60 replies to this topic

[Felicitatem Parco]

Cementi, on 19 June 2017 - 08:01 AM, said:

I would take a day off work to read the forums on the day they make that announcement. It would be glorious.

A heat scale that caused progressive reductions in mobility, sensor range, and accuracy as you remain in red levels of heat?
That may be the one major game mechanic change that almost nobody would complain about...

[STEF_]

Vellron2005, on 19 June 2017 - 01:00 AM, said:

Everybody going bananas over the laser nerfs needs to remember - heavy lasers are coming.. they have to put them somewhere in the middle..

They are supposed to do more damage for more heat, so a SPL used to do 6 damage, not Heavy Small Laser will do 6 damage.. but for more heat..

I've already written the same many times: good new tech incoming.
BUT 80% of forumwarriors have:
1) love for low TTK and powercreep
2) functional illiteracy

Edited by Stefka Kerensky, 19 June 2017 - 08:09 AM.

[cazidin]

Chris Lowrey, on 19 June 2017 - 08:01 AM, said:

You guys can ask, but I can't guarantee that I will get around to answering. Kinda have a lot on my plate already for the next few days.

Best venue to ask questions at this time would either be when I'm streaming a bit of the new Patch with NGNG or with the upcoming Townhall that Russ might bring me into. Even if I'm not in the townhall, I should still be in chat and can answer questions then.

Until then though I can't guarantee much. Have to focus on getting other stuff done right now.

Thanks.

OK. First. How're you?

Second. Why was the IS Large Laser and C-ER Med nerfed? I don't know if you're permitted to expand upon the data, but... I honestly just want to know why the IS LL. I know you have a spreadsheet and trust that but this is an underperforming weapon from my personal experience. Does that count for much? Probably not.

Third. Just a heads-up. Expect more Tweets. You're the new Balance Guy. I will nickname you Balance Overlord or Balance Master in the months to come depending on what happens, but just know that I think you're a cool guy regardless.

Fourth. What about Paul? Does he have a new position?

Fifth. Have you tried Iced Coffee?

Sixth. Can you elaborate on any of the other balance changes? I know this may be asking a lot, and really I appreciate anything but I'd like to hopefully understand the why better. You're new, and I hope that we do honestly see more iterative changes but we've come to expect stagnant balance for a few months, then a big shift.

Edited by cazidin, 19 June 2017 - 08:16 AM.

[MechaBattler]

Chris Lowrey, on 19 June 2017 - 07:54 AM, said:

There really is no reason to spam my Twitter feed unless you want to. I read the forums as well, and have been taking notes on all the feedback from the weekend.

We'll see how predictions stack up to reality once the patch drops and if anything isn't working out the way we want them to they will be iterated upon in future patches.

Just block em if they spam. Don't give in to terrorists. You seem pretty professional and I like that. So don't give in to their strong arming ways.

[ShadeofHades]

Chris, I have to ask, after reading the patch notes...hopefully you can give some answer.

There was a stated intent around of feel/tradeoff around each kind of laser, and yet the CSPL specifically contradicts it:

Patch Notes said:

Pulse Lasers
• Trades overall Range for higher DPS and shorter Duration, providing highly-focused burst DPS over multiple shots.
• Possess the most favorable Cooldown, Duration, and Damage per Heat (DPH) ratio out of all of the Lasers, but runs at the highest HPS with sustained fire.

And yet DPH for each other small laser is 1.76/1.67/1.75, compared with the CSPL and lowest DPH of 1.48?

(Edited to clean up color code tags)

Edited by ShadeofHades, 19 June 2017 - 11:19 AM.

[Deathlike]

Chris Lowrey, on 19 June 2017 - 07:54 AM, said:

There really is no reason to spam my Twitter feed unless you want to. I read the forums as well, and have been taking notes on all the feedback from the weekend.

We'll see how predictions stack up to reality once the patch drops and if anything isn't working out the way we want them to they will be iterated upon in future patches.

That word.



I'm going to hold you to that word.

[Chris Lowrey]

cazidin, on 19 June 2017 - 08:14 AM, said:

Thanks. OK. First. How're you?

Second. Why was the IS Large Laser and C-ER Med nerfed? I don't know if you're permitted to expand upon the data, but... I honestly just want to know why the IS LL. I know you have a spreadsheet and trust that but this is an underperforming weapon from my personal experience. Does that count for much? Probably not.

Third. Just a heads-up. Expect more Tweets. You're the new Balance Guy. I will nickname you Balance Overlord or Balance Master in the months to come depending on what happens, but just know that I think you're a cool guy regardless.

Fourth. What about Paul? Does he have a new position?

Fifth. Have you tried Iced Coffee?

Sixth. Can you elaborate on any of the other balance changes? I know this may be asking a lot, and really I appreciate anything but I'd like to hopefully understand the why better. You're new, and I hope that we do honestly see more iterative changes but we've come to expect stagnant balance for a few months, then a big shift.

1.) Busy.

2.) The C-ER Medium changes are mostly about bringing them closer into alignment with both other Inner Sphere energy weapons, and have a bit more give and take within the clan weapon lineup given the naturally high punch the weapons are known for. For the IS-LL, that will be a good question for a stream or podcast, as this was something where there where multiple factors that lead to the change coming from where we wanted to position the IS-LL looking at the full weapon lineup. Its something that I can't really explain in a timely manner without making this a huge forum post. But overall, we are keeping an eye on it.

3.) Comes with the job. If I had an issue with it, I wouldn't be working on balance in the first place.

4.) No. Paul is still the Lead Designer. I'm just another designer on the team.

5.) Yes.

6.) We try to be as forward as we can in the Patch notes, and I try to make myself available in Patch day streams in case any lingering questions crop up. Beyond that I can clear something up if there is a misconception floating around, but overall forums are typically a poor venue to discuss changes for me because whatever I throw out needs to be concise enough that I can walk away from a post and focus on my actual work. Which not only takes time to type up, but also typically comes with an expectation of follow up answers that I simply can't guarantee. Podcasts and streams are a better venue to discuss those kinds of things because if there is any confusion about an answer, Stream chat can let the moderators know that we need to elaborate more on something.

[Gyrok]

Chris Lowrey, on 19 June 2017 - 12:21 PM, said:

1.) Busy.

2.) The C-ER Medium changes are mostly about bringing them closer into alignment with both other Inner Sphere energy weapons, and have a bit more give and take within the clan weapon lineup given the naturally high punch the weapons are known for. For the IS-LL, that will be a good question for a stream or podcast, as this was something where there where multiple factors that lead to the change coming from where we wanted to position the IS-LL looking at the full weapon lineup. Its something that I can't really explain in a timely manner without making this a huge forum post. But overall, we are keeping an eye on it.

3.) Comes with the job. If I had an issue with it, I wouldn't be working on balance in the first place.

4.) No. Paul is still the Lead Designer. I'm just another designer on the team.

5.) Yes.

6.) We try to be as forward as we can in the Patch notes, and I try to make myself available in Patch day streams in case any lingering questions crop up. Beyond that I can clear something up if there is a misconception floating around, but overall forums are typically a poor venue to discuss changes for me because whatever I throw out needs to be concise enough that I can walk away from a post and focus on my actual work. Which not only takes time to type up, but also typically comes with an expectation of follow up answers that I simply can't guarantee. Podcasts and streams are a better venue to discuss those kinds of things because if there is any confusion about an answer, Stream chat can let the moderators know that we need to elaborate more on something.

Since clans are supposed to have superior range, can we get double fall off back on small and medium class lasers? With IS ER lasers coming...that ever so tiny range advantage is going to evaporate when the new tech hits.

Thanks for answering.

[Dr Mlem]

Questions:

1. Is the Small laser nerfs to make room for the new tech coming? Certain mechs like Gargoyle will be heavily hit by these changes. Up to including light mechs.

2. Are you happy with Timberwolf and Spirit Bear mobility? Nothing was done about such a common complaint. There is a massive quality of life gap between the 90 to 100 tonners. They feel sluggish, even with full mobility spec. Due to how the mobility tree is set up, Assaults see very little improvement if they have low base mobility stats.

3. Do you see the new tech bridging the gap between IS and Clan, and if there will be equal tonnage again?

[cazidin]

Chris Lowrey, on 19 June 2017 - 12:21 PM, said:

1.) Busy.

2.) The C-ER Medium changes are mostly about bringing them closer into alignment with both other Inner Sphere energy weapons, and have a bit more give and take within the clan weapon lineup given the naturally high punch the weapons are known for. For the IS-LL, that will be a good question for a stream or podcast, as this was something where there where multiple factors that lead to the change coming from where we wanted to position the IS-LL looking at the full weapon lineup. Its something that I can't really explain in a timely manner without making this a huge forum post. But overall, we are keeping an eye on it.

3.) Comes with the job. If I had an issue with it, I wouldn't be working on balance in the first place.

4.) No. Paul is still the Lead Designer. I'm just another designer on the team.

5.) Yes.

6.) We try to be as forward as we can in the Patch notes, and I try to make myself available in Patch day streams in case any lingering questions crop up. Beyond that I can clear something up if there is a misconception floating around, but overall forums are typically a poor venue to discuss changes for me because whatever I throw out needs to be concise enough that I can walk away from a post and focus on my actual work. Which not only takes time to type up, but also typically comes with an expectation of follow up answers that I simply can't guarantee. Podcasts and streams are a better venue to discuss those kinds of things because if there is any confusion about an answer, Stream chat can let the moderators know that we need to elaborate more on something.

Alright, Chris, I'll trust you with the LL. I, personally, think the duration nerf was unwise but if this could be changed? Np. I'll try this out and see how things go.

Thank you very much. I know that this may perhaps seem like a small gesture to you but it's something that I think a few of us, I can't speak for the majority, but just a few of us would like more open communication like this.

In return for your kind gesture, I offer one myself.

BY THE POWER VESTED IN ME, BY MYSELF, AS EMPEROR CAZIDIN OF THE WORD OF CAZIDIN I HEREBY DUB THEE...

BALANCE MASTER. WORTHY SUCCESSOR TO PAUL! /cue ominous music and pointing.

You've earned your shot, Chris. Make it a good one!

*Also. Since you're new-ish to the company and maybe new to the forums, I'm the resident joke-poster. If you see a thread created by me it's most often intended in humor or to raise a serious idea. Usually both.

Edited by cazidin, 19 June 2017 - 02:09 PM.

[Mister Blastman]

Tweet sent.



I feel dirty now. I never touch that filthy Twitter.

[Alan Davion]

Gyrok, on 19 June 2017 - 12:27 PM, said:

Since clans are supposed to have superior range, can we get double fall off back on small and medium class lasers? With IS ER lasers coming...that ever so tiny range advantage is going to evaporate when the new tech hits.

Thanks for answering.

I think you and I both know IS ER Small and Medium Lasers are going to be garbage compared to the Clan ERs, so don't ask for more Clan power creep. Even without double range (optimum range/maximum range), Clan ERs would still more than likely out range IS ERs by at least 50% or better.

[JohnnyWayne]

While we are at it and ask pointless questions (as the patch is gonig live if we want or not with the current implementation) do you really think it is neseccary to bat the marauder IIC down on the agility level of the kodiak? I mean, it is 85 tons compared to 100 tons. Seems off.

Similar things about the agility of the night gyr. I mean, what is the end of this? People can spawn and if someone runs into the crosshair they can shoot - bot no movement otherwise?

Alan Davion, on 19 June 2017 - 02:16 PM, said:

I think you and I both know IS ER Small and Medium Lasers are going to be garbage compared to the Clan ERs, so don't ask for more Clan power creep. Even without double range (optimum range/maximum range), Clan ERs would still more than likely out range IS ERs by at least 50% or better.

Any form of light mech are going to be garbage - even more than before. Lights taking a hit again whatever side they are on, not happy.

Edited by JohnnyWayne, 19 June 2017 - 02:33 PM.

[Angel of Annihilation]

cazidin, on 19 June 2017 - 07:36 AM, said:

I really don't think that's fair to the man. I don't agree with the recent changes but he seems like a nice guy. For whatever reason, PGI has made their Marketing Executive put in charge of balance. He went on record saying that he doesn't play much, if at all, had zero input before, and just handled the mechpack sales.

Which means he is dramatically unqualified to balance this game. He needs to play about 5000 matches to have any sort of idea what his changes actually mean to game play and him saying he doesn't play much means he is clueless. You can't balance this game by using numbers, it doesn't work.

Take the 1.25 upcoming beam duration on the C-ER ML. By the numbers it might make sense but if you haven't played much before you have zero understanding what it means to have a beam duration of 1.25. For example:

1. Extended Face Time with the enemy. Sure the weapon might be balanced but now I am taking more damage than I did before. Was this taken into account when the change was made?

2. Spread damage - Ok great I am doing X amount damage to an enemy but how much of that damage is actually being concentrated where I want it rather than spread all over the mech as I try to hold my beam on target. Was the fact that I will now have a more difficult time applying that damage in a decisive manner even considered in the balance equations?

3. Friendly fire - Yep it is a major factor. Give a weapon a beam duration of 1.25 and your going to have a hell of alot more friendly fire as you teammates accidentally cross the beam that is burning forever. Was this also taken into account when the balancing decision was made?

There are probably at least a 1/2 dozen other factors I am not thinking about now that increasing the duration on the C ERML is going to effect and it is not likely one of them can be seen or understood just by looking at a spreadsheet listing off a bunch of numbers. Nope, you have to actually play the game to understand how this all factors in.

No offense to Chris, I am sure he is a great guy, but if he isn't a fan of the game who is playing each and every day, he isn't even remotely qualified to be balancing this.

Edited by Viktor Drake, 19 June 2017 - 02:51 PM.

[Alan Davion]

JohnnyWayne, on 19 June 2017 - 02:28 PM, said:

Any form of light mech are going to be garbage - even more than before. Lights taking a hit again whatever side they are on, not happy.

And that's a problem of core game mechanics, not just specific weapons. Something PGI as a whole would have a hard time fixing even if they stopped work on literally everything else.

There's too many factors at work here and light mechs just got the short end of the stick.

Just one example is the pin point perfect accuracy the game allows. Because of this, light mechs were adapted into ninja backstabbers because people started front loading 90% of their armor.

Where as with the table top random dice hit location, if a light mech did manage to get behind another mech, they'd more than likely have a much harder time ninja backstabbing because they wouldn't be able to dump all their damage into a single component.

Not to mention another mech on table top would likely have more armor on their back than mechs do here in MWO. Even with doubled armor values.

What do the best mech builds have for back armor in MWO thanks to the front loading of armor? My guess would be no more than about 12 points, and that's probably on the big 100 tonners. Most of those mechs on Table Top have probably about 14 points at minimum.

The real problem is, as I said, the core game mechanics. The players just exacerbated them to an absurd degree.

[Angel of Annihilation]

Alan Davion, on 19 June 2017 - 02:55 PM, said:

And that's a problem of core game mechanics, not just specific weapons. Something PGI as a whole would have a hard time fixing even if they stopped work on literally everything else.

There's too many factors at work here and light mechs just got the short end of the stick.

Just one example is the pin point perfect accuracy the game allows. Because of this, light mechs were adapted into ninja backstabbers because people started front loading 90% of their armor.

Where as with the table top random dice hit location, if a light mech did manage to get behind another mech, they'd more than likely have a much harder time ninja backstabbing because they wouldn't be able to dump all their damage into a single component.

Not to mention another mech on table top would likely have more armor on their back than mechs do here in MWO. Even with doubled armor values.

What do the best mech builds have for back armor in MWO thanks to the front loading of armor? My guess would be no more than about 12 points, and that's probably on the big 100 tonners. Most of those mechs on Table Top have probably about 14 points at minimum.

The real problem is, as I said, the core game mechanics. The players just exacerbated them to an absurd degree.

My thing is that I don't see there being a problem with lights being Ninja Backstabbers because quite frankly it is a fairly high risk maneuver if you ask me. To do this in a light you either had to really expend alot of effort to stalk and single out your prey or move in for a bold, high risk run right under the feet of several enemy mechs. It also gives a light mech a way to compete against an Assault mech. Reducing the light mechs capability to do this just seems silly.

[Alan Davion]

Viktor Drake, on 19 June 2017 - 03:04 PM, said:

My thing is that I don't see there being a problem with lights being Ninja Backstabbers because quite frankly it is a fairly high risk maneuver if you ask me. To do this in a light you either had to really expend alot of effort to stalk and single out your prey or move in for a bold, high risk run right under the feet of several enemy mechs. It also gives a light mech a way to compete against an Assault mech. Reducing the light mechs capability to do this just seems silly.

I never said lights being ninja backstabbers was a bad thing, only that it was the nature of the core game mechanics being so badly broken that it required light mechs to become ninja backstabbers.

[Angel of Annihilation]

Chris Lowrey, on 19 June 2017 - 12:21 PM, said:

1.) Busy.

2.) The C-ER Medium changes are mostly about bringing them closer into alignment with both other Inner Sphere energy weapons, and have a bit more give and take within the clan weapon lineup given the naturally high punch the weapons are known for. For the IS-LL, that will be a good question for a stream or podcast, as this was something where there where multiple factors that lead to the change coming from where we wanted to position the IS-LL looking at the full weapon lineup. Its something that I can't really explain in a timely manner without making this a huge forum post. But overall, we are keeping an eye on it.

3.) Comes with the job. If I had an issue with it, I wouldn't be working on balance in the first place.

4.) No. Paul is still the Lead Designer. I'm just another designer on the team.

5.) Yes.

6.) We try to be as forward as we can in the Patch notes, and I try to make myself available in Patch day streams in case any lingering questions crop up. Beyond that I can clear something up if there is a misconception floating around, but overall forums are typically a poor venue to discuss changes for me because whatever I throw out needs to be concise enough that I can walk away from a post and focus on my actual work. Which not only takes time to type up, but also typically comes with an expectation of follow up answers that I simply can't guarantee. Podcasts and streams are a better venue to discuss those kinds of things because if there is any confusion about an answer, Stream chat can let the moderators know that we need to elaborate more on something.

My question to you is why the 1.25 second beam duration on the C-ER ML. Do you really understand what this means in terms of how the game is played? I mean people stopped using the C-ER LL when they hit 1.25 beam duration because to put it mildly, its absurd to have to try to hold a beam on target for 1.25 second let alone the current 1.5 seconds. Hell I just recently started using C-ER LLs on my Supernovas and I think I have already been flagged for excessive team damage like 5-6 times in maybe 40 matches because the beam duration is so long, my teammates end up running through them over and over again.

Also so many other factors come into play like the longer beam duration meaning I have to be exposed longer and will end up taking more damage. I think this one is pretty important because if your just looking at DPS or HPS or whatever and not considering that the mechs mounting this weapons are going to take more damage due to the duration, then you aren't really creating balance, rather your creating a different problem.

So ok fine, I can see the cooldown being nerfed or even the damage being nerfed if you needed to reign in the DPS a bit but beam duration is something that has a huge cascading effect across so many different things.

Finally your forgetting one major part of the balance equation. You haven't answered if the change leaves the weapon still fun to use. Yes this is important because it isn't fun to have to use C-ER LL with a 1.5 beam duration and it is not going to be fun to use probably the most common and important weapon in the Clan Arsenal with a 1.25 duration. Drop the damage to 6.5 or even 6 but please revert beam duration back down to something that is actually usable and fun in game.

[Deathlike]

Viktor Drake, on 19 June 2017 - 03:18 PM, said:

My question to you is why the 1.25 second beam duration on the C-ER ML. Do you really understand what this means in terms of how the game is played? I mean people stopped using the C-ER LL when they hit 1.25 beam duration because to put it mildly, its absurd to have to try to hold a beam on target for 1.25 second let alone the current 1.5 seconds. Hell I just recently started using C-ER LLs on my Supernovas and I think I have already been flagged for excessive team damage like 5-6 times in maybe 40 matches because the beam duration is so long, my teammates end up running through them over and over again.

Also so many other factors come into play like the longer beam duration meaning I have to be exposed longer and will end up taking more damage. I think this one is pretty important because if your just looking at DPS or HPS or whatever and not considering that the mechs mounting this weapons are going to take more damage due to the duration, then you aren't really creating balance, rather your creating a different problem.

So ok fine, I can see the cooldown being nerfed or even the damage being nerfed if you needed to reign in the DPS a bit but beam duration is something that has a huge cascading effect across so many different things.

Finally your forgetting one major part of the balance equation. You haven't answered if the change leaves the weapon still fun to use. Yes this is important because it isn't fun to have to use C-ER LL with a 1.5 beam duration and it is not going to be fun to use probably the most common and important weapon in the Clan Arsenal with a 1.25 duration. Drop the damage to 6.5 or even 6 but please revert beam duration back down to something that is actually usable and fun in game.

I hate to tell you, but most of the duration increases on most of the laser changes is specifically to "counter" the effect of the skill tree (aka duration nodes virtually mandatory) and not much else.

[Felicitatem Parco]

Alan Davion, on 19 June 2017 - 03:18 PM, said:

I never said lights being ninja backstabbers was a bad thing, only that it was the nature of the core game mechanics being so badly broken that it required light mechs to become ninja backstabbers.

Yeah, as if "fixed" mechanics would have Commandos charging head-on into Assault Mechs. That would sure be balanced, right.