60 replies to this topic

[Angel of Annihilation]

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.

See I don't think this is the case either. Light can do so much more than be Ninja Backstabbers and it they are reduced to this, then it is the players who are at fault, not the game mechanics.

The reason I say this is because I run quite a few light mechs contrary to the meta "Must go faster" builds that are so common and I can easily put up numbers with them comparable to what I can in my many of my mediums, heavies and even assault mechs. 400-500 damage, 2-3 Kills per match, a few solo kills, many KMDDs, etc, are all very common with these lights I run and whats more they typically earn more C-bills than any other weight class because I can take advantage of tons of Protected Lights, Flanking, etc while playing these mechs and builds.

So, no, I don't believe that it is broken game mechanics that hold light mechs back, rather it is a majority of players that think there is only one "Correct" way to play a light mech that is holding them back.

Deathlike, on 19 June 2017 - 03:21 PM, said:

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.

Then you have a broken skill tree. A player shouldn't have to invest points in laser duration nodes just to make the weapon tolerable to use in game. I mean the whole point of the skill tree was that it gives us players options right? As soon as they make something required in the skill tree, then the choices go away.

[Jackal Noble]

Hey look another thread DERAAAAAIIIILLLL
Better call in the cleanup crew.

The 1.25 sec on cermeds seems like it might straight-up suck donkeys. I say that as someone who uses them to fill out my builds not rely on them. But still. , None of that craptastic cookie cutter lpl/cermed vomit garbage that got us here in the first place. My beef with some of this is with the comptards of the community that run cliche uninspiring copy pastas.

Screw it, I hope by the time this is all said and done I hope that in order to fire the lasers on my left torso I have to execute a 16 button combo perfectly and in time.

[Deathlike]

Viktor Drake, on 19 June 2017 - 03:31 PM, said:

Then you have a broken skill tree. A player shouldn't have to invest points in laser duration nodes just to make the weapon tolerable to use in game. I mean the whole point of the skill tree was that it gives us players options right? As soon as they make something required in the skill tree, then the choices go away.

Welcome to MWO.

[Navid A1]

Chris, don't you think a damage reduction to 5 was a more sensible way to approach C-SPL?
Drastic changes usually are not a good way to find balance.

[Y E O N N E]

Viktor Drake, on 19 June 2017 - 03:31 PM, said:

Then you have a broken skill tree. A player shouldn't have to invest points in laser duration nodes just to make the weapon tolerable to use in game. I mean the whole point of the skill tree was that it gives us players options right? As soon as they make something required in the skill tree, then the choices go away.

Skill tree was always broken, because every node is a straight upgrade from base and not skewing it one way at the expense of others.

And laser duration is particularly egregious. Anybody playing to win with laser-centric builds is going to take the duration nodes, making many lasers a bit too good when the full set is active (i.e. isML and isLL down to 0.77s and 0.85s is a little much, as is cERML down to 1.035). And not only that, but being able to reduce laser burn just muddies the distinction between standard and pulse lasers or standard and ER lasers, especially on the IS side of things. IMHO, laser duration nodes should be removed from the skill tree entirely.

[Gyrok]

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.

IS ERML = 360m effective 720m max range

CERML = 405 effective 688m max range

IS ERSL = 180m effective range 360m max range

CERSL = 200m effective range 340m max range

[Pjwned]

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

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.

The problem is that PGI either doesn't understand how to accomplish what they want (far more likely) or they just intentionally make asinine changes to weapons to pretend they're accomplishing anything when they're actually not.

The changes to small lasers completely miss the mark, the changes to large lasers are all over the place and make little sense, ER PPC projectiles are still way too slow to reliably hit their target at optimal range without extensive velocity boosts from other sources which is stupid, and the LRM5 heat nerf is just dumb when they were already hot enough when also considering the asinine ghost heat system and the fact that they're already less heat efficient than bigger launchers; the only passable upcoming changes are for medium lasers, which could still be better, and the somewhat questionable AMS buff.

If the idea is to make room for new upcoming tech then it doesn't make sense to nerf already bad weapon systems and leave other bad weapon systems to still be bad, because the result will just be people dropping the nerfed weapons and continuing to not use bad weapons that weren't fixed, rather than having a balanced assortment of weapons with valid pros & cons.

[cazidin]

Am I the only one who noticed that most of these duration nerfs basically bring them back to pre-skill tree levels with laser duration skills?

[Appogee]

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.

Kudos for a level-headed response, good sir.

Navid A1, on 19 June 2017 - 04:43 PM, said:

Chris, don't you think a damage reduction to 5 was a more sensible way to approach C-SPL?
Drastic changes usually are not a good way to find balance.

Navid has a good point, don't you think, Chris?

[Y E O N N E]

cazidin, on 20 June 2017 - 06:16 AM, said:

Am I the only one who noticed that most of these duration nerfs basically bring them back to pre-skill tree levels with laser duration skills?

No, and I think that is the wrong way to go about it. The larger the starting value, the bigger the gap in performance between the haves and have-nots, the muddier the balance gets.

[R Valentine]

It's been said multiple times, it was a terrible idea to put laser duration in the skill tree. Now PGI has to "fix" it by increasing laser duration. Uhm, what was the purpose then? You've now forced us to buy laser duration skills just to get back what we had. That's a stupid, stupid, stupid system and the whole "choice" idea you had implementing the damn thing just went out the window. If laser duration balance really suffered from the ST, then remove the laser duration nodes and replace them with something else. Don't nerf lasers to fix the skill tree. You have it backwards.

[Shifty McSwift]

Kiran Yagami, on 20 June 2017 - 06:26 AM, said:

It's been said multiple times, it was a terrible idea to put laser duration in the skill tree. Now PGI has to "fix" it by increasing laser duration. Uhm, what was the purpose then? You've now forced us to buy laser duration skills just to get back what we had. That's a stupid, stupid, stupid system and the whole "choice" idea you had implementing the damn thing just went out the window. If laser duration balance really suffered from the ST, then remove the laser duration nodes and replace them with something else. Don't nerf lasers to fix the skill tree. You have it backwards.

I am not sure which patch notes you were reading but most laser durations are getting lower, which sensibly comes with a damage reduction in most cases.

[R Valentine]

Shifty McSwift, on 20 June 2017 - 06:31 AM, said:

I am not sure which patch notes you were reading but most laser durations are getting lower, which sensibly comes with a damage reduction in most cases.

Other way around. The damage was lowered to nerf said lasers, so duration was buffed to compensate. The only exceptions were ERLL and cERLL, and the cERLL was so long it wasn't even viable. It still probably won't be given that it's still way too long. That had to be reduced on principle.

[Y E O N N E]

Shifty McSwift, on 20 June 2017 - 06:31 AM, said:

I am not sure which patch notes you were reading but most laser durations are getting lower, which sensibly comes with a damage reduction in most cases.

Look at the burn-time DPS. It gets lower across the board with the exception of ERLL on both sides.

I mean, I am not super broken up over the ERML, because now it shares an almost identical value to the isML, but I would have gone the other way and buffed the isML to 0.82s...if it weren't for the skill tree mucking that up (would be OP AF to shave 15% off of that).

[Y E O N N E]

Kiran Yagami, on 20 June 2017 - 06:38 AM, said:

Other way around. The damage was lowered to nerf said lasers, so duration was buffed to compensate. The only exceptions were ERLL and cERLL, and the cERLL was so long it wasn't even viable. It still probably won't be given that it's still way too long. That had to be reduced on principle.

Both ERLLs in their stock form, as of now before the patch, burn too long to be viable. They both have the same burn-time DPS (IS 7.20 vs Clan 7.33), and even worse the IS version has a 65 meter deficit on top.

[TKSax]

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.

Not sure why Chris did not answer this he was not a marketing executive at pgi before he started working on balance. Since I knew Chris and played with Chrs before he worked at pgi I would like to see where he has went on record saying he does not play much and handled mech pack sales. I see Chris playing on his non pgi account quite a bit. He has around 50 matches in season 12 and over a 100 in season 11.

[cazidin]

TKSax, on 20 June 2017 - 06:51 AM, said:

Not sure why Chris did not answer this he was not a marketing executive at pgi before he started working on balance. Since I knew Chris and played with Chrs before he worked at pgi I would like to see where he has went on record saying he does not play much and handled mech pack sales. I see Chris playing on his non pgi account quite a bit. He has around 50 matches in season 12 and over a 100 in season 11.

Perhaps I misunderstood what he said and I'm honestly a bit too lazy to go and find the quote again but it was stated somewhere in his last thread that warned of us of the upcoming changes. Also. Are you sure that's an alt of his? I believe that you played with him but 50 matches does seem small. Of course, he has a job and a time-demanding one so that seems reasonable.

[TKSax]

cazidin, on 20 June 2017 - 06:54 AM, said:

Perhaps I misunderstood what he said and I'm honestly a bit too lazy to go and find the quote again but it was stated somewhere in his last thread that warned of us of the upcoming changes. Also. Are you sure that's an alt of his? I believe that you played with him but 50 matches does seem small. Of course, he has a job and a time-demanding one so that seems reasonable.

Yes 100% sure. I have known Chris for over 3 years we used to be i the same unit and he is a founder with mwo and a long time battletech lover. He worked at other gaming companies before doing balance work at PGI.

Edited by TKSax, 20 June 2017 - 07:00 AM.

[PhoenixFire55]

TKSax, on 20 June 2017 - 06:58 AM, said:

Yes 100% sure. I have known Chris for over 3 years we used to be i the same unit and he is a founder with mwo and a long time battletech lover. He worked at other gaming companies before doing balance work at PGI.

Then it is only a shame he got suckered into PGI's endless sea of lies and torpor.

[Grus]

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.

so in the meantime we will be playing as IS with clan skins... thanks.