139 replies to this topic

[Mcgral18]

Ghogiel, on 23 January 2017 - 04:33 AM, said:

W/L is the only stat that demonstrates a players effect on the outcome of matches. It's the main stat.

Secondly, it's not. PSR is heavily biased on dmg, it barely gives a **** about wins.

Wins and damage

Mainly because wins mean you need to deal less damage to reach the max

You need ~400 damage to stay even on a loss (250 MS), but under 200 on a win (100 MS)
Damage being half your match score

[JC Daxion]

the Energy quirk on the summoner, i am unsure of.. I don't really play um and can see how it would make the dual PPC poptart run hotter.. then again i am not sure i am upset that a mech i regularly see hit 1k-1200 damage as something unwarranted. It also got buffs on a bunch of other areas.. I guess we will see.



as for the structure quirks on the warhammer and shadow hawk, they remind me of people loosing their minds when the catapults lost -6 or -7 around the resize. You are talking scrapping with a large laser, or a couple of mediums,, a single ac5 hit.. most weapons would kill the mech regardless of the +7 with any sorta normal hit.

I can't say i noticed my arms being blow off any more after the nerf, and i don't think this will be much of a difference.. I suppose on the shadow hawk's legs if you really are doing damage from jumping.. maybe it is time to add shock absorber.. or just how do the kids say it.. git gud? save some of that thrust so you don't hurt yourself.


I'll take a couple small nerfs when a bunch of IS mechs get a HUGE buff..

[Ultimax]

Tristan Winter, on 21 January 2017 - 05:35 AM, said:

Someone please explain. Are comp players using some other builds for the SHC and SMN that I don't know about?

Overall you're not wrong but the all ASRM 6 Summoner is used from time to time depending.

[Tristan Winter]

JC Daxion, on 23 January 2017 - 08:22 AM, said:

as for the structure quirks on the warhammer and shadow hawk, they remind me of people loosing their minds when the catapults lost -6 or -7 around the resize. You are talking scrapping with a large laser, or a couple of mediums,, a single ac5 hit.. most weapons would kill the mech regardless of the +7 with any sorta normal hit.
I can't say i noticed my arms being blow off any more after the nerf, and i don't think this will be much of a difference.. I suppose on the shadow hawk's legs if you really are doing damage from jumping.. maybe it is time to add shock absorber.. or just how do the kids say it.. git gud? save some of that thrust so you don't hurt yourself.

The Shadow Hawk? What about it? I didn't read anything about it in the patch notes.

In regards to the Whammy, my objection isn't so much that they should have nerfed Clan heavies first (which is the common criticism and is a valid one at that), but that they nerfed it the wrong way. The Warhammer should not have ballistic quirks, as it's primarily a PPC / laser / missile platform, with MGs for killing infantry and such. They should have replaced ballistic quirks with MG ROF quirks.

I don't think the Whammy needs to be an [U]AC5 + PPC platform. We have the Marauder for that. It's basically the stock build for the Marauder, even. So let the Warhammer focus on energy weapons and missiles. If the IS needs a heavy mech that can compete with the Clan mechs in pin point sniping matches, then they should look at the Marauder. And maybe even return the Jagermech to being a popular mech, as it once was.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Tristan Winter, on 23 January 2017 - 11:27 AM, said:

I don't think the Whammy needs to be an [U]AC5 + PPC platform. We have the Marauder for that.

The only problem is the Marauder can't perform that as well as the Whammy because the Marauder can't take an XL with 2 UAC5s and 2 PPCs. Taking away ballistic quirks won't change anything about that either.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 23 January 2017 - 12:49 PM.

[Ultimax]

Tristan Winter, on 23 January 2017 - 11:27 AM, said:

The Shadow Hawk? What about it? I didn't read anything about it in the patch notes.

In regards to the Whammy, my objection isn't so much that they should have nerfed Clan heavies first (which is the common criticism and is a valid one at that), but that they nerfed it the wrong way. The Warhammer should not have ballistic quirks, as it's primarily a PPC / laser / missile platform, with MGs for killing infantry and such. They should have replaced ballistic quirks with MG ROF quirks.

I don't think the Whammy needs to be an [U]AC5 + PPC platform. We have the Marauder for that. It's basically the stock build for the Marauder, even. So let the Warhammer focus on energy weapons and missiles. If the IS needs a heavy mech that can compete with the Clan mechs in pin point sniping matches, then they should look at the Marauder. And maybe even return the Jagermech to being a popular mech, as it once was.

This might be fine in a game where there was only one Warhammer.

Or if PPCs didn't have a 90M deadzone nor Ghost Heat.

However in this game we have those things.

PPCs all by themselves are not a good enough as a build, this has been the case ever since GH was introduced - so if you can't add ballistics to it you basically have half a build for the most part.

Then there is the Black Widow which basically exists (in this game) to boat ballistics - if it cant do that then it is irrelevant compared to the other variants with superior hardpoint locations.

Edited by Ultimax, 23 January 2017 - 01:06 PM.

[Appogee]

Trying to understand PGI is like trying to smell the color 9.

[Tristan Winter]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 23 January 2017 - 12:49 PM, said:

The only problem is the Marauder can't perform that as well as the Whammy because the Marauder can't take an XL with 2 UAC5s and 2 PPCs. Taking away ballistic quirks won't change anything about that either.

IIRC, PGI nerfed AC5s because the 5xAC5 Mauler was too powerful. And AC2s are still UP because PGI is worried that the 6xAC2 Mauler would be too powerful. Furthermore, they don't want to give mechs like the Marauder or Jagermech weapon quirks that would make AC5s or AC2s good alternatives to the UAC5. And I've been complaining about the AC10 for ages, because it's basically nowhere to be seen. A single AC10 seems about as useful to most people as a ******** on their elbow, and most mechs that can carry dual AC10 can also carry dual gauss or dual AC20, so why bother with the AC10?

IIRC, PGI killed the AC10 to end the poptart meta and it hasn't really been a major part of the meta since then. Could be wrong.

This is the problem when nobody wants PGI to nerf the top performing variants. It means that PGI will simply balance weapons and a whole chassis around the best variant with the best possible build.

TL;DR: I think there are ways around this problem, if PGI wanted to think outside the box.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Tristan Winter, on 23 January 2017 - 01:03 PM, said:

IIRC, PGI killed the AC10 to end the poptart meta and it hasn't really been a major part of the meta since then. Could be wrong.

For the AC10 to make a real comeback, it would need a velocity/range buff and Heavy PPCs to be added to help overcome the damage deficit since very few mechs can mount more than one. If I could mount 2 HPPCs and an AC10 on the MAD-5M and poptart with it I would try to compete with the Night Gyr (even if it won't be as strong because of heat and structure/speed).

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 23 January 2017 - 01:12 PM.

[Ultimax]

Tristan Winter, on 23 January 2017 - 01:03 PM, said:

IIRC, PGI nerfed AC5s because the 5xAC5 Mauler was too powerful. And AC2s are still UP because PGI is worried that the 6xAC2 Mauler would be too powerful. Furthermore, they don't want to give mechs like the Marauder or Jagermech weapon quirks that would make AC5s or AC2s good alternatives to the UAC5. And I've been complaining about the AC10 for ages, because it's basically nowhere to be seen. A single AC10 seems about as useful to most people as a ******** on their elbow, and most mechs that can carry dual AC10 can also carry dual gauss or dual AC20, so why bother with the AC10?

PGI is PGI's own problem.

Deceber 2015: PGI makes a bunch of changes and adds new mechs that start to see a shift toward ballistic builds and face rush builds away from laser vomit.

February 2016: A bunch of laser focused mechs are nerfed anyway, even though the meta has already shifted. At this point, with fewer competitors Dakka and PPC/Gauss builds start to dominate the meta.

???? I forget when but at some point DHS were all nerfed.

Over the next several months we get the KDK & the NGT along with IS mechs we had such as WHM & MAL and Dakka / Ballistics clearly dominate.

November 2016: Dakka is nerfed (especially all UACs and also AC 5s)

December 2016: DHS are once again, re-buffed leading to a resurgance of energy builds - with PPC/Gauss still being a dominant force (as it also benefits from DHS buffs)

In one year we have nearly come full circle, because PGI doesn't even remember what PGI did.



If you have build types A, B & C and you nerf A then B & C start to look overpowered in comparison.

PGI's solution at that point is often to nerf B or C and/or also re-buff A (or re-buff A at a later point) which then leads to A being overpoweed vs. B or C - and this is the cycle the just continues to repeat.

The worst part? They make these nerfs 4 to 8 months late and apparently are unable to follow the meta in its current form.

[MacClearly]

Ghogiel, on 23 January 2017 - 04:33 AM, said:

W/L is the only stat that demonstrates a players effect on the outcome of matches. It's the main stat.

Secondly, it's not. PSR is heavily biased on dmg, it barely gives a **** about wins.

You couldn't be more wrong.

Go look up how it works. Yes damage is heavily factored. However it would be incredibly difficult to climb the psr bar with damage alone.

That you somehow think that it doesn't give weight towards wins is a strong indication that you have no idea how the system works at all.

I know this sounds harsh but if you were to look it up, which there are lots of posts on it, you can see for yourself how important winning is a factor in the current system.

[Revis Volek]

Ultimax, on 23 January 2017 - 01:17 PM, said:

*snip*

In one year we have nearly come full circle, because PGI doesn't even remember what PGI did.



If you have build types A, B & C and you nerf A then B & C start to look overpowered in comparison.

PGI's solution at that point is often to nerf B or C and/or also re-buff A (or re-buff A at a later point) which then leads to A being overpoweed vs. B or C - and this is the cycle the just continues to repeat.

The worst part? They make these nerfs 4 to 8 months late and apparently are unable to follow the meta in its current form.

PGI is very out of touch with the game you would think the fellas at NGNG at least would be on top of that (meta) but maybe PGi doesn't listen to them, wouldn't surprise me if true.

But also PGI doesnt understand the game on top of this issue, or at least they have never demonstrated that to us, the player base which they also seem to be very out of touch with, again.

Edited by Revis Volek, 23 January 2017 - 02:14 PM.

[Tristan Winter]

MacClearly, on 23 January 2017 - 01:28 PM, said:

You couldn't be more wrong.
Go look up how it works. Yes damage is heavily factored. However it would be incredibly difficult to climb the psr bar with damage alone.
That you somehow think that it doesn't give weight towards wins is a strong indication that you have no idea how the system works at all.
I know this sounds harsh but if you were to look it up, which there are lots of posts on it, you can see for yourself how important winning is a factor in the current system.

No, if you do about 450 damage in every match, you should get a match score of at least 250, which means you never lose your PSR in defeat, you only maintain your PSR in defeat or climb when you get a victory.

If you actually play to complete the objectives first and foremost, you will probably have several victories where you spend the whole match capping in Conquest, capping base in Assault, rushing towards the circle in Domination or ninja-killing the VIP in Escort. Neither of these things have a significant rewards. Whenever you lose, your PSR will tank because you didn't focus on doing damage and got a 0-100 match score. And if you win? You'll have a low match score and your PSR will not go up.

Of course, if you get both damage and a victory, you will increase your PSR. But to say that victories are rewarded is just not true. If it wasn't for Skirmish, you could win all game modes in MWO without actually increasing your PSR.

[Deathlike]

To better restate the title...

"I don't understand PGI's balance changes, plz halp."

[Ghogiel]

Mcgral18, on 23 January 2017 - 07:58 AM, said:

Wins and damage

Mainly because wins mean you need to deal less damage to reach the max

You need ~400 damage to stay even on a loss (250 MS), but under 200 on a win (100 MS)
Damage being half your match score

Exactly, the wins don't even matter, you just have to do dmg and you go up.

MacClearly, on 23 January 2017 - 01:28 PM, said:

You couldn't be more wrong.

Go look up how it works. Yes damage is heavily factored. However it would be incredibly difficult to climb the psr bar with damage alone.

That you somehow think that it doesn't give weight towards wins is a strong indication that you have no idea how the system works at all.

I know this sounds harsh but if you were to look it up, which there are lots of posts on it, you can see for yourself how important winning is a factor in the current system.

lol no its not. The old Elo system, wins mattered. PSR you just have to not be a potato and it's hard to even lose PSR, even on a loss.

Edited by Ghogiel, 23 January 2017 - 02:46 PM.

[Fake News]

Mole, on 21 January 2017 - 05:43 AM, said:

Paul. Paul is what's going on.

quoted for ****** truth.

[MacClearly]

Tristan Winter, on 23 January 2017 - 02:38 PM, said:

No, if you do about 450 damage in every match, you should get a match score of at least 250, which means you never lose your PSR in defeat, you only maintain your PSR in defeat or climb when you get a victory.

If you actually play to complete the objectives first and foremost, you will probably have several victories where you spend the whole match capping in Conquest, capping base in Assault, rushing towards the circle in Domination or ninja-killing the VIP in Escort. Neither of these things have a significant rewards. Whenever you lose, your PSR will tank because you didn't focus on doing damage and got a 0-100 match score. And if you win? You'll have a low match score and your PSR will not go up.

Of course, if you get both damage and a victory, you will increase your PSR. But to say that victories are rewarded is just not true. If it wasn't for Skirmish, you could win all game modes in MWO without actually increasing your PSR.

Right...it is heavily biased towards winning but if you put out 450+ damage you won't go down. I know this because I am climbing with .82 wlr which is absolutely terrible.

This doesn't change that it is not simply an exp bar nor is it ineffctive at separating really terrible players from competent ones.

Edited by MacClearly, 23 January 2017 - 03:22 PM.

[Dimento Graven]

Albino Boo, on 21 January 2017 - 05:51 AM, said:

... when anyone in T1 will say the that lrms are bad.

Side note for a whole new thread:

I'm in T1, I don't think LRMs are bad...

That is to say, in quick play, LRMs are not bad. I think they're about right actually.

In FP, IS LRMs (or maybe the LRM builds) are significantly weaker than their Clan counter parts (maybe that's a sign they could be weak in QP, but in QP with Clan tech on BOTH sides of the battle it's harder to notice maybe).

[C E Dwyer]

Slightly off topic as it doesn't involve the summoner, or the shadowcat, but I had two games today in my Loyalty Stalker, where I got four kills and over 800 damage,

I'm now worried that the stats will say it needs to be nerfed as statistics are a clear indicator of how OP something is...clearly..

[MacClearly]

Ghogiel, on 23 January 2017 - 02:45 PM, said:

Exactly, the wins don't even matter, you just have to do dmg and you go up.


lol no its not. The old Elo system, wins mattered. PSR you just have to not be a potato and it's hard to even lose PSR, even on a loss.

Well then it is clear you have absolutely no idea how the system functions at all.