153 replies to this topic

[Kmieciu]

Stefka Kerensky, on 14 November 2016 - 03:14 AM, said:

This is another reason why this nerf is stoooopid.
Mixed loadout are bad now.
No more 1 or 2 uac10 builds.

This sucks a lot

I think I'll be fine in my 2xUAC10 HBK-IIC.
It will still have 69% chance to deal 40 damage with less exposure than ERML+LPL.

Widowmaker1981, on 14 November 2016 - 03:22 AM, said:

Its simply about exposure cost - there is no point exposing yourself to return fire to do just 10 dmg.

Even if you have a mech with only a single ballistic weapon, like an Urbanmech or a Cicada, it's still better to poke and double-tap the UAC5 rather than to poke two times with the AC5. And you will get a lot less return fire than when poking with Large Lasers.

Edited by Kmieciu, 14 November 2016 - 03:31 AM.

[Widowmaker1981]

Duke Nedo, on 14 November 2016 - 02:59 AM, said:

I still think you're missing the point here. The issue with cUACs mainly was that the double-tap was too powerful compared to single-tap. You could for no cost at all double dps output for a period of time determined by a dice-roll. That mechanic was nerfed a bit, justly so I think.

So what though? C-UACs are too strong compared to C-ACs? Who cares, given that C-ACs arent supposed to exist at all?

IS-UAC5s need to be a LOT stronger than AC5s to make them worth it, because you cannot fit two of them in a ST with an XL, and that is a HUGE thing (because yes, XL > STD in 95% of cases, whatever people think - limping around as half a mech, doing another 50 dmg or something is waaaaaaay less useful than being faster and having more guns from the start of the match)

[Kmieciu]

Widowmaker1981, on 14 November 2016 - 03:31 AM, said:

IS-UAC5s need to be a LOT stronger than AC5s to make them worth it,

UAC5 on average has 27% more DPS than the AC5 for the price of 12,5% more tonnage and slots.
After the patch, it will have 20% more DPS.

And let's not forget that when you poke, you have 85% of dealing double damage.
Since the majority of matches are spent behind cover, I say UACs will still be fine.

8 second jam duration is not that bad compared to laser vomit. When I pilot a TBR-C 6xERML 2xLPL, I have to spend 12 seconds cooling down after each alpha.

On average, it deals 1,21 damage per 1 heat.
Autocannons deal 3,33 damage per 1 heat.

Edited by Kmieciu, 14 November 2016 - 03:41 AM.

[Idealsuspect]

Hadrogh, on 13 November 2016 - 11:41 PM, said:

I really hate the "more rng" approach. If the goal was to nerf dps why not just increase the cooldown or reduce the dmg?
I don't want to roll a dice in a high dps engagement.

If you hate "more rng" approach don't use double tap approach or mount only C-AC you will be happy...

[Kmieciu]

Idealsuspect, on 14 November 2016 - 03:46 AM, said:

If you hate "more rng" approach don't use double tap approach or mount only C-AC you will be happy...

C-AC have a great role in MWO: they are a clear indication that the player did not even look at the weapon stats.

[Widowmaker1981]

Kmieciu, on 14 November 2016 - 03:35 AM, said:

UAC5 on average has 27% more DPS than the AC5 for the price of 12,5% more tonnage and slots.
After the patch, it will have 20% more DPS.

And let's not forget that when you poke, you have 85% of dealing double damage.
Since the majority of matches are spent behind cover, I say UACs will still be fine.

8 second jam duration is not that bad compared to laser vomit. When I pilot a TBR-C 6xERML 2xLPL, I have to spend 12 seconds cooling down after each alpha.

On average, it deals 1,21 damage per 1 heat.
Autocannons deal 3,33 damage per 1 heat.

Im actually not saying that i think the changes will ruin UACs - ill probably still use them because i have a severe blind spot with Gauss+PPC builds, i just cant use them effectively for some reason. Im fine with Gauss + lasers, or gauss by itself, and PPCs are my favourite weapon system.. but for some reason combining the two makes me miss with everything constantly.. But thats me, and i dont play comp.

What i was saying is that IS-UAC5s need to be dramatically better than AC5s, more so than you would expect for just 1 ton and 1 slot more, because of the way that one slot interacts with IS XL engines and side torso spaces.

[The Unstoppable Puggernaut]

I'd say, while I don't like the changes but lets see what creative builds we can put together. I've already found my replacement config for the kdk-3, I'll give it a test after the patch rolls out but I am confident in it.

Seeing how much effect went into punishing this mech and others like it, I want to challenge myself to prove it's the player and not the config. If I am wrong then so be it, if I am right then they've made a grave mistake.

I hope the standard clan A/C just shoots one volly soon, I dont care what the recharge time or heat is anymore.

[Kmieciu]

Widowmaker1981, on 14 November 2016 - 03:58 AM, said:

What i was saying is that IS-UAC5s need to be dramatically better than AC5s, more so than you would expect for just 1 ton and 1 slot more, because of the way that one slot interacts with IS XL engines and side torso spaces.

I know where you're coming from, but that's more of a fault of inferior IS mech design. If you can't fit 2xUAC5 with XL, you go with 2xAC5+AC2 (SHD-5H, MAD-3R), or UAC5+2xAC2 (DRG-5N), or just use a chassis that can support 2xUAC5 (like ENF-5P, RFL, JM6, CPLT-K2, WHM, CTF-3D...)

Widowmaker1981, on 14 November 2016 - 03:58 AM, said:

i have a severe blind spot with Gauss+PPC builds

I admire anyone that can carry their team using those builds, especially on a mech with no velocity quirks.

If you miss with 2xC-ERPPC, you've just wasted 28 points of heat. 28 points of heat could be used by a UAC10 build to deal 93,24 damage...

Edited by Kmieciu, 14 November 2016 - 04:12 AM.

[Widowmaker1981]

Kmieciu, on 14 November 2016 - 04:06 AM, said:

I know where you're coming from, but that's more of a fault of inferior IS mech design. If you can't fit 2xUAC5 with XL, you go with 2xAC5+AC2 (SHD-5H, MAD-3R), or UAC5+2xAC2 (DRG-5N), or just use a chassis that can support 2xUAC5 (like ENF-5P, RFL, JM6, CPLT-K2, WHM, CTF-3D...)

Well no, not really. Its always better to use two of the same because modules (and 2xAC5+AC2 is too heavy for mediums, even with an XL)... Imagine how much better the Dakka Shadow Hawk would be if it could mount a pair of UAC5s with an XL (i.e. id use it, instead of the only SHD i touch ever being the 2K).. I mean, i know thats not going to happen, but the point stands, that one slot size increase makes a massive difference (much more than going from 3 to 4, for example)

Kmieciu, on 14 November 2016 - 04:06 AM, said:

I admire anyone that can carry their team using those builds, especially on a mech with no velocity quirks.

If you miss with 2xC-ERPPC, you've just wasted 28 points of heat. 28 points of heat could be used by a UAC10 build to deal 93,24 damage...

I can carry fine in pure 2xERPPC mechs, its the combination of two different lead speeds plus charge time screws my brain i think, i dont multitask well enough or something. I either miss with the Gauss, miss with the PPCs or dont charge the gauss long enough and it fails to fire lol.

[Idealsuspect]

Widowmaker1981, on 14 November 2016 - 03:58 AM, said:

Im actually not saying that i think the changes will ruin UACs - ill probably still use them because i have a severe blind spot with Gauss+PPC builds, i just cant use them effectively for some reason. Im fine with Gauss + lasers, or gauss by itself, and PPCs are my favourite weapon system.. but for some reason combining the two makes me miss with everything constantly.. But thats me, and i dont play comp.

What i was saying is that IS-UAC5s need to be dramatically better than AC5s, more so than you would expect for just 1 ton and 1 slot more, because of the way that one slot interacts with IS XL engines and side torso spaces.

IMO this clan UACs jamming buff will more hurt mixed builds ( like only 1 uac ++ many others weapons ) than the dedicated UACs boats...
KDR3 will still be the best we have there, pilots will have to tank a bit more cautious for perform exactly like before.

But well clan UAC weapon are too powerfull when comparing to others it's a fact.
Also by nerfing the best weapon (OP one ) in a game it's like an automatically "buff" all others or more exact: you just increase TTK in overall.

[El Bandito]

Stefka Kerensky, on 14 November 2016 - 03:14 AM, said:

This is another reason why this nerf is stoooopid.
Mixed loadout are bad now.
No reason to take 1 or 2 uac
This sucks a lot

Doesn't sound worse than letting Clanners min-max those CUACs on those boats.

[Widowmaker1981]

If im honest, i think a better way to reign in things would be link UAC5 and UAC10 ghost heat (and Gauss and ERPPC ghost heat but im really biased there, since i dont use that combo). That way it doesnt screw anything except boats.

People will probably hate that suggestion though, given the rabid (and stupid, imo) hate for ghost heat.

[Duke Nedo]

Widowmaker1981, on 14 November 2016 - 03:31 AM, said:

So what though? C-UACs are too strong compared to C-ACs? Who cares, given that C-ACs arent supposed to exist at all?

IS-UAC5s need to be a LOT stronger than AC5s to make them worth it, because you cannot fit two of them in a ST with an XL, and that is a HUGE thing (because yes, XL > STD in 95% of cases, whatever people think - limping around as half a mech, doing another 50 dmg or something is waaaaaaay less useful than being faster and having more guns from the start of the match)

Well, I think people has just got used to the double-dps-feature and take it for granted, both for IS and clans UACs. Clans get that feature for free (cACs being a filler and all, but yeah, that doesn't really matter when you get a pure upgrade for free) and IS pays 1 ton/slot.

That benefit doesn't have to be huge really, also consider builds like: http://mwo.smurfy-ne...3c672dadd077a46 If you can fit UAC5's, you fit UAC5s. They are always better. Only build rules speak for AC5's, I think that's bad design....

IMO clan cUACs have been dis-proportionally strong compared to IS tech for... always. Granted that PPFLD has nearly always been better over all, but that doesn't mean that there was balance among UACs neither compared to ACs nor between factions.

[C E Dwyer]

Gas Guzzler, on 13 November 2016 - 11:15 PM, said:

Alright, many of you may remember when Clan mechs came out, there was only one weapon that was really worth putting into ballistic slots: Gauss. Gauss has been nerfed, UACs were buffed and now there is some semblance of balance between Gauss and UACs, each having a more specific roles.

With this latest nerf package on UACs, we are legitimately going to see a trend of mechs switching back to Gauss rifles only. This is BAD. Please test the UACs on release and provide feedback to show that balance suffers from this round of changes. Perhaps a softer hand is necessary to tone down the DPS slightly, while still leaving the ability to sustain a push so they are more than just an inferior poke weapon.

This Nerf I firmly believe is the first step in trying to reduce ( Err INCREASE DOH ! )T.T.K, something many people have wanted for a very long time.
I believe this is the first step in cutting back on the biggest offenders and later on down the line certain variants of mechs will get jam buffs.

I could possibly be wrong, because they talk about the heat increase being what they hoped would normalise it. if they nerf it further and don't buff certain mech variants and pods this will as you say be a big negative.

I also don't think you'll see everyone going back to Gauss PPC builds, as most average people can't use them effectively, and will soldier on with nerfed dakka. The top 10-15% of players comp and FW teams use those builds all ready, unless they're in Q.P and are using a dakka KDK-3 to troll fight etc ..

We further don't know what the new skill tree is going to be like, will it be pilot skills for each mech with a line of general skills for movement, heat, energy, ballistics, which could mitigate a lot of the nerfs.

Sure I don't hold much hope for that from past experience, but who knows this might be the moment where the Cleveland Browns pull their head out their backside as well.


I do think that these kind of nerfs should have waited for the new skill tree, as usual PGI timing is bad, but the community has been screaming, well that part that does, for games to last longer, so evaluation should be over the whole of the games feel, and not just the weapon set

Edited by Cathy, 14 November 2016 - 05:15 AM.

[C E Dwyer]

Vellron2005, on 14 November 2016 - 02:22 AM, said:

Hahahahahaha... here come the "please don't nerf my Dakka beast" threads...

All I can say is.. Eat LRM!

RestosIII, on 14 November 2016 - 02:55 AM, said:

I'm pretty sure EVERYONE here knows how much I love gifs, but I have to say... That one is being used so often, I'm getting sick of it. Ya'll need to go gif hunting or make some new material.

yeah it's getting a bit tiresome

[GrimRiver]

Nah.

All the top mechs are clan, 2nd runner ups are mostly clan too and then IS.

IS need to have quirks just to compete with clans.

My point being is that too many top tier mechs are clans and not enough are IS.

There is simply no cons to C-UAC's other than a tiny jam, in most cases it's a minor inconvenience since that mech can most likely run more than 1 C-UAC to make up for that alongside host of back up lasers with the benefits of C-XL for super good weight savings with no cons of a ST loss.

Reason why C-UAC's are sooo much more powerful is they have the option of double tap.

IS has way more dud mechs than clans and seeing clans being notched down a tad isn't a bad thing, but it by no means will bring down the top tier, it'll just make them a bit trickier to use.

What I'm trying to point out is that current C-UAC's have very little risk vs reward and thus further felicitates the power gap between clans and IS, hence the upcoming C-UAC nerf to rectify that.

Edited by GrimRiver, 14 November 2016 - 06:07 AM.

[Sjorpha]

El Bandito, on 14 November 2016 - 04:42 AM, said:

Doesn't sound worse than letting Clanners min-max those CUACs on those boats.

There is/was only one problematic clan uac boat, the KDK-3. And the it was the UAC boating that made it problematic, because the gauss/ppc build has been stronger on that mech than the dakka boats from the start.

All the other uac builds on all other mechs have been well balanced as far as I know. I think the Dire Wolf is the only remaining mech where uac boating is actually still the strongest build for the mech, and it's not even that good.

Edited by Sjorpha, 14 November 2016 - 06:08 AM.

[El Bandito]

Sjorpha, on 14 November 2016 - 05:44 AM, said:

There is/was only one problematic clan uac boat, the KDK-3. And the it was the UAC boating that made it problematic, because the gauss/ppc build has been stronger on that mech than the dakka boats from the start.

All the other uac builds on all other mechs have been well balanced as far as I know. I think the Dire Wolf is the only remaining mech where uac boating is actually still the strongest build for the mech, and it's not even that good.

And what happens when other Clan mechs capable of boating CUACs arrive? The Bane? The Blood Asp? Much simpler to take preemptive measurements.

Then there is PGI's tendency to inflate hardpoints (KDK-3 being the most prominent example). So your point is moot.

Edited by El Bandito, 14 November 2016 - 09:10 AM.

[Jikil]

If boating UACs was the issue why not just increase the jam duration based on how many ballistics you mount?

If you wanna run quad uac dakka machine thats fine just be prepared for long timeouts when your weapons lock up.

Meanwhile things like a single UAC20 can be decent since a jam won't neuter your ability to fight.

Or just nerf the KDK-3, MX90, and the other top performing dakka boats that get away with 1000 damage games every match because they can stare people down until their dead.

[Sjorpha]

El Bandito, on 14 November 2016 - 06:04 AM, said:

And what happens when other Clan mechs capable of boating CUACs arrive? The Bane? The Blood Asp? Much simpler to take preemptive measurements.

What happens is that they will probably be more imbalanced with gauss than with uacs, just like the kodiak is. So the preemptive measure will do absolutely nothing to prevent them from being overpowered, just like this uac nerf has no balancing effect on the kodiak, all it does is destroy other mechs like the Dire wolf and any attempt to make a good clan dakka mech on any chassis.

Edited by Sjorpha, 14 November 2016 - 06:17 AM.