, or promotes build variety. Is 30 damage from lasers the same as 30 damage from PPFLD? ED seems to think so. Should LRMs and SRMs be treated exactly the same? ED thinks so. Should large SRM alphas cost double the heat as currently? ED thinks so. Should 4 PPC builds (one of the reasons for Ghost Heat in the first place) be cooler under ED than it is currently, by like 20 points? ED thinks so.

So, yes, all weapons are covered by ED. But PGI's insistence on normalizing and putting everything under the same system, even though they were balanced in different ways in lore, will have serious consequences for the next few years. The question "Is ED an improvement?" is much more important than "Does ED close loopholes?".

So, yes, everything is covered. But maybe not in

At this point need to wait and see. I never stated that ED will magically fix everything.

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 23 October 2016 - 06:08 AM.

[Oberost]

BLOOD WOLF, on 23 October 2016 - 05:10 AM, said:

For the record I wasn't against laser lock, would have been interesting, leave it to some people and the game would never change.


yea, threads that ask for evidence don't go far on these forums. Everyone seems to want to stay in conjecture land.

I told you on this other thread: http://mwomercs.com/...-decline-of-fw/

Change your signature now. As everyone can see I wasn't threatening you and your current signature is really offensive. Reported.

[Deathlike]

Davers, on 23 October 2016 - 06:02 AM, said:

Actually LBX isn't treated the same as a regular AC (or UAC), it does get a lesser ED value. Should IS and Clan ACs be treated the same though? Not sure on that.

Hm, I may have forgotten about said changes.

However, how do you properly quantify that number? If LBX was effective, the number may make some sense right? What's the point of putting a number down when the weapon by at least comp standards is "a joke"? It doesn't have much meaning. If the spread or damage was awful, would that justify the ED # that was put there? If the weapon is even remotely useful, then you could justify it... but that's not the case here.

It's one of those things that you can't strictly use a number to quantify stuff if the the quality of said stuff does not match up with the number provided.

Edited by Deathlike, 23 October 2016 - 06:09 AM.

[BLOOD WOLF]

Oberost, on 23 October 2016 - 06:05 AM, said:

I told you on this other thread: http://mwomercs.com/...-decline-of-fw/

Change your signature now. As everyone can see I wasn't threatening you and your current signature is really offensive. Reported.

not changing it, you stated that, and you claim that it is not a threat, so why do you want me to remove it?

Report me all you want dude, but either way, its a sig worthy quote.

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 23 October 2016 - 06:11 AM.

[Snowbluff]

RestosIII, on 23 October 2016 - 01:43 AM, said:

Want to respond, but I just realized it's 5:40 AM and I haven't gotten any sleep. Already having trouble posting this and keeping it coherent. Will get back to this when I wake up.

Get some sleep buddy. :3

[Oberost]

BLOOD WOLF, on 23 October 2016 - 06:09 AM, said:

not changing it, you stated that, and you claim that it is not a threat, so why do you want me to remove it?

Ok, then I will report every post from you as I think that everyone can clearly see in this thread http://mwomercs.com/...-decline-of-fw/ that I wasn't threatening you (and if there are any doubts I explained later the meaning of this phrase) but you keep calling me "Internet tough guy".

[Davers]

BLOOD WOLF, on 23 October 2016 - 06:05 AM, said:

At this point need to wait and see. I never stated that ED will magically fix everything.

I'm not talking about "everything". My examples are ED specific. If the best response is we will have to wait and see, how can you claim it's winning? Seems the outcome is still uncertain.

[BLOOD WOLF]

Imperius, on 23 October 2016 - 06:52 AM, said:

When you're fighting with someone whose IQ is the average temperature in Antarctica you might want to just cut your losses. We all understand at this point.

christ, its like I am dealing with kids

Davers, on 23 October 2016 - 07:00 AM, said:

I'm not talking about "everything". My examples are ED specific. If the best response is we will have to wait and see, how can you claim it's winning? Seems the outcome is still uncertain.

I said at this point, because the back and forth seems to get nowhere. every time I try to make a topic with an actually discussions the kids come out to play.

All I am concerned with ED is that it makes those 4meds 2ll builds sweat after firing just once, if they choose to alpha. Alpha for high damage needs to be a secondary option. Wish I could contend your points properly but maybe another time.

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 23 October 2016 - 07:05 AM.

[martian]

Perhaps we could return to discussion about ED, what do you think?

[Oberost]

martian, on 23 October 2016 - 07:34 AM, said:

Perhaps we could return to discussion about ED, what do you think?

Yes, why not.

Who was winning the war?

Edited by Oberost, 23 October 2016 - 07:38 AM.

[RestosIII]

Snowbluff, on 23 October 2016 - 06:12 AM, said:

Get some sleep buddy. :3

'reads my old post, realizes I said the Pokebear will still be fine, has no idea why I said that and really doesn't believe it will be fine how people play it right now'



Dakka Bear I can still defend as being great though. Unlike a lot of builds post-ED, you don't have to do anything special with weapon grouping that a lot of people didn't do already with it, firing from one side, then firing from another, back and forth. If you're trying to fire all 4 of once, yes, you will have more heat than you used to after the first volley has left, and you can't double tap instantly, but honestly unless it's a guaranteed shot you should take the time to see if your first rounds are going to hit anyways and readjust your aim for the second blast in the first place, so (for me at least) if I actually ran the KDK-3 dakka bear loadout for anything besides the one time in the testing grounds and on the PTS, then put it away in disgust, I wouldn't lose any DPS. I will admit that you lose DPS in an up-close situation, but with how much it neuters most people's DPS, it is still an outlier as being the ultimate assault mech.

[Jman5]

At this point I just want PGI to release something.

[Deathlike]

Jman5, on 23 October 2016 - 07:53 AM, said:

At this point I just want PGI to release something.

[Gas Guzzler]

Jman5, on 23 October 2016 - 07:53 AM, said:

At this point I just want PGI to release something.

How about iterative weapon balance? And iterative mech balance for that matter.

Oberost, on 23 October 2016 - 07:38 AM, said:

Who was winning the war?

Some guy named Ed, I guess.

Edited by Gas Guzzler, 23 October 2016 - 08:03 AM.

[Snowbluff]

Gas Guzzler, on 23 October 2016 - 08:04 AM, said:

How about iterative weapon balance? And iterative mech balance for that matter.

Like I said, PD give another tool to make it easier to nerf certain aspects of a weapon, and looks like it'll be coming with a bunch of changes to weapons in general (as people have said, but weapons were buffed and others were nerfed). We'll probably see a bunch of changes after it hits live.

[Oberost]

Gas Guzzler, on 23 October 2016 - 08:04 AM, said:

Some guy named Ed, I guess.

Ed? Doesn't sound to me...

[Gas Guzzler]

Snowbluff, on 23 October 2016 - 08:09 AM, said:

Like I said, PD give another tool to make it easier to nerf certain aspects of a weapon, and looks like it'll be coming with a bunch of changes to weapons in general (as people have said, but weapons were buffed and others were nerfed). We'll probably see a bunch of changes after it hits live.

Why do they need another tool?

Heat
Cooldown
Damage
Range

Figure it out. That's easy. Adding another set of variables means we get another few years before we actually have decent balance again. It's already so close for most weapon cases..

[Oberost]

Snowbluff, on 23 October 2016 - 08:09 AM, said:

Like I said, PD give another tool to make it easier to nerf certain aspects of a weapon, and looks like it'll be coming with a bunch of changes to weapons in general (as people have said, but weapons were buffed and others were nerfed). We'll probably see a bunch of changes after it hits live.

That is the problem, a bunch of changes after it hits live. Why not iterative balance changes, small ones?

Instead we have a completely overhaul of something that maybe it wasn't perfect but it was more or less balanced (with obvious exceptions), and we have to start over again because I fear that when this new Ed (or it was Red? Or Ned? I'm confused...) hits the public server it's going to be unbalanced as hell....

[Wintersdark]

I honestly don't care anymore.

I'll adapt and enjoy the game exactly as much as I do now if ED happens, and I'll continue having fun if it doesn't. Whatever.