476 replies to this topic

[BurningDesire]

Mcgral18, on 12 November 2016 - 07:34 PM, said:

I'd rather have a game with balance

UACs fit nicely in the current game, they're likely going to suffer significantly come the patch

+3s to firing again
That's a full firing cycle for many mechs.
8 seconds is nearly 3 cycles, which you cannot fire a main weapon again.



You want to do the math? How long can a mech survive without being able to fire it's weapon?

hence risk V reward you want to double tap you run the risk of a jam simple right?

[Gas Guzzler]

BurningDesire, on 12 November 2016 - 07:56 PM, said:

hence risk V reward you want to double tap you run the risk of a jam simple right?

The point is the risk is too high, so it's not worth bringing the autocannons that aren't even super pinpoint front loaded damage.

[BurningDesire]

Gas Guzzler, on 12 November 2016 - 07:59 PM, said:

The point is the risk is too high, so it's not worth bringing the autocannons that aren't even super pinpoint front loaded damage.

think you hit the nail on the head there, if you dont want to use UAC's anymore dont then you have no risk of jams

[Mcgral18]

BurningDesire, on 12 November 2016 - 08:01 PM, said:

think you hit the nail on the head there, if you dont want to use UAC's anymore dont then you have no risk of jams

Exactly...which is removing weapon diversity


It was nice having multiple weapon systems being functional, shame that can't last.

[Mister Blastman]

Those UAC jam changes are wrong and bad. Please undo, k thx.

[Sereglach]

Mcgral18, on 12 November 2016 - 05:48 PM, said:

The Magic Jesus Box blocking direct LoS target locks
The Magic Jesus Field doing the same to allies. Not as bad as it once was, with the 180M diameter, but it only allowed you to lock at 200M, but 180M was your min range

Now, you can target to 90M (the current bubble size) before it blocks locks.

The Magic Jesus Field is the Dorito stealing, where you're unable to even target. This is due to the "targetingfactor" attribute, currently set to 0.25
That is, 25% of your sensor range is what you can target mechs inside of a Magic Jesus Field.

Set that to 50%, 0.5, and suddently you can target mechs at 400M, far above the Lurm min range.
THAT would be a positive change to both Lurms and the Jesus Box (while returning his 180M dia bubble)

Now, that doesn't fix the whole Lurm issue either, it's another bandaid, but that's a 30 second to implement bandaid, unlike the years (past PGI experience) it would take for something more serious.

But, we don't get Super Simple Stuff, normally.

The other thing to do, that PGI already has sitting around, is implement the ECM fix that they were using while doing the Info Warfare PTS runs. No "Magic Jesus Box". Instead, it merely increased the required time to get a lock by a large margin.

The ECM was actually functioning more like the ECM from Battletech Lore is supposed to function. It's not supposed to provide the effects of Stealth Armor. It really drives me bonkers that they implemented the perfect ECM fix on that PTS run and NEVER brought it to the live servers.

Edited by Sereglach, 12 November 2016 - 08:55 PM.

[Mcgral18]

Sereglach, on 12 November 2016 - 08:54 PM, said:

The other thing to do, that PGI already has sitting around, is implement the ECM fix that they were using while doing the Info Warfare PTS runs. No "Magic Jesus Box". Instead, it merely increased the required time to get a lock by a large margin.

The ECM was actually functioning more like the ECM from Battletech Lore is supposed to function. It's not supposed to provide the effects of Stealth Armor. It really drives me bonkers that they implemented the perfect ECM fix on that PTS run and NEVER brought it to the live servers.

That's actually what I'm suggesting, to a lesser degree

That PTS session had "targetingfactor" set to 1, or 100% of your sensor range
I'd go half.

Otherwise, identical.

Edited by Mcgral18, 12 November 2016 - 10:54 PM.

[Wraith 1]

I can still use light mechs effectively, better nerf them some more.


Sarcasm aside, it'd be really great if you could ditch the RNG and rework UACs to use a modified version of the Flamer overheat mechanic to determine jams.

[Sereglach]

Mcgral18, on 12 November 2016 - 09:19 PM, said:

That's actually what I'm suggesting, to a lesser degree

That PTS session had "targetingfactor" set to 1, or 100% of your sensor range works
I'd go half.

Otherwise, identical.

The fact that you were talking about not being able to target until within 400m threw me off. I apologize for the misunderstanding. I could happily live with what you're proposing.

PGI really dropped the ball on not going forward and continuing to iterate on the Information Warfare overhaul. It actually started to put "Roles" into "Role Warfare". The ECM fix, at the very least, was perfect, and needed to be brought to live.

Wraith 1, on 12 November 2016 - 09:26 PM, said:

Sarcasm aside, it'd be really great if you could ditch the RNG and rework UACs to use a modified version of the Flamer overheat mechanic to determine jams.

Sorry, but I have to caveat this before moving on: That mechanic is absolutely horrible for Flamers and it shouldn't be anywhere near them. Those weapons deserve the reengineering fix they were promised years ago.

However, funnily enough, you're right in that the mechanic could actually be used to enforce UAC Jam rates in a non-RNG fashion. I had actually suggested they pull the mechanic over as a means to implement the Rotary Autocannons (RAC Systems) if/when they ever get around to bringing those weapons into MWO. It would work just as well for UAC's.

Edited by Sereglach, 12 November 2016 - 10:00 PM.

[Navid A1]

PGI: "We are implementing new features A,B,C, and D. You can test it in PTS"
Players: "Thx, We tested it. A, B and C s*cks. D has potential, we like it."
PGI: "You didn't like all of it... Then you can forget about all of it"
Players: "No, We liked D. It has potential and is a very nice feature"
PGI: "lalalala"
Players: :|



PGI: "We are changing weapon balance. Come test in PTS."
PGI: "We are buffing aspect 'A' of this weapon, while nerfing aspect 'B' to balance it"
Players: "Cool, We like it.It has potential. Would like to see it in game. We are liking all of it this time"
PGI 2 months later: " Great, Here is aspect 'B' you all asked for"
Players: "But where is 'A'?"
PGI: "small steps guys... we are doing it in an iterative way... right?... heeehee"
Players: "but weapon X is going to s*ck with just 'B' nerf... no testing needed"
PGI: "that is it. We will never listen to you again. You don't know what you want and what you don't"
Players: :|

[GweNTLeR]

Energy
Small Laser
• Range increased to 150 (from 135)
• Max Range increased to 300 (from 270)
Thx for finally adressing them! Now please normalise CLAM and IS DPH!

[Zolaz]

PGI ... moving some numbers around and calling it content. At least they havent been doing it for 5 years?

[BLOOD WOLF]

I am starting to wonder what content means? my content, your content, their content!. Content is what?......I dunno



Continue on. patch looks aright enough, BRING ON DECEMBER

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 12 November 2016 - 11:51 PM.

[Falconer Cyrus]

Quirks are certainly not the main problem of the game. But reading this thread makes impression they are

[Dodger79]

SuperFunkTron, on 12 November 2016 - 06:42 PM, said:

A single UAC is by no means killing in an obnoxiously short amount of time. But consider what the contrast of an AC to a UAC is supposed to be. AC does not jam and provides a clear steady rate of fire. The UAC offers an extra salvo at the risk of a jam. Sure, jams suck, but it seems like a reasonable consequence for squeezing out double damage in the same time frame. It looks like the first of multiple steps to make the cAC useful again.

Sorry, but there should not even be sth like "make cAC useful again", simply because cACs should not be there at all, they just are placeholders for the switchable ammo which LBXs have in TT and lore but PGI was not able to implement. But if you want to make a placeholder viable, just because you cannot programm the ammo switch, you can also try sth complete nuts like, you know, make the placeholder viable insted of nerfing the other weapons in it's class just to make it more appealing to use the "placeholders".

And yes, UACs are all about risk/reward. But that is already there, there is a jam chance already (and to me it seems like it happens rather frequently and often, atleast with the bigger UACs). Increasing both jam chance AND jam duration simply kills these weapons as single main weapon systems. Example: i used to run a SMN with 1x cUAC/10 + 4x CERML. The UAC happens to jam after every 2nd or 3rd shot, so i switched the Omnipod for the left arm, loosing 2x CERML for a reduced jam chance, attaching an additional CERLL. This build somehow worked. It doesn't perform great, but you can make it work. But now, if this single main weapon jams (which it will with a higher chance), it won't work for over 10 seconds. 10 SECONDS!!! During this time a laser-vomit-boat unleashes it's alpha 3 times on you.

For a brawler with a cUAC/20 it's even worse. It quite needs the double tap in a brawl against an IS-Mech with AC/20 because of the damage spread making it less efficient then the pinpoint IS-AC. YOu just have to dish out more dmg in the same time to make up for it. But now, when this brawl-weapons jams, it gives your opponent with an AC/20 full 3 shots without conterfire. And these shots are pinpoint, so they _really_ hurt. And your salvo-weapon stays silent for a whole 12 seconds before you are able to return fire. In a brawl...

This mechanic of longer jam-time would work with a sniper weapon, but not for a brawl weapon! Brawl-weapons could handle higher jam-chance but shorter jam-time. But in a brawl not being able to return fire for 10 or 12 seconds just means one thing: you are dead. Which translates to: this weapon system is dead. So diversity dies and we will see some more Gauss, again. And after a year of complaining about all those nasty Gauss/PPC-snipers PGI might think "hey, let's reduce jam-chance and time to make UACs a real alternative to Gauss, how's 'bout that?"...

[PFC Carsten]

Do UACs jam when you don't double-tap them? I think not. How bad is UAC spread at brawling ranges of 250m an less? What about the Dakka-effect of UACs compared to pinpoint IS ACs (which by definition (hence the A in autocannon) and lore (streams of depleted uranium...) should not be firing single slugs anyway either...) which keeps you from controlling your return fire?

I do not think UACs are worthless now, they are just not as viable to boat as they were before. Bring a diversity of weapons, make the game fun again. Now we only need to have WAY longer shutdown times from overheating in order to make laser boats an equally bad idea. Luckily, the idea of pure LRM boats being bad at higher level play has been made as a point before.

Edited by PFC Carsten, 13 November 2016 - 02:37 AM.

[tee5]

Dodger79, on 13 November 2016 - 01:26 AM, said:

...And after a year of complaining about all those nasty Gauss/PPC-snipers PGI might think "hey, let's reduce jam-chance and time to make UACs a real alternative to Gauss, how's 'bout that?"...

But isn't that where whe started?
So the cycle of quirk/nerf/buffing continuous.

Edited by tee5, 13 November 2016 - 02:40 AM.

[Hawok79]

PFC Carsten, on 13 November 2016 - 02:35 AM, said:

Do UACs jam when you don't double-tap them? I think not. How bad is UAC spread at brawling ranges of 250m an less? What about the Dakka-effect of UACs compared to pinpoint IS ACs (which by definition (hence the A in autocannon) and lore (streams of depleted uranium...) should not be firing single slugs anyway either...) which keeps you from controlling your return fire?

I do not think UACs are worthless now, they are just not as viable to boat as they were before. Bring a diversity of weapons, make the game fun again. Now we only need to have WAY longer shutdown times from overheating in order to make laser boats an equally bad idea. Luckily, the idea of pure LRM boats being bad at higher level play has been made as a point before.

That´s wrong.
The CUAC 20 can jam on the first click and they'll do,its a bug.

If the enemy mech moving at your 200m,you hit 2-3 components with 5 dmg.
Clan AC´s are skill based Weapons and very hard to use on moving or twisting enemies.
I'll would change it instantly for an AC 20...

A Jagermech with dual AC10 make 20dmg on the component it hit...Pinpoint,every 1,8 seconds.
Tell which Clanmech are able to to that?!

When will you people learn that the damage output is not the relevant value.
It is in which time,you can make Damage X on component Y,targeted!

It´s also wrong to evaluate a 4 CUAC10 KDK3 in Pug.Games who plays T1 against T5 and come with the argumentation : Uhuhu the KDK3 dominate the Leaderboards with blabla Points more ...KDK3 is OP...it is noob bashing,noting else.

Pgi call this "Overperformer" like Nova,Adder and the Kitfox,Ok seriously the Kitfox is really OP.
I call this ridiculous!And an other prof that they dont understand their own Game.

This Patch is a simple Clan Nerv!

Edited by Hawok79, 13 November 2016 - 03:39 AM.

[Sopistan]

Dont know why they nerf the ac and uacs ( aka dps) and buff/dont touch the ppc/gauss combo, when they wanted to increase the ttk so much ...

I really hope to be wrong, but this patch will shift the meta to a more long range poke an pop-tart, speacilly for clans, and thats what made the old MW games boring on multuplayer, imo .

[Aramuside]

Wing 0, on 12 November 2016 - 06:01 PM, said:

You're an idiot. The players in this community game are scared of fights and that is exactly what PGI gave us. You players had been given several chances in helping FW and most of the community was too scared to play it. Scared to take on teams when most of the time there is no matchmaker. first come gets served. You want to prove me wrong, then get those buckets up and start playing.

If I recall, Most loyalists units are not even close to handling a heavy lifting that we mercs can do. We go where the fights are regardless of what faction unlike whatever the fk you're talking about.

Strange I'm not the coward that went to the faction with the I win numbers button. Enjoying your pain and rage so much.