211 replies to this topic

[Black Wyvern]

The math presented in the patch thread for the stats like DPS, DPH, HPS and DPT is completely fubar from table to table, and sometimes entry to entry. Using basic math and understanding of the weapon system dumped into Excel gives a much better outlook on the state of the patch than you guys did.

Mind telling us where those numbers came from? And why that guy isn't fired?

[Zolaz]

Since you wont answer any real questions ... just answer some soft balls from your prepared list.

[Will9761]

MrLT912, on 19 June 2017 - 09:26 PM, said:

HEY Chris and Russ perhaps yall might wanna do that town hall meeting wearing Bright Yellow rain suits...you know the ones they wear on Deadliest catch or like on that Morton salt can we all got in our pantries. Get ready for the back handed QQ I think yall doing a good... i dig the new skill tree and all that....my beef is with yall and this small .00001 balance stuff hey if ya gonna adjust adjust ima almost sure that .o1 reduction doesn't mean a dam thing a regular QP and pardon my French but err frack your so called nerfing of that Night Gyr...cant nerf skill and positioning my friends....what we need is that DAM "LFE" (light fusion engine) like a couple years ago. Night Gyrs are only good because they can torso check and IS mech with its Frackin XL engine. well all know this but that QQ crowd is all over the place with that BS. I say frack sticking to that lore crap and lets bring some real balance so we can have some fun up in this joint...them Lore Foolies can play that Battletch crap when it comes out...*steps down from milk crate

I agree with you and I like some of the changes like the Skill Tree despite some of the toxicity on the forums. Still much more work needs to done and PGI should step up and communicate more often.

Also, try not to sound like a disrespectful scrub towards HBS next time and try to show some respect towards others. I understand that their are toxic entitled brats who do nothing but spew bile. But there are also those who do have legitimate concerns about the game and their own opinions on balance and enjoyment on this game.

This coming from a "Lore Fooly" who likes that "BattleTech crap".

Edited by Will9761, 20 June 2017 - 11:39 AM.

[Ruar]

1. Are there any plans to simplify, make linear, or simply streamline the Skill Tree based on player feedback and the apparent decline in numbers compared to last year at this time?

2. Why are maps not a higher priority? By priority I mean we see a new map quarterly. At the least, why aren't spawn points and objective placement rotated to utilize areas of the map which rarely see combat? Why aren't map boundary's altered to create more options with existing terrain?

3. Are there any plans to change the fundamental mechanics for LRMs so that they can be an effective direct fire weapon without also being overpowered in an indirect fire role? Are MRMs simply going to be the defacto long range missile system with LRMs remaining focused on indirect fire but with multiple counters to prevent them from becoming overpowered?

[Aramuside]

Captain Caveman DE, on 20 June 2017 - 03:33 AM, said:

2 things:

-pls explain the thought process behind the cspl and why you arrive at -2 dmg. just curious.

-more important: care to explain why you don't have a pts with the lasers, but simply roll it out untested? why don't you just pts all the time? I just don't get why you are so afraid of (for you) free testing and data..

No new mechanics to test so no PTS. Its literally just tweaked stats.

linux4eva, on 20 June 2017 - 03:57 AM, said:

Recent PTS occasions didn't work because:
1. it was not 12 vs 12 cause lacking players in the queue.
2. there were events that distracted players from participating.
3. there were no rewards or earned c-bill transfer to live account to motivate people spend their time.

So basically PTS is just a formality to be fulfilled, so there would be less arguments against proposed changes.
Ultimately this is just business and they have their own vision on how to attract player base and where the profit is.
Unfortunately this game is advertised as Battletech and Mechwarrior game that does not fulfil expectations of the fanbase.

I would happily play MWLL if there was a team to play with. Being PUG there is less fun: no matchmaker no in-game VOIP.

Strangely for those of us that did extensively test it... worked for us. For the lazy who didn't not so much.

[-Quiet-]

any new map maybe?
dont you think that a 4 years old game should have more maps?
nice that you keep update the shop and the mechs and al that nice things we can buy. but dont you think that new maps will upgrade the game ?

[Meppoy]

Are you guys gonna dance on the bones of Clan Small Pulses during this Townhall? You know, like: "Balance! Balance everywhere! Wheeeee!"

PGI is making a great game, but there were a bunch of bad decisions. And this one... well, I gonna name it The King of The Bad Choices.

[Nightbird]

Remember, the problem is not the nerfs, the problem is the choice of nerfs and buffs show a lack of understanding of how the game is played.

[Imperius]

What is PGI's focus and direction for MWO?

Examples:

E-Sports
Game to be play with friends.
Solo queue
Faction Warfare

[PraetorGix]

MechaBattler, on 19 June 2017 - 08:05 PM, said:

How about a taste of what the IS has instead? That seems fair to me!

You mean recently buffed weapons, tankier, cooler mechs and a plethora of new toys to play next patch? Yeah, I'd like a taste of that.

Edited by PraetorGix, 20 June 2017 - 02:06 PM.

[Meppoy]

NlGHTBlRD, on 20 June 2017 - 01:51 PM, said:

Remember, the problem is not the nerfs, the problem is the choice of nerfs and buffs show a lack of understanding of how the game is played.

Agree, but this time particularly nerf _is_ a problem. SPL must have more damage than SL, it's one of the basic rules in the game universe. I mean... well, how often we can see CUAC-20 in the game? Quite rare, right? It was so few patches ago, but CUAC-20 was nerfed again with the whole line of UAC's. It was quite strange, isn't it? But, well, bad weapon became worse, screw it, nobody cares. But now PGI made the OP weapon (ok, it was OP, actually) - they make it useless. You need too much slots to use it as a support weapon (and damage is a joke), you can't use it as a primary weapon (damage is a joke), you can jump around bunch of enemies firing everything you can see because of MAGNIFICENT 10% low heat generation - and die like a stupid insect (because your damage is still a joke). Clan light and fast mechs do not have all of this ridiculous surviveability quirks, they can't spent enough of time in the middle of the storm. So, let me say it again, clan small pulses as good as dead. Rules, lore, logic - everything is broken because of imaging BALANCE, SWEET BALANCE, MORE BLOOD TO THE BALANCE GOOD.

I never saw such a bad "balance tuning". Never, in the ~20 online games which I ever played a lot.

[PraetorGix]

Ed Steele, on 19 June 2017 - 11:27 PM, said:

You would have to teach low-tier pugs tactics, it is a player problem, not an LRM problem.

They seem to not know the difference between mechanics imbalance and player skill. They make it really clear with their Night Gyr nerf's explanation. So we can guess we're better off with no "solution" for the LRM problems.

[PraetorGix]

Black Wyvern, on 20 June 2017 - 10:35 AM, said:

The math presented in the patch thread for the stats like DPS, DPH, HPS and DPT is completely fubar from table to table, and sometimes entry to entry. Using basic math and understanding of the weapon system dumped into Excel gives a much better outlook on the state of the patch than you guys did.

Mind telling us where those numbers came from? And why that guy isn't fired?

Because that guy is head of the balance team. So, yeah, basically that's the best they got and this is their best effort.

[Grinster]

Ruar, on 20 June 2017 - 11:39 AM, said:

2. Why are maps not a higher priority? By priority I mean we see a new map quarterly. At the least, why aren't spawn points and objective placement rotated to utilize areas of the map which rarely see combat? Why aren't map boundary's altered to create more options with existing terrain?

Altering map boundaries would be great. What is down that tunnel in River City? Does that railway line really go to Shrek's house?

[Big Tin Man]

1. Any plans to buff lesser used skill tree nodes (read: FIX HOVERJETS)

2. When is the first IS v IS FP conflict happening? We've been waiting MONTHS for someone to flip the switch.

3. Any plans to improve skill tree UI? Copy/paste loadouts, or just click and draw a path? 91 clicks times my 162 mechs is too many clicks.

[stealthraccoon]

Quick play with randomly assigned stock mechs... also reduced gravity on HPG.

[Bud Crue]

Another question:

And yes I am yelling:

WHAT ON EARTH ARE YOU PEOPLE THINKING BY REMOVING THE QUICKDRAW IV-4'S ARMOR QUIRKS? YOU DO REALIZE THAT THE ONLY WAY THAT THING IS PLAYABLE IS TO PLAY TO THE COOLDOWN QUIRKS RIGHT? THAT MEANS IT HAS TO BE ABLE TO FACE TANK EVEN IF FOR JUST A BIT. YET EVEN WITH THE ARMOR QUIRKS IT STILL LOST ITS ARMS (AND ITS MAIN GUNS) AMAZINGLY QUICKLY. SO, IN SUMMARY WTF?

The IV-4 is widely considered by your player community as one of thee worst mechs in the game. Metamechs.com lists it at the bottom of its tier rankings. Yet you just made it worse. I'd like to end this little tirade with an exclamation of "Unbelievable!" but given your conduct of late I have to say instead that this sort of thing is becoming simply "typical".

[SuperFunkTron]

Is there any chance to get some of the old maps put back in to circulation. I'm thinking old forest colony, Terra Therma, an anything else that was fun from back in the day.

[NocturnalBeast]

PraetorGix, on 20 June 2017 - 02:11 PM, said:

They seem to not know the difference between mechanics imbalance and player skill. They make it really clear with their Night Gyr nerf's explanation. So we can guess we're better off with no "solution" for the LRM problems.

From my experiences in MWO, I have come to the conclusion that the biggest problem with LRMs is the ridiculously short cooldown time between salvos, which can be greatly reduced through quirks and skill nodes. A fair fix, in my opinion is that LRMs should have a significantly increased cooldown time between shots, but in return the missiles themselves should have greatly increased velocity. It does not make any sense that a missile that travels slower than a 100kph Mech is able to stay in the air long enough to hit anything other than the ground in front of the Mech that fired it.

Edited by Ed Steele, 20 June 2017 - 03:31 PM.

[Nightbird]

Meppoy, on 20 June 2017 - 02:07 PM, said:

Agree, but this time particularly nerf _is_ a problem. SPL must have more damage than SL, it's one of the basic rules in the game universe.

C-SPL was over performing, but nerfing this much damage without making people angry takes common sense. For example, you nerf the damage by 33% from 6 to 4, but you reduce the heat to 2 (because they stated Pulse lasers have better DPH than regular lasers, and also this is the original DPH), you reduce the cooldown by 33% to maintain the DPS of 2, and you reduce the duration by 33%. Then and only then, can they claim they're changing this to a DPS weapon.

Right now, C-SPLs have lower DPS (taking into consideration more weight=fewer heatsinks), lower range, lower alpha damage, and twice the weight of ERSLs. An idiotic move that makes many light mechs instantly useless. (P.S. coulda done the same to IS SLS)

Edited by NlGHTBlRD, 20 June 2017 - 03:36 PM.