34 replies to this topic

[MischiefSC]

When poptarting was king the alpha usually capped at 35 pts. Heavies and assaults with a 35pt alpha. Some assaults has 40, like the 4 ppc stalker. For a variety of reasons the weapons and loadouts to get above that were flat out inferior. The 2xac20 Boomjag was considered game breaking. It's why ghost heat was created.

Now 35 pts is what you'd see on 35 tonners. Any serious medium or above is at 40+. Most heavies are over 50, many in the 70+ range. Same with assaults.

Mounts are higher, mobility got steadily buffed until assaults with big engines were more nimble than many heavies. Weapons mostly got cooler, though some ranges were reduced. Modules arrived and 15% cooldown/range bonuses to primary weapons became the norm so we were putting those 70pt alphas out faster.

We all got used to it while we shelved most all of the older mechs. Then we realized that we've painted ourselves into a corner of steadily spiraling up firepower and mobility.

So, yeah. It's time for a bunch of nerfs. CSPL was broke. Now it's about as useful as ISSpl has been. Csmls are still a 1/2 ton medium and cermls are only slightly less than a 1 ton, 1 slot large laser. Assault mechs are significantly less mobile than heavies. Lights are too big though, because volumetric symetry doesn't work or make sense on man-like objects - it's why a toddler isn't proportioned like an adult.

However, the reality is we are due for a LOT of nerfs. Overdue. In that process some stuff is going to get nerfed too hard. Something else will fit in that slot though, we just need to adapt a bit. At least you can be certain it'll change again.

The best thing to help I can think of is changes to the skill tree. Condense the survival and mobility trees a bit to let people lean a bit more into them, which directly increases both fun and survivability.

Make the survival and mobility nodes a flat value by tonnage - this makes investing in both less reliant on existing stats (no point in spending mobility nodes on a Dire or KDK currently) and more about making the mech personalized to what you want. Currently you want to stack mobility on lights and survival on assaults because the converse gives less return for investment - which dilutes the value of the skill tree.

There's a few things that can be done to tweak things to add that "fun" back in without the power creep.

Nerfs are not bad. They're what keeps older mechs/equipment relevant and the meta wider. At least we've got a selection of PPFLD, laservomit, srm brawler and ballistic boats available and viable. Balance is always a moving target but both the complaints over nerfs in general and about CSPLs needs a reality check.

A gamer can not live by buffs alone.

Edited by MischiefSC, 21 June 2017 - 11:23 AM.

[cazidin]

But PGI nerfed <insert thing I like here> and not <insert thing that killed me here>!

Also LRMS OP still!

[Deathlike]

Actually, I disagree somewhat.

CSPL probably needed a nerf. That's not in dispute.

The problem really is that buffs need to exist moreso for the IS... as when you have plenty of Clan mechs that need no quirks/buffs to be functional, that means either Clans as a whole need to be nerfed (it's mostly in the tech, whether it is Clan XL or weapon stats compared to the IS equivalent) or that the IS needs to be buffed (there are not many goto IS heavies outside of a Grasshopper-5P, and even that got nerfed) or something in between.

It's not straight up and clear cut, but when diversity is limited to the best and "OK", there's too many mech chassis that have been left behind in this raw deal.

[Mister Blastman]

I'll just leave this thread with this post:

https://mwomercs.com...ost__p__5792966

Sums things up.

[MischiefSC]

Deathlike, on 21 June 2017 - 11:29 AM, said:

Actually, I disagree somewhat.

CSPL probably needed a nerf. That's not in dispute.

The problem really is that buffs need to exist moreso for the IS... as when you have plenty of Clan mechs that need no quirks/buffs to be functional, that means either Clans as a whole need to be nerfed (it's mostly in the tech, whether it is Clan XL or weapon stats compared to the IS equivalent) or that the IS needs to be buffed (there are not many goto IS heavies outside of a Grasshopper-5P, and even that got nerfed) or something in between.

It's not straight up and clear cut, but when diversity is limited to the best and &quot;OK&quot;, there's too many mech chassis that have been left behind in this raw deal.

Hence why I recommend decoupling (see what I did there?) Mobility and structure nodes from % and make it flat values by tonnage, so structure buffs for the Banshee are worth the same as any mech with existing structure/armor buffs. That makes doing things like spending points in mobility for a Spirit Bear worthwhile.

Which is what we really want, right? Good justification for mechs with great firepower to spend less on firepower and more on mobility so they self-balance with more agile but worse hardpoint mechs.

Retaining their unique identity but balancing in with the others. Sure, there's some mechs that need help (QD, was famous for less time than Nicklebacks last song) and that's not going to change.

Most of my 200 mechs are viable right now. Hell, 5mpls on my K9 performs solidly. I haven't had that big a percent of my mechs viable in a long time.

[MischiefSC]

Mister Blastman, on 21 June 2017 - 11:46 AM, said:

I'll just leave this thread with this post:

https://mwomercs.com...ost__p__5792966

Sums things up.

Pfft. LFE, baby. Each worth as much as 200-300 heavy smalls, if not more than.

Module refund giveth, power creep new tech taketh away.

[Deathlike]

MischiefSC, on 21 June 2017 - 11:51 AM, said:

Hence why I recommend decoupling (see what I did there?) Mobility and structure nodes from % and make it flat values by tonnage, so structure buffs for the Banshee are worth the same as any mech with existing structure/armor buffs. That makes doing things like spending points in mobility for a Spirit Bear worthwhile.

Which is what we really want, right? Good justification for mechs with great firepower to spend less on firepower and more on mobility so they self-balance with more agile but worse hardpoint mechs.

Retaining their unique identity but balancing in with the others. Sure, there's some mechs that need help (QD, was famous for less time than Nicklebacks last song) and that's not going to change.

Most of my 200 mechs are viable right now. Hell, 5mpls on my K9 performs solidly. I haven't had that big a percent of my mechs viable in a long time.

It's pointless. I've skilled only a small fraction of my mechs, and don't really want to play.

You see, if the weapon value changes weren't obvious, most lasers had their duration adjusted because of the skill tree. There's a few exceptions, but even a .1s duration increase for those lasers that apply are literally a microcosm of the skill tree's existence through adjustments (aka, it's generally virtually mandatory to get duration nodes or get rekt).

So, if you wanted things done properly, you'd have to properly identify the purpose of what you're trying to accomplish and have a plan... instead of pie in the sky changes that make generally no sense in the grand scheme of things.

[Basilisk222]

So... someone explain to me why when the civil war update comes out, we don't just allow IS to use Clan Weaponry?

I mean in most games post clan invasion, it's a thing.

It's like 3054 or some crap?

Since we'll be past that, wouldn't it make more sense to do this instead of nerf buff to oblivion?

Return clan Weaponry to default values, return IS to default values, make their weaponry cost nothing pretty much and allow players with low incomes to buy IS equipment which is worse, and is heavier, BUT allows them to at least build a working mech.

At that point, price point balances the trade in power. Then simply adjust weapons in game as needed.

I mean they said they ain't doing it, but really, they're making their lives so much harder.

[Angel of Annihilation]

MischiefSC, on 21 June 2017 - 11:22 AM, said:

When poptarting was king the alpha usually capped at 35 pts. Heavies and assaults with a 35pt alpha. Some assaults has 40, like the 4 ppc stalker. For a variety of reasons the weapons and loadouts to get above that were flat out inferior. The 2xac20 Boomjag was considered game breaking. It's why ghost heat was created.

Now 35 pts is what you'd see on 35 tonners. Any serious medium or above is at 40+. Most heavies are over 50, many in the 70+ range. Same with assaults.

Mounts are higher, mobility got steadily buffed until assaults with big engines were more nimble than many heavies. Weapons mostly got cooler, though some ranges were reduced. Modules arrived and 15% cooldown/range bonuses to primary weapons became the norm so we were putting those 70pt alphas out faster.

We all got used to it while we shelved most all of the older mechs. Then we realized that we've painted ourselves into a corner of steadily spiraling up firepower and mobility.

So, yeah. It's time for a bunch of nerfs. CSPL was broke. Now it's about as useful as ISSpl has been. Csmls are still a 1/2 ton medium and cermls are only slightly less than a 1 ton, 1 slot large laser. Assault mechs are significantly less mobile than heavies. Lights are too big though, because volumetric symetry doesn't work or make sense on man-like objects - it's why a toddler isn't proportioned like an adult.

However, the reality is we are due for a LOT of nerfs. Overdue. In that process some stuff is going to get nerfed too hard. Something else will fit in that slot though, we just need to adapt a bit. At least you can be certain it'll change again.

The best thing to help I can think of is changes to the skill tree. Condense the survival and mobility trees a bit to let people lean a bit more into them, which directly increases both fun and survivability.

Make the survival and mobility nodes a flat value by tonnage - this makes investing in both less reliant on existing stats (no point in spending mobility nodes on a Dire or KDK currently) and more about making the mech personalized to what you want. Currently you want to stack mobility on lights and survival on assaults because the converse gives less return for investment - which dilutes the value of the skill tree.

There's a few things that can be done to tweak things to add that "fun" back in without the power creep.

Nerfs are not bad. They're what keeps older mechs/equipment relevant and the meta wider. At least we've got a selection of PPFLD, laservomit, srm brawler and ballistic boats available and viable. Balance is always a moving target but both the complaints over nerfs in general and about CSPLs needs a reality check.

A gamer can not live by buffs alone.

I really don't have a problem with nerfs if they are required but many, if not most of the nerfs I have seen over the years weren't something I felt was required or done in a fashion that makes little sense. Also even after nerfs happen, the fun factor needs to remain. In many cases, the fun factor has disappeared completely. The last issue I have is that Nerfs keep happening to things I spent real money on and the mechs I am buying specifically for certain characteristics like, I don't know, because they are fast and agile assaults (Cough...Marauder IIC, Kodiak....Cough). I mean with your spending between $300-$500 per year on the game, you really don't want your money to become wasted money due to nerfs and it happens all too many times.

[Scyther]

While power creep has been real, a lot of it has been due to putting in superior mech designs. Night Gyr isn't a strong mech because of C-Gauss or C-ERPPC (which were in the game long before).

It's a strong mech because it is a tall mech, with JJ, with payload room that can mount 2xCG and a CERPPC in high mounts. In shorter range it can often shoot over terrain or teammates, in long range it can hill hump and poptart. Nerfing the weapons won't cure that since no matter where the weapon numbers end up, its design will be the same.

I've got no real issues with the weapon nerfages, since they affect everyone equally. The key problem is specific changes to specific mechs. Some mechs simply have better designs and will outperform because of that, and you can't really nerf that away.

I'm willing to accept that a handful of mechs will have superior designs, so long as they are roughly equally distributed. I don't even bother to play the 'most minmax' mechs usually, I'm fine struggling along with 2nd and 3rd best.

One thing PGI could do to narrow the 'mech design' gap is to go back and rework a few hitboxes on underperformers, and for heaven's sake at least mount weapons on the higher section of arms for knuckle-draggers, etc. Also, allow us to select which weapon goes in which slot, so that at least, if we only have one or two high mounts, we can get our weapon of choice in them. (I know there are semi-workaround for this, but there's absolutely no reason I should have to fiddle around shuffling or adding weapons to get a LPL or AC into the high weapon slot.)

[MischiefSC]

Viktor Drake, on 21 June 2017 - 12:11 PM, said:

I really don't have a problem with nerfs if they are required but many, if not most of the nerfs I have seen over the years weren't something I felt was required or done in a fashion that makes little sense. Also even after nerfs happen, the fun factor needs to remain. In many cases, the fun factor has disappeared completely. The last issue I have is that Nerfs keep happening to things I spent real money on and the mechs I am buying specifically for certain characteristics like, I don't know, because they are fast and agile assaults (Cough...Marauder IIC, Kodiak....Cough). I mean with your spending between $300-$500 per year on the game, you really don't want your money to become wasted money due to nerfs and it happens all too many times.

KDK and MAD IIC were OP. Especially the MAD IIC - I know the IIC and the Scorch were just stupidly powerful for me. Fast, Tanky, huge alpha. Nimble.

I bought the original Phoenix package. BLRs, Thuds, Locusts were all trash for like 18+ months. The Shawk was good but the rest? Trash. Do you want to go over how many mechs have been released as mediocre or ended up that way later?

That's really the point - MAD IIC is still solid. It's just not flat out all ways superior. Right now I'm running the Roughnecks. Tanky as hell. After it comes out for cbills it will likely get nerfed. That's not new. You buy mechs and sometimes (especially Clan mechs) they're a bit OP at release and get scaled back. Buying something for real money should not be buying an advantage though.

[MischiefSC]

Deathlike, on 21 June 2017 - 11:57 AM, said:

It's pointless. I've skilled only a small fraction of my mechs, and don't really want to play.

You see, if the weapon value changes weren't obvious, most lasers had their duration adjusted because of the skill tree. There's a few exceptions, but even a .1s duration increase for those lasers that apply are literally a microcosm of the skill tree's existence through adjustments (aka, it's generally virtually mandatory to get duration nodes or get rekt).

So, if you wanted things done properly, you'd have to properly identify the purpose of what you're trying to accomplish and have a plan... instead of pie in the sky changes that make generally no sense in the grand scheme of things.

CSPLs got knocked doen. Too much, but down indeed. Laservomit scaled back a little in general which indirectly buffs the rest. Top performers nerfed (not how I would recommend but it happened).

In a way this is how PGI shuffles the meta. It's not totally random - just not very surgical.

I've skilled a ton of my mechs and am having more fun than I have in a while. Huge variety of viable mechs to play. My biggest issue is how bad pugs are in QP, not the mechs.

[Aggravated Assault Mech]

Deathlike, on 21 June 2017 - 11:29 AM, said:

Actually, I disagree somewhat.

CSPL probably needed a nerf. That's not in dispute.

The problem really is that buffs need to exist moreso for the IS... as when you have plenty of Clan mechs that need no quirks/buffs to be functional, that means either Clans as a whole need to be nerfed (it's mostly in the tech, whether it is Clan XL or weapon stats compared to the IS equivalent) or that the IS needs to be buffed (there are not many goto IS heavies outside of a Grasshopper-5P, and even that got nerfed) or something in between.

It's not straight up and clear cut, but when diversity is limited to the best and "OK", there's too many mech chassis that have been left behind in this raw deal.

I think you'd find more IS mechs got buffed than got nerfed, some quite significantly. It was really only a handful of variants that were nerfed, while a much larger number were buffed- levelling the playing field between IS variants. That's a significant quality of life improvement for IS players that have always had to chase the best quirks.

Nerfs are big and sensational even when they're small- there have been threads about the MX90 nerf of 5% ballistic heat despite the MAL-1P and -2P receiving even more significant buffs. There were even people spinning the King Crab buff as a nerf since it lost quirks like ballistic velocity in exchange for a deeply needed defensive and agility buff.

The Grasshopper and BLR-2C both got nerfed, so did the MAD-IIC, Night Gyr and CSPL. Those weren't the only changes to the patch and we (the community) need to look at the bigger picture rather than just lamenting the loss of the meta of last patch.

[Kiiyor]

MischiefSC, on 21 June 2017 - 11:22 AM, said:

When poptarting was king the alpha usually capped at 35 pts. Heavies and assaults with a 35pt alpha. Some assaults has 40, like the 4 ppc stalker. For a variety of reasons the weapons and loadouts to get above that were flat out inferior. The 2xac20 Boomjag was considered game breaking. It's why ghost heat was created.

Now 35 pts is what you'd see on 35 tonners. Any serious medium or above is at 40+. Most heavies are over 50, many in the 70+ range. Same with assaults.

Mounts are higher, mobility got steadily buffed until assaults with big engines were more nimble than many heavies. Weapons mostly got cooler, though some ranges were reduced. Modules arrived and 15% cooldown/range bonuses to primary weapons became the norm so we were putting those 70pt alphas out faster.

We all got used to it while we shelved most all of the older mechs. Then we realized that we've painted ourselves into a corner of steadily spiraling up firepower and mobility.

So, yeah. It's time for a bunch of nerfs. CSPL was broke. Now it's about as useful as ISSpl has been. Csmls are still a 1/2 ton medium and cermls are only slightly less than a 1 ton, 1 slot large laser. Assault mechs are significantly less mobile than heavies. Lights are too big though, because volumetric symetry doesn't work or make sense on man-like objects - it's why a toddler isn't proportioned like an adult.

However, the reality is we are due for a LOT of nerfs. Overdue. In that process some stuff is going to get nerfed too hard. Something else will fit in that slot though, we just need to adapt a bit. At least you can be certain it'll change again.

The best thing to help I can think of is changes to the skill tree. Condense the survival and mobility trees a bit to let people lean a bit more into them, which directly increases both fun and survivability.

Make the survival and mobility nodes a flat value by tonnage - this makes investing in both less reliant on existing stats (no point in spending mobility nodes on a Dire or KDK currently) and more about making the mech personalized to what you want. Currently you want to stack mobility on lights and survival on assaults because the converse gives less return for investment - which dilutes the value of the skill tree.

There's a few things that can be done to tweak things to add that "fun" back in without the power creep.

Nerfs are not bad. They're what keeps older mechs/equipment relevant and the meta wider. At least we've got a selection of PPFLD, laservomit, srm brawler and ballistic boats available and viable. Balance is always a moving target but both the complaints over nerfs in general and about CSPLs needs a reality check.

A gamer can not live by buffs alone.

I Agree.

I don't agree with all the methods of execution, but so far i'm liking the results. Having your 65 tonne futuristic heavy war machine lose almost 100% combat viability with a single enemy salvo was freaking ludicrous, yet so many people defended their alpha potential tooth and nail that I was beginning to think there was some sort of conspiracy.

The conspiracists were probably the guys that exclusively drove heavies and assaults and complained about there not being enough light and medium mechs in the queues as they were one shotting them, and then complained that their enemies no longer stood in the open or sought to leave cover to fight at closer ranges.

[MischiefSC]

Kiiyor, on 21 June 2017 - 03:18 PM, said:

I Agree.

I don't agree with all the methods of execution, but so far i'm liking the results. Having your 65 tonne futuristic heavy war machine lose almost 100% combat viability with a single enemy salvo was freaking ludicrous, yet so many people defended their alpha potential tooth and nail that I was beginning to think there was some sort of conspiracy.

The conspiracists were probably the guys that exclusively drove heavies and assaults and complained about there not being enough light and medium mechs in the queues as they were one shotting them, and then complained that their enemies no longer stood in the open or sought to leave cover to fight at closer ranges.

An 85 ton assault that was as nimble as a 65 ton heavy, as Tanky as a 100 tonner and spat out a over 70pt laservomit alpha at 500m+ and could do so repeatedly was always broken.

The basic issue is that it's really nice to have something be the best of all worlds or at least average/above average on everything and then exceptional in a couple of points. It's frustrating to then have your exceptional points offset by below average points. At this point though... would you still say the BLR is better than the MAD IIC? I dont think so. MAD IIC has a better alpha, range and tanker but the BLR is more nimble - by a little bit.

Would you say there are any IS heavies that are better than the MAD IIC? How about Clan heavies that can be called better than the BLR?

The nerfs hurt but the reality is that they're doing what they're supposed to do.

Having something be exceptional is fun. It's just not balanced. So you need to try and keep things fun, but balanced.

[Deathlike]

Aggravated Assault Mech, on 21 June 2017 - 02:59 PM, said:

I think you'd find more IS mechs got buffed than got nerfed, some quite significantly. It was really only a handful of variants that were nerfed, while a much larger number were buffed- levelling the playing field between IS variants. That's a significant quality of life improvement for IS players that have always had to chase the best quirks.

Nerfs are big and sensational even when they're small- there have been threads about the MX90 nerf of 5% ballistic heat despite the MAL-1P and -2P receiving even more significant buffs. There were even people spinning the King Crab buff as a nerf since it lost quirks like ballistic velocity in exchange for a deeply needed defensive and agility buff.

The Grasshopper and BLR-2C both got nerfed, so did the MAD-IIC, Night Gyr and CSPL. Those weren't the only changes to the patch and we (the community) need to look at the bigger picture rather than just lamenting the loss of the meta of last patch.

The problem with that logic is that the IS still has a net loss.

What exactly did the IS get buffed in... because what just happened is that the few comp worthy IS mechs (at least with respect to heavies and assaults) got nerfed.

Sure there's a number of notable Clan mechs that got nerfed, but there's still plenty of functional ones that are still a notch ahead of the IS in the associated weight brackets and/or roles (mostly in due part to Clan XL). Then there's tonnage and other stuff (Huntsman with all the SRMs is a nastier brawler than whatever the IS can come up with, although a bit hot).

[MechaBattler]

Viktor Drake, on 21 June 2017 - 12:11 PM, said:

I really don't have a problem with nerfs if they are required but many, if not most of the nerfs I have seen over the years weren't something I felt was required or done in a fashion that makes little sense. Also even after nerfs happen, the fun factor needs to remain. In many cases, the fun factor has disappeared completely. The last issue I have is that Nerfs keep happening to things I spent real money on and the mechs I am buying specifically for certain characteristics like, I don't know, because they are fast and agile assaults (Cough...Marauder IIC, Kodiak....Cough). I mean with your spending between $300-$500 per year on the game, you really don't want your money to become wasted money due to nerfs and it happens all too many times.

Because armor, firepower, and mobility all in one package is balanced. Just because you paid money to get your meta creep on, doesn't justify that level of imbalance.

[FireStoat]

MischiefSC, on 21 June 2017 - 03:39 PM, said:

An 85 ton assault that was as nimble as a 65 ton heavy, as Tanky as a 100 tonner and spat out a over 70pt laservomit alpha at 500m+ and could do so repeatedly was always broken.

I'd just like to politely say that this is exactly what the community is about to face again in the form of the Madcat Mk II, only this time around the mech will have a much longer delay before it's available for Cbills and the normal intended nerf cycle for it. I'm assuming you won't find this acceptable as per your view on the MAD IIC, so what is your suggestion for players that didn't sink 20 dollars into the latest pay-to-win?

[MischiefSC]

Deathlike, on 21 June 2017 - 04:08 PM, said:

The problem with that logic is that the IS still has a net loss.

What exactly did the IS get buffed in... because what just happened is that the few comp worthy IS mechs (at least with respect to heavies and assaults) got nerfed.

Sure there's a number of notable Clan mechs that got nerfed, but there's still plenty of functional ones that are still a notch ahead of the IS in the associated weight brackets and/or roles (mostly in due part to Clan XL). Then there's tonnage and other stuff (Huntsman with all the SRMs is a nastier brawler than whatever the IS can come up with, although a bit hot).

Hopper. The heat reduction on mediums is real - especially on the 3 lpl, 4 medium builds.

Bushie needs leg armor quirks. If it had that it would be beastly. As it is, it's easy to leg otherwise.

Not a lot of good IS mediums but that didn't change. For heavies though and asssults? It absolutely helps everything that boats lasers.

[Deathlike]

MischiefSC, on 21 June 2017 - 04:44 PM, said:

Hopper. The heat reduction on mediums is real - especially on the 3 lpl, 4 medium builds.

The 5P got nerfed structure-wise. It may just decline into a niche option, although the ISERLL did get buffed so that'll need some level of analysis.

Quote

Bushie needs leg armor quirks. If it had that it would be beastly. As it is, it's easy to leg otherwise.

Bushwacker's not really comp relevant, and often gets sidecored to test for XL... but then there's a fair chance of some ammo explosion due to the nature of most Bushwacker builds.

Quote

Not a lot of good IS mediums but that didn't change. For heavies though and asssults? It absolutely helps everything that boats lasers.

For me, it was either Battlemaster-2C or Grasshopper-5P for the relevant mechs in those brackets. Diversity beyond that was really limited in comp play. At best, medium lasers got buffed for brawling... and ERLL will be more of a staple IMO for some variants/builds... still not enough in terms of chassis however.