11 replies to this topic

[Jack Shayu Walker]

You removed weapon modules from the game.

5 range nodes at 2% a piece equal an old range module's 10%

5 cooldown nodes at -0.8% a piece equal 1/3 of an old cooldown modules 12%.


I can understand avoiding power creep, but there was no need to backpedal in maximum firepower under a system that's supposed to encourage player determined specialization.

I have to go through a lot of crap skill nodes to max out my weapon CDs and all I get is 4%? That's hardly worth it. I mean I get it, CDs are "The God Stat" but 4% is pathetic if you are throwing all other methods of decreasing cool-down's out the window.

Edited by Jack Shayu Walker, 09 February 2017 - 12:35 AM.

[Jack Shayu Walker]

Same issue with weapon heat generation. Clans should be able to hit 12% on cooldown and heat gen, 15% for IS. If that's too much value next to range and velocity, you can doublethe number of cooldown and heat gen nodes and spread the bonuses out.

Edited by Jack Shayu Walker, 09 February 2017 - 12:49 AM.

[ForceUser]

Well their stated goal is still to increase TTK and since the heat changes is on the back burner and new deadlier tech is on the way....

Makes perfect sense why they would use this opportunity to tone down the deadliness of all mechs at once.

[Jack Shayu Walker]

ForceUser, on 09 February 2017 - 12:53 AM, said:

Well their stated goal is still to increase TTK and since the heat changes is on the back burner and new deadlier tech is on the way....

Makes perfect sense why they would use this opportunity to tone down the deadliness of all mechs at once.

It's giving me a migraine having to constantly relearn trigger times on Auto-canons and PPCs. I wish they would just leave well enough alone when it comes to cooldown changes. But besides that point, if that's the way they want to play it, reduce the number of nodes. 0.8% for a whole skill point is a raw deal. I don't think it's even possible to notice a change that small.

Edited by Jack Shayu Walker, 09 February 2017 - 12:57 AM.

[Arianrhod]

I don't disagree with nerfing the cooldown buffs. How much cooldown do you really need guys? And, the nerf to cooldown modules affects All players, not just certain chassis, so your favorite 4x C-Gauss + 9x C-ER PPC Kodiak should still be fine.

Edited by Arianrhod, 09 February 2017 - 01:15 AM.

[ForceUser]

Arianrhod, on 09 February 2017 - 01:14 AM, said:

I don't disagree with nerfing the cooldown buffs. How much cooldown do you really need guys? And, the nerf to cooldown modules affects All players, not just certain chassis, so your favorite 4x C-Gauss + 9x C-ER PPC Kodiak should still be fine.

You can never have enough cooldown, but at the same time 'MWO isn't stompy robot enough' and 'it's too fast paced', etc.

There's no winning

[HeresWhy]

Not only are the #'s absurdly low. A flat rate ignores the opportunity cost.

Edited by HeresWhy, 09 February 2017 - 01:23 AM.

[Jack Shayu Walker]

Arianrhod, on 09 February 2017 - 01:14 AM, said:

I don't disagree with nerfing the cooldown buffs. How much cooldown do you really need guys? And, the nerf to cooldown modules affects All players, not just certain chassis...

We need enough so that every singular node has a noticeable impact on the weapon's performance. If you tried to tell me you can notice a 0.8% difference in weapon cooldown or heat generation, I wouldn't believe you.

It's not about balancing different mechs against each other, it's about not placing 'increase the TTK' above 'make a good skill tree' in the skill tree patch.

Arianrhod, on 09 February 2017 - 01:14 AM, said:

...so your favorite 4x C-Gauss + 9x C-ER PPC Kodiak should still be fine.

I'd rather find better ways to burn that cancer than gimping two of the skill trees weapon values.

Edited by Jack Shayu Walker, 09 February 2017 - 02:39 AM.

[Kaeb Odellas]

I wish PGI hadn't shafted so many underpowered mechs with cooldown nerfs for their weapons. The BJ-1 had a 40% cooldown reduction for AC2s with Fast Fire unlocked. Now you only get 25% with ballistic cooldown skills.

[Reno Blade]

I am ok if the % per SP is low, but I would like to focus on one aspect (e.g. CD or heat) of a weapon and not spend too many points in other aspect (e.g. beam time) which I don't want to spec in.

Taking Gauss branch: I would need to get Velocity and Charge bonus if I want CD which is only 5% max.
I rather have 10 SP for Gauss CD of 10% (still 1% each) and ignore the other parts I wont need.

More SP per branch would provide more specializaion, but then you would not have many SP for secondary weapons (as most people will try to max survivability always).

Maybe give a bonus to a branch if you max it out.
Maybe give synergy if you max two weapon branches (e.g. Laser give Missile bonus, ACs give Laser Bonus, etc.) to give a bonus to mixed builds.

[Horseman]

Arianrhod, on 09 February 2017 - 01:14 AM, said:

I don't disagree with nerfing the cooldown buffs. How much cooldown do you really need guys?

Depends on how many weapons I am boating. 9 ML Hunchback? Keep your cooldowns, bro. ENF-5P with dual LBXes? I need every % of cooldown I can get, that thing only mounts three weapons.

Hmm, here's a thought. What if the cooldown buffs scaled basing on the amount of hardpoints of the given type on the chassis, and then on how many weapons are equipped (if you want to lower your cooldown, drop a few weapons)?

Edited by Horseman, 09 February 2017 - 05:35 AM.

[Jack Shayu Walker]

Horseman, on 09 February 2017 - 05:29 AM, said:

Depends on how many weapons I am boating. 9 ML Hunchback? Keep your cooldowns, bro. ENF-5P with dual LBXes? I need every % of cooldown I can get, that thing only mounts three weapons.

Hmm, here's a thought. What if the cooldown buffs scaled basing on the amount of hardpoints of the given type on the chassis, and then on how many weapons are equipped (if you want to lower your cooldown, drop a few weapons)?

I have suggested this before in weapon module form, way back when. I think it's just a good an idea now. I'll put up a poll about it later.

Edited by Jack Shayu Walker, 09 February 2017 - 10:02 AM.