84 replies to this topic

[Quicksilver Aberration]

JackalBeast, on 05 May 2017 - 07:44 AM, said:

I am aware and yet still it proves to be a resilient thorn in the right hands.

I'm not talking about how it plays, sure because of its speed it can be resilient (though firepower compared to the Locust or Firestarter is a bit disappointing). My point has been if you just look at hitboxes and mounts, Firestarter/Spider > Commando/Arctic Cheetah

JackalBeast, on 05 May 2017 - 07:44 AM, said:

but can be relatively neutered by taking the arms off, which is pretty easy with the shoulders it has.

That's the reason I'm saying the ACH doesn't have the best hitboxes.....because it really doesn't for this reason alone (it isn't the only reason though, since it does have some large legs).

El Bandito, on 05 May 2017 - 07:44 AM, said:

Also, ACH is tiny. Firestarter is giant in comparison.

They are different in size (though not as different as you seem to make it out to be), but not having giant arms that falloff like a Mist Lynx's is a huge benefit, especially if you mount a majority of your firepower there.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 05 May 2017 - 07:55 AM.

[Jackal Noble]

Yeonne Greene, on 05 May 2017 - 07:48 AM, said:

There's a problem here, because the baseline has inherent deficiencies all by itself. Before even touching the 'Mechs themselves, they need to address those.

Fine, can we touch on this subject here?; because this an often stated, and obvious (in the sense that the game is over 30 years old and was developed this way over time to encompass a 500+ year old progressive storyline between two tech bases, not to mention expand on the original franchise - cuz business on moneys, keep players interested)

I can never seem to get a coherent answer that would solve this problem and not create a weird androgynous sameness vs having a nice sprinkling of a unique snowflake mechs on each side which we currently have with some disparities.

[Jackal Noble]

And to much people's chagrin, Sized hardpoints (lowers ttk because less overall firepower on the field, reinforces roles of mechs, plus with decoupling slower mechs - this sh!t all compounds and could contribute to a much more rewarding over all experience within the game. To some I realize this is preaching to the choir, as well as hot air...because it ain't happening.

[Bud Crue]

JackalBeast, on 05 May 2017 - 08:14 AM, said:

Fine, can we touch on this subject here?; because this an often stated, and obvious (in the sense that the game is over 30 years old and was developed this way over time to encompass a 500+ year old progressive storyline between two tech bases, not to mention expand on the original franchise - cuz business on moneys, keep players interested)

I can never seem to get a coherent answer that would solve this problem and not create a weird androgynous sameness vs having a nice sprinkling of a unique snowflake mechs on each side which we currently have with some disparities.

That's what quirks are for...to address those inherent baseline deficiencies. We KNOW many mechs are below par in performance, hit boxes, hard points, whatever. Quirks are supposed to address that. Yes, it can be argued that quirks have failed at that in many cases, but eliminating them wholesale will certainly not help the mechs that we KNOW need them to be competitive, let alone viable. PGI's shotgun approach of leaving some, reducing others, eliminating some, will not help either and will guarantee nonsensical future baseline establishment.

The only rational path forward is to leave quirks where they are at, make the skills tree changes, and then conduct your future "balance efforts," "baseline establishment", or more likely "just let it sit for six months" efforts from THAT point.

[Clownwarlord]

El Bandito, on 03 May 2017 - 05:59 PM, said:

PGI never made sense on their balancing department. I've been with the game from the beginning, and PGI's gross incompetence when it comes to mech/weapon/equipment/faction balancing is already meme-worthy. And now they are bringing in new tech, which will further expose their incompetence.

this is the meme you are looking for

[Andi Nagasia]

Bud Crue, on 05 May 2017 - 04:11 AM, said:

My change to you proposal would be to rather than remove all quirks...LEAVE THEM THE HELL ALONE.
PGI has spent the last 3 years balancing by quirks. I do not understand why they are so keen to throw that effort away just because of the skills tree.

i keep hearing this, (All Quirks are ganna be removed with the New Skill Tree)
yes PGI did once say that, but then Quickly explained that some Base Quirks would Stay,

Structure is Staying, Agility is getting Rolled into base Chassis Mobility,
the only Quirks that are really being removed are some Extreme Weapon Quirks,

all in all with the Skill Tree,
IS mechs will be more Tanky & Agile, and will benefit Heavily from the Defense & Mobility Skill Trees,
Clan Mechs will have more Damage & Speed, and will benefit more from the Firepower & Operations Skill Trees,

so no PGI isnt so Keen on throwing away Balance Progress,

[Bud Crue]

Andi Nagasia, on 05 May 2017 - 08:30 AM, said:

the only Quirks that are really being removed are some Extreme Weapon Quirks,

No offense intended but that is total bull shi7.

Why does a Spider 5V need a 5% energy cooldown reduction? It's current 30% is extreme but 25% isn't? 5% on a mech that is barely functional other than as a novelty is extreme?

I can go through the whole list if you would like, but go look at the pdfs yourself. As I have said countless times: they are nerfing some of the worst mechs in the game. These are not "extreme weapons quirks" they are weapons quirks that make crap mechs a little less crappy.

I get that some people are okay with this. But even if you accept that these mostly 5-10% reductions are somehow "extreme" and need nerfing, the other thing that fans of this (and PGI) are failing to account for is that by advertising the reduction in value of content (nerfs) you are creating in the mind of the player a negative incentive to play that content. As an inevitable consequence your players will congregate to content that is not negatively affected. That is bias. Bias is lethal to any statistical inquiry. Trying to establish baseline performance from biased data will f**k up balance even more than it already is.

Edit: One more thing...nothing in my posts have stated or suggested that PGI is eliminating all quirks. Not sure where you are seeing that or how you interpreted what I wrote as suggesting it.

Edit 2: the nerf pdfs:
https://static.mwome...Final%20PTS.pdf
https://static.mwome...Final%20PTS.pdf

Edited by Bud Crue, 05 May 2017 - 08:55 AM.

[Y E O N N E]

JackalBeast, on 05 May 2017 - 08:14 AM, said:

Fine, can we touch on this subject here?; because this an often stated, and obvious (in the sense that the game is over 30 years old and was developed this way over time to encompass a 500+ year old progressive storyline between two tech bases, not to mention expand on the original franchise - cuz business on moneys, keep players interested)

I can never seem to get a coherent answer that would solve this problem and not create a weird androgynous sameness vs having a nice sprinkling of a unique snowflake mechs on each side which we currently have with some disparities.

Well, I'm not even referring to that. I'm talking about MWO's specific implementations. The following are some of the items that are all screwed up, how they are screwed up, and the suggested fix:

• IS Small Lasers - cool-down is too long (should be equal to duration)
  
• IS Medium Lasers - cool-down is too long (should be about a quarter second shorter), heat is too high (should be between 3 and 3.5), duration is a tiny bit too long (should be around 0.82 s to match DPT on the cERML)
  
• IS Medium Pulse Laser - heat too high (should be down to 3.5)
  
• ERLL and cERLL - durations slightly too long (reduce to 1.15 and 1.4 s to start, though dropping the cERLL to 10 damage and giving it an even shorter duration around 1.25 would be superior)
  
• ERLL and cERLL - range is too short (should bump up to 720 m and 810 m)
  
• LL - range is too short (it comes into its own at 500 m with nothing else changed)
  
• cERSL - range is slightly short (increase by another 10-15 m)
  
• SRM2 and cSRM2 - cool-down is too long (reduce by at least 20%)
  
• Standard ACs and cACs - cool-down is too long (should be shorter than base cool-down on Ultras)m velocity is too low (increase by 20% across the board, probably more for cACs)
  
• LB-X ACs - too much spread (decrease by 15% across the board), cool-down is too long (should be shorter than standard AC), and don't get me started on the IS slot requirements
  
• Gauss - runs too cold (give it between 3 and 6 heat)
  
• IS ER PPC - drop the goddamn heat to at most a flat 13 and dramatically increase velocity (+50%); it's the only weapon in the game dealing more heat than damage and it has absolutely nothing to show for it...it's bloody awful
  
• Clan lasers vs. IS lasers: Clan lasers ought to get 1.75x max range while IS lasers keep 2x; the net result is that Clan lasers are short at the edge for the last 60-80 meters, but they ramp up faster and hit full damage sooner than their equivalent IS counterparts (meaning isERML vs. cERML, not isML vs. cERML). The flavor is maintained without completely gimping either side versus the other.

You are welcome to interrogate my justification on any of these.

Edited by Yeonne Greene, 05 May 2017 - 08:55 AM.

[Clownwarlord]

Well I would like to point out ... the only reason why PGI would want to remove offensive quirks is this. (That I can think of.)

The previous skill tree had nothing to do with weapons (that is fact, look in game if you do not believe me). Now back when quirks first came out was there was an issue with some quirks being to big (35% energy weapon range quirk for example on battlemaster 1s). So to prevent the combination of (new skill tree weapon quirks) + (mechs chassis quirks) = could give you a result of when the quirks were similar to one that needed to be reduced before.

Outside of that reasoning I would have to agree leave the quirks alone or find other ways to increase the ability of that mech in a different but just as effective ability.

Edited by Clownwarlord, 05 May 2017 - 08:49 AM.

[I_AM_ZUUL]

Andi Nagasia, on 05 May 2017 - 08:30 AM, said:

i keep hearing this, (All Quirks are ganna be removed with the New Skill Tree)
yes PGI did once say that, but then Quickly explained that some Base Quirks would Stay,

Structure is Staying, Agility is getting Rolled into base Chassis Mobility,
the only Quirks that are really being removed are some Extreme Weapon Quirks,

all in all with the Skill Tree,
IS mechs will be more Tanky & Agile, and will benefit Heavily from the Defense & Mobility Skill Trees,
Clan Mechs will have more Damage & Speed, and will benefit more from the Firepower & Operations Skill Trees,

so no PGI isnt so Keen on throwing away Balance Progress,

sure they are throwing even the current facsimile of Balance into the garbage.... "tankiness" is an irrelevant concept thrown around whining Clan Crocodile Tears members when they are opining about how the Clan mechs are underpowered, in thread just flat out dumb arguments. Being able to be shot with an extra ML or 2 is so inconsequential when you consider cXL engines, Lighter weapons, Longer Ranges, preponderance of High Weapon Mounts, good Hitboxes... the ONLY thing that IS had going for them in the majority of cases was good Quirks (they took away the insane or great ones long ago) and they were still solidly sucking hind teat, just look at the CW map for progress.

[Mcgral18]

Clownwarlord, on 05 May 2017 - 08:49 AM, said:

Well I would like to point out ... the only reason why PGI would want to remove offensive quirks is this. (That I can think of.) The previous skill tree had nothing to do with weapons (that is fact, look in game if you do not believe me). Now back when quirks first came out was there was an issue with some quirks being to big (35% energy weapon range quirk for example on battlemaster 1s). So to prevent the combination of (new skill tree weapon quirks) + (mechs chassis quirks) = could give you a result of when the quirks were similar to one that needed to be reduced before. Outside of that reasoning I would have to agree leave the quirks alone or find other ways to increase the ability of that mech in a different but just as effective ability.

The current allowed cooldown bonus is 17% (12+5)
The current allowed range bonus is 10%

Cooldown is falling way down to 9.9% (and 7.7%)
Range is going up to 15%



If you cut range by 5%, you would get parity
You don't need to touch Cooldown, because it's already going down.

[Lances107]

Clan Crocodile Tears thats funny, who is posting daily to find something to ***** about when it comes to the clans... Oh yea thats right IS player base. I believe you have the wrong faction for the crocodile tears. Nevermind we arnt going to talk about the large lasers spamming by IS units, or the fact that IS units can house more large pulse lasers in the field then clan ones. We couldnt possibly talk about that could we? lets not talk about the fact that you guys are about to get a large amount of ppcs with the civil war update? So enough with the snide remark of "crocodile tears"

[Acehilator]

Clownwarlord, on 05 May 2017 - 08:49 AM, said:

Well I would like to point out ... the only reason why PGI would want to remove offensive quirks is this. (That I can think of.)

The previous skill tree had nothing to do with weapons (that is fact, look in game if you do not believe me). Now back when quirks first came out was there was an issue with some quirks being to big (35% energy weapon range quirk for example on battlemaster 1s). So to prevent the combination of (new skill tree weapon quirks) + (mechs chassis quirks) = could give you a result of when the quirks were similar to one that needed to be reduced before.

Outside of that reasoning I would have to agree leave the quirks alone or find other ways to increase the ability of that mech in a different but just as effective ability.

Even that reasoning does not really work. Of course with the new skill tree you can get -Laser duration for instance, but you cannot fully regain Fast Fire + CD Module + Range Module, so even in the best case scenario it is a wash, and in most cases an effective reduction of offensive capabilities. That is why I am so baffled by PGIs decisions regarding quirks (although I know, I shouldn't be anymore at this point).

[Gyrok]

I_AM_ZUUL, on 04 May 2017 - 09:19 PM, said:

Nope... that is the acurrate assessment of the mentality of people on the forums. Trashcan pilots whining about ridiculous things which is just adding insult to the injury of the already broken balance problems PGI has caused by their incompetence as "designers"

Ah...forgot why I quit hanging around this place...

If a bunch of trashcan pilots use this as an echo chamber to spout biased ideas based on preconceived notions from a period of gameplay that occurred roughly 4 years ago and lasted approximately 6-12 months...I think we can safely say that anyone with those ideas is so myopic their optometrist has lost all hope of finding a prescription to fix their vision.

I_AM_ZUUL, on 05 May 2017 - 08:55 AM, said:

sure they are throwing even the current facsimile of Balance into the garbage.... "tankiness" is an irrelevant concept thrown around whining Clan Crocodile Tears members when they are opining about how the Clan mechs are underpowered, in thread just flat out dumb arguments. Being able to be shot with an extra ML or 2 is so inconsequential when you consider cXL engines, Lighter weapons, Longer Ranges, preponderance of High Weapon Mounts, good Hitboxes... the ONLY thing that IS had going for them in the majority of cases was good Quirks (they took away the insane or great ones long ago) and they were still solidly sucking hind teat, just look at the CW map for progress.

Hmm...that could not possibly have any bearing on organization or skill...right? I mean, when IS drove the clans back to nothing, that had everything to do with skill, and nothing to do with OP mechs that had *every* advantage against seriously underpowered clans. Right?

[Mcgral18]

Lances107, on 05 May 2017 - 09:05 AM, said:

Clan Crocodile Tears thats funny, who is posting daily to find something to ***** about when it comes to the clans... Oh yea thats right IS player base. I believe you have the wrong faction for the crocodile tears. Nevermind we arnt going to talk about the large lasers spamming by IS units, or the fact that IS units can house more large pulse lasers in the field then clan ones. We couldnt possibly talk about that could we? lets not talk about the fact that you guys are about to get a large amount of ppcs with the civil war update? So enough with the snide remark of "crocodile tears"

...seriously bro?

The cERPPC will still be the best PPC available, on the best robots, with the best engine

The new tech isn't likely to change ANY of that. It will just make the bad LESS bad, not GOOD

[Monkey Lover]

Lances107, on 05 May 2017 - 09:05 AM, said:

Clan Crocodile Tears thats funny, who is posting daily to find something to ***** about when it comes to the clans... Oh yea thats right IS player base. I believe you have the wrong faction for the crocodile tears. Nevermind we arnt going to talk about the large lasers spamming by IS units, or the fact that IS units can house more large pulse lasers in the field then clan ones. We couldnt possibly talk about that could we? lets not talk about the fact that you guys are about to get a large amount of ppcs with the civil war update? So enough with the snide remark of "crocodile tears"

No lets talk about it.

"the large lasers spamming by IS units,"
You mean the weapon that is basically a clan 1 ton er medium laser? Lol

"IS units can house more large pulse lasers"
This is because Clans do 15% more dmg,have 39% more range, are 1 ton less and do more dps. Its called balance.
33dmg at 365m or 26dmg at 600m. For me its a trade off.

"lets not talk about the fact that you guys are about to get a large amount of ppcs with the civil war update"
hehe lets see what "we get" when we get it. Right now the Clan ppc Is OP for 0.5heat you get an extra 50% of smash dmg for free. At the same time the weapon is 1 ton less and 1 slot less.

Edited by Monkey Lover, 05 May 2017 - 06:34 PM.

[Gyrok]

Monkey Lover, on 05 May 2017 - 06:34 PM, said:

No lets talk about it.

Yes, lets do that...

Quote

"the large lasers spamming by IS units,"
You mean the weapon that is basically a clan 1 ton er medium laser? Lol

You mean the one with at minimum a 300m+ range advantage, and 2 points more damage with less duration, and can be fired 3 at a time, where as the *true* clan equivalent weighs 4 tons, and can only be fired 2 at a time? That one?

Quote

"IS units can house more large pulse lasers"
This is because Clans do 15% more dmg,have 39% more range, are 1 ton less and do more dps. Its called balance.
33dmg at 365m or 26dmg at 600m. For me its a trade off.

You do realize that CLPL now has *less* range than a 10% range quirked IS LPL with a range module, right? Without the 10% range quirks, the IS LPL is basically equal range with a range module. The CLPL also does that 15% more damage over a 100% longer duration, and can only be fired 2 at a time versus 3 at a time for the IS.

Quote

"lets not talk about the fact that you guys are about to get a large amount of ppcs with the civil war update"
hehe lets see what "we get" when we get it. Right now the Clan ppc Is OP for 0.5heat you get an extra 50% of smash dmg for free. At the same time the weapon is 1 ton less and 1 slot less.

50% splash damage that is mostly worthless unless you are a terrible pilot running a mech with 4 ppcs and spamming them in hopes of hitting an open component you are unaware exists because you cannot even press the key to target the mech you are shooting?

When you are counting PPCs, the pinpoint is the only thing that matters.

[Monkey Lover]

Gyrok lol you have been saying clans suck for years. Yet they win all the leaderboards and events. They're used almost 90% in the comp games. Even half of my mechs at this point are clan mechs lol

Gyrok, on 05 May 2017 - 06:41 PM, said:

You mean the one with at minimum a 300m+ range advantage, and 2 points more damage with less duration, and can be fired 3 at a time, where as the *true* clan equivalent weighs 4 tons, and can only be fired 2 at a time? That one?

The dude is crying about large lasers. No one is using larger lasers. I would agree IS erlasers is very good at this point from 700-1100m. Anything under or over is clan.

Gyrok, on 05 May 2017 - 06:41 PM, said:

You do realize that CLPL now has *less* range than a 10% range quirked IS LPL with a range module, right? Without the 10% range quirks, the IS LPL is basically equal range with a range module. The CLPL also does that 15% more damage over a 100% longer duration, and can only be fired 2 at a time versus 3 at a time for the IS.

modules? lol ya because clans dont have modules or anything ?
You have always loved to jump to the quirks card but never think about the mechs without them. Or the 1 ton 5% range target computer on any Clan mech. Clpl is still doing more dps the tiny increase in duration is "some" balance. If it wasn't for this it would have everything.

Gyrok, on 05 May 2017 - 06:41 PM, said:

50% splash damage that is mostly worthless unless you are a terrible pilot running a mech with 4 ppcs and spamming them in hopes of hitting an open component you are unaware exists because you cannot even press the key to target the mech you are shooting?

When you are counting PPCs, the pinpoint is the only thing that matters.

Doesn't matter if its worthless to you. I have finished off tons of mechs with the free splash dmg. I can tell you every player getting hit in the ct and the sides turn yellow too don't think it worthless.

There is reason you dont see IS poptarts with ppc but you see Clan mechs doing it.

[Kael Posavatz]

[shakes head]

PGI has been struggling (and failing) to find 'game balance' for years.

Now they want to put in two major patches that will have significant effects on game balance within months of each other.

I hope this game is playable post-July patch...but I won't hold my breath.

[Athom83]

Kael Posavatz, on 05 May 2017 - 07:51 PM, said:

[shakes head]
PGI has been struggling (and failing) to find 'game balance' for years. Now they want to put in two major patches that will have significant effects on game balance within months of each other. I hope this game is playable post-July patch...but I won't hold my breath.

It should stabilize for the most part in a month or two after the second major update. They need to build data sets from the live server to get a baseline for what the playerbase is doing with the new changes to make further balancing. Quite a difference between lab testing and field testing.