145 replies to this topic

[Nutta88]

D V Devnull, on 13 April 2017 - 06:32 PM, said:

• Disabling Streak SRM from killing stationary targets (MFB/Generator/Turret)
  
  There should have been a way to work around, such as requiring TAG/NARC/UAV to help acquire a lock. At least then with Direct Sight now not working, the Streak SRM Weapon System would not be facing serious deprecation through inability to hit due to its' active requirement of having a Target Lock before it can be fired. Perhaps we can get this cured in a future Patch or HotFix?

Agree... at least, tag or narc, though somtimes I think that UAV should just be about location information rather than target locks to prevent the rain. If you have line of sight you still should be able to get target lock or at least be able to use tag to get your own. Might make tag a must for streak/lrm...

AnHell86, on 13 April 2017 - 07:35 PM, said:

Hey!

I welcome the Match Score adjustments. In QP and in my experience, people like to farm damage. For example, in my Oxide, I prefer disabling mechs with precise blows, getting more destroyed components, backstabs, destroying locusts trying to backstab our assaults, using UAVs, spotting assists with Adv. Sensor Range and, at the end, I get less match score than damage farmers. I get satisfaction by helping my team but I don't feel rewarded by the current system.

Side Note: LRMs are great weapons to farm damage with an awesome spread. However, it fails at disabling the enemy mech effectively. Positively, LRMs are great at making an enemy mech retreat for cover.

Thanks for the changes, PGI!

o7

I like balancing the match score as well... some builds/mechs/play styles just don't put out the damage, though will be very useful to the team. But you don't end up with the cbills or match score at the end of the match.

[D V Devnull]

Nutta88, on 14 April 2017 - 12:16 AM, said:

though somtimes I think that UAV should just be about location information rather than target locks to prevent the rain.

Let's not go around taking the 'Spotting Assist' and 'UAV Locked Damage' bonuses away from those who provide UAV Assistance. People won't use them if they can't pay for them properly, because they would recognize the lack of payment as unfair to them. That, and given the need for teamwork, if there's no UAVs being used, then there's a reduction in synergy going on. I'm sure we don't want to kill teamwork and everyone enjoying and earning together, right?

Also, the last I checked, we need to not go around "babying" people who are having issues with LRMs/SSRMs. They need to learn how to use AMS & ECM, as well as cover on maps, even if it's just an open trench.

~Mr. D. V. "Just spotting the hole in that piece of your thought..." Devnull

[mrpetzold]

Nutta88, on 14 April 2017 - 12:16 AM, said:

I like balancing the match score as well... some builds/mechs/play styles just don't put out the damage, though will be very useful to the team. But you don't end up with the cbills or match score at the end of the match.

You might think you are very useful to the team, but the fact is that you would have been alot more useful in something that would put out damage aswell.

[W31rdWarrior]

Quote

• Match Score (AMS): Using AMS to destroy Enemy Missile fire targeted at your teammates will now contribute slightly toward your Match Score. Destroying Enemy Missiles targeted at your own 'Mech do not contribute toward your Match Score.

Yes, finally one of the most wanted feature. Thank you PGI, finally bringing multiple AMSs on the field will be worthy (my Kit Fox and Nova are happier now), and it's good to see that you have increased some in-game C-Bills reward

Also the new game mode seems interesting, i haven't tried it during the PTS, so it's new to me, but sounds good.

New loading screens, yay!

Edited by W31rdWarrior, 14 April 2017 - 02:53 AM.

[I cant want to]

so, providing AMS cover to your team now earns you match score, but no cbills/xp

if only match score counted for anything outside of challenges

well, its a start

if AMS provided a tangible reward to the pilot, i bet you would see a lot more of it on the battlefield
as it stands, you are better off just taking more weapons, as damage is what gets paid

[Krucilatoz]

Navid A1, on 13 April 2017 - 06:44 PM, said:

Floating chat is a big step in the right direction.

But for god sake... make the user able to use chat WHILE HE/SHE IS SEARCHING.

I'm tired of pressing cancel search every time when I want to quickly respond to something in chat.

THIS!
When play on groups I usually ends up watching youtube/manga etc when the game searching. That could last several minutes, and being unable to chat with group mate is annoying

[Sky Hawk]

I am just very curious, what PGI means with "slightly".. It is 5% or 15% or 50 % ???...

[Acehilator]

No new decals again, forth time in a row. How about you reassign one of the 2D artists working on MW5 back to MWO?

[metallio]

With the Alpine adjustments, any chance you'd consider playing with a major relocation of the domination beacon for a little while and seeing how it plays out?

https://mwomercs.com...ination-circle/

Just playing as something different for a month would be fun, even if we changed it right back.

[Marius Romanis]

Sky Hawk, on 14 April 2017 - 04:28 AM, said:

I am just very curious, what PGI means with "slightly".. It is 5% or 15% or 50 % ???...

Yes the vagueness of this is very annoying, is P.I. continuing his cbill income nerfs or are the increases going to more than offset our damage cbill reward decreases ?

(I expect skilled players who do 700-1200 damage most quick play games will be getting penalised for being good and potatoes that do <300 damage regularly, but run around a lot b4 they die / have ams / shoot off arms trying to hit ct's will get a cbill reward increase?)

Do these alterations apply only to Quick Play or FP/CW as well ?

metallio, on 14 April 2017 - 06:07 AM, said:

With the Alpine adjustments, any chance you'd consider playing with a major relocation of the domination beacon for a little while and seeing how it plays out?

I think the new location with the new wall/hill is worth seeing how it plays out before we complain and request it be changed a 5th time b4 we have even had a chance to play how this 4th attempt works.

Edited by CadoAzazel, 14 April 2017 - 06:38 AM.

[Jman5]

Hey PGI, I think it's good to see you guys adjusting matchscore. It would be really useful for players and for yourself if you released a full breakdown of how matchscore adds up. It would allow for quality feedback and give your players an understanding of what they are being scored on. Plus it would help us help you catch any bugs.

On a related note, since you guys are adjusting matchscore can you PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE look at fixing the matchscore for Faction Play? Currently the scores get MASSIVELY inflated based on how many living mechs you have left. While I'm all for giving maybe 5-10 points per living mech the current system is just completely rendering the matchscore useless in Faction Play. Some guy who sat in the back with ER LL and didn't do much of anything, but never died will have the highest score in the game by a wide margin.

It's really frustrating and prevents you guys from using matchscore in any of your events, or internal metrics.

Edited by Jman5, 14 April 2017 - 06:47 AM.

[metallio]

I've been making the Alpine request since before the patch and I'll keep making it. I *like* the idea of non-centralized domination circles...a lot. So no, not planning on halting my discussion because they put a wall up. The current location has a north and south lane on the approach and near zero maneuver opportunity once you're engaged.

I'm sure the changes will help. I'm sure it'll be the same boring fight without being as lopsided as it usually is; I also don't think it's a bad idea to change often, even if my idea isn't the best one. Change, change back, do it twice a week. I'd enjoy it.

Edited by metallio, 14 April 2017 - 07:35 AM.

[Trev Firestorm]

InnerSphereNews, on 13 April 2017 - 04:58 PM, said:

Targeting Changes

• Mobile Field Bases, Generators, and Turrets can no longer be target-locked; direct or dumb-fire weaponry is now required to damage them. The standard 'R' command will still convey information and health values, but target-lock will not be acquired.

This is just stupid, give them AMS not Jesusbox MKIIs.

[HGAK47]

First things first - This sounds like fun I look forward to trying th incursion game mode. I think I am going to love my ECM mechs even more than I do now!

Also - I had no idea there were different corporations (in the lore) that manufactured the different mechs. I would absolutly LOVE to see this information in game. Even just a little blurb or maufacturer logo for the different mechs! Love little details like that in games.

[Kuaron]

Quote

• Match Score (AMS): Using AMS to destroy Enemy Missile fire targeted at your teammates will now contribute slightly toward your Match Score. Destroying Enemy Missiles targeted at your own 'Mech do not contribute toward your Match Score.
• Match Score (Loss): Losing a Match will now contribute slightly more toward your final Match Score.
• Match Score (Spotting Assist): Getting a Spotting Assist will now contribute slightly more toward your final Match Score.
• Match Score (Component Destroyed): Destroying an Enemy Component will now contribute slightly more toward your final Match Score.
• Match Score (Scouting): Achieving a Scouting action will now contribute slightly more toward your final Match Score.
• Match Score (Flanking): Achieving a Flanking action will now contribute slightly more toward your final Match Score.
• Match Score (Damage Done): Damage Done will now contribute slightly less toward your final Match Score.

Oh, nice, some actual improvement!

The rest of the patch is "yay, next mech!", more or less.

[Odanan]

HGAK47, on 14 April 2017 - 09:11 AM, said:

First things first - This sounds like fun I look forward to trying th incursion game mode. I think I am going to love my ECM mechs even more than I do now!

Also - I had no idea there were different corporations (in the lore) that manufactured the different mechs. I would absolutly LOVE to see this information in game. Even just a little blurb or maufacturer logo for the different mechs! Love little details like that in games.

It would be cooler if the manufactures added some small "quirk" to their equipment. For instance: "Martell" medium lasers get +1% range and -1% damage; "Intek" medium lasers get -1% heat and +1% burn time...

[testhero]

Having some difficulty getting the idea behind the

• Mobile Field Bases, Generators, and Turrets can no longer be target-locked; direct or dumb-fire weaponry is now required to damage them. The standard 'R' command will still convey information and health values, but target-lock will not be acquired.


I can see that with the new incursion mode you don't want the base walls to actually help the enemy to destroy the Tower generators by letting them lob missiles over the top with impunity but can you not do this by using armoured or hardened generator buildings as in use in Faction warfare.

Why turrets are not target-able once they pop up is silly. Fair enough that they can't be targeted while they are in their silos but once they deploy they should be fair game like any other damage causing battlefield feature.

Perhaps fitting them with the upcoming Stealth Armour would give a better effect so they can only be targeted by a battlemech with Line of Sight to them. That would be a fairer representation of mobile field bases and turrets being built of low signature materials.

Being unable to LuRM Alpha and Bravo in Domination games (and hence not having to protect them) will just make them even less relevant to play in Domination Mode matches

If this is a further move along the path into information warfare I would like to see these three battlefield oblects be affected by TAG and or NARC

Edited by testhero, 14 April 2017 - 11:58 AM.

[Rebel Ace Fryslan]

Quote

Targeting Changes
• Mobile Field Bases, Generators, and Turrets can no longer be target-locked; direct or dumb-fire weaponry is now required to damage them. The standard 'R' command will still convey information and health values, but target-lock will not be acquired.

This is a bad thing on the FP side where you use a tactic to lock a turret then have an lrm-mech pull on them, this is only possible for some turrets when you come in.

BTW in (FP CW FW in invasion Siege) choose 1111111, you could make the defence of IS-side more advance sind they occupy the spawn very often.

[Draglock]

AMS Rewards need I say more.

[Marius Romanis]

Roughneck
"Release Date for MC: July 4th 2017
Release Date for C-Bills: August 8th 2017"

whats with the one month instead of usual 3 months, not complaining just curious.

Am I wrong in thinking destructable walls should take less damage from lasers than other weapon types ?

Edited by CadoAzazel, 15 April 2017 - 01:17 AM.