121 replies to this topic

[Scout Derek]

Heads up for those who wanted to try out a few last things before the PTS offically closes today.

EDIT: PTS is now closed.

Edited by Scout Derek, 05 July 2017 - 03:24 PM.

[Felicitatem Parco]

No! Now I have to go back to looting...

[LordNothing]

i think ive learned all i could in a 4v4 setting. some of the more situational weapons might find there place with full teams on the map.

[Davegt27]

BFD try hards are on the PTS forums trying to game the system anyways

it was fun playing with paint jobs that's about it

[Angel of Annihilation]

I am a bit disappointed there isn't going to be be another PTS session with the changes they are changing. Instead we just get "Hey we are closing test servers and oh by the way, there are going to be a million and one changes happening based on your feedback but we are not going to let you test these changes before going live". Seriously isn't that what test is for so we can give feedback BEFORE it goes live? I mean seems pretty obvious to me the final round of changes needs to actually be tested on the PTS prior to going live so they can get a few tweak in here or there.

Also obvious to me is if they had to make as many changes as they say are going to be showing up in live, then there wasn't enough testing done on PTS because the message we should be seeing is, "Thanks for your feedback. Please note that with the exception of a few minor changes, we will be going live with these results." If that is not the case, then why bother having us test in the first place?

Edited by Viktor Drake, 05 July 2017 - 02:57 PM.

[Felicitatem Parco]

Viktor Drake, on 05 July 2017 - 02:56 PM, said:

I am a bit disappointed there isn't going to be be another PTS session with the changes they are changing. Instead we just get "Hey we are closing test servers and oh by the way, there are going to be a million and one changes happening based on your feedback but we are not going to let you test these changes before going live". Seriously isn't that what test is for so we can give feedback BEFORE it goes live? I mean seems pretty obvious to me the final round of changes needs to actually be tested on the PTS prior to going live so they can get a few tweak in here or there.

Also obvious to me is if they had to make as many changes as they say are going to be showing up in live, then there wasn't enough testing done on PTS because the message we should be seeing is, "Thanks for your feedback. Please note that with the exception of a few minor changes, we will be going live with these results." If that is not the case, then why bother having us test in the first place?

Did you miss the June 30th changes they made to the PTS based on our feedback(?) that they let us test out before they closed it... Because that kind of conflicts with your sentiment.

[Angel of Annihilation]

Prosperity Park, on 05 July 2017 - 02:59 PM, said:

Did you miss the June 30th changes they made to the PTS based on our feedback(?) that they let us test out before they closed it... Because that kind of conflicts with your sentiment.

Nope. Tested all those. I am referring to this:

"A large number of weapon changes. Final values to be released with the Patch Notes."

https://mwomercs.com/news/2017/07/1856-conclusion-civil-war-new-tech-pts-july-5-4-pm

Seems like there are going to be "A large number of weapons changes" coming. Kinda, sorta feel like if there are a LARGE number of weapons changes, those LARGE number of weapons changes should be on the PTS so we can test and offer feedback on them until the message is "A minor number of changes." Seriously what did they change? Did the make a Small Heavy Laser do 20 heat now? Did they change the minimum range of ATMs to 500m? Do IS UAC have an 80% jam chance? I mean there are changes, alot of them apparently. How the hell do you go live with those changes without actually putting them on the PTS for a bit to see how things work out? Don't they need actual Data on the changes?

I mean minor tweaks I can see but when you basically say that pretty much everything is changing, obviously testing isn't complete.

Anyway, hopefully they did actually take our feedback and adjustments were made on them in a positive manner but as usual with PGI, now all I can do is grit my teeth and hope these "Changes" aren't they type that makes me want to uninstall and quit the game because I sure am not going to get to actually test them before they go live.

Edited by Viktor Drake, 05 July 2017 - 03:15 PM.

[MadRover]

Wait no more PTS?

[Felicitatem Parco]

MadRover, on 05 July 2017 - 03:08 PM, said:

Wait no more PTS?

It closed today. They are harvesting all comments, feedback, etc and will release this month's patch with updated values for live use.

Expect changes to missile spread, RAC parameters, and likely some laser tuning. I bet it will be better than the last PTS iteration.

If it requires further adjustments, then we might need to wait for a hotfix after the patch. I care little, since it'll drift however it's gonna drift whether or not the changes are due to PTS feedback or live patch feedback.

[Mister Blastman]

No point in testing if the balance underlord doesn't learn how to properly balance... fast.

Heavy PPC @ 15 pts PPFLD or bust.

Light guass charge removed.

IS AC/20 ghost heat removed (UAC/20 kept).

[MadRover]

Prosperity Park, on 05 July 2017 - 03:11 PM, said:

It closed today. They are harvesting all comments, feedback, etc and will release this month's patch with updated values for live use.

Expect changes to missile spread, RAC parameters, and likely some laser tuning. I bet it will be better than the last PTS iteration.

If it requires further adjustments, then we might need to wait for a hotfix after the patch. I care little, since it'll drift however it's gonna drift whether or not the changes are due to PTS feedback or live patch feedback.

Could've sworn the PTS lasted for more than 2weeks. Oh well back to the real deal until then.

[Khobai]

Quote

Could've sworn the PTS lasted for more than 2weeks. Oh well back to the real deal until then.

The patch is still 2 weeks away so im sure well get one more PTS session before then

Quote

Heavy PPC @ 15 pts PPFLD or bust.

there is no good reason why it should do 15 PPFLD.

the CERPPC doesnt get 15 PPFLD. so why should the IS HPPC? you think just because it weighs a couple tons more it should do 5 more PPFLD. yeah no thats not how it works.

whats next youre gonna be asking for the IS gauss to do 20 damage? or for IS SRMs to do 4 damage per missile?

13/1/1 with removal of the 90m deadzone is already good enough as far as damage goes. All it needs is a heat reduction because its heat is still way too high.

Quote

Light guass charge removed.

they should remove chargeup for all gauss rifles. heavy gauss gets screwed by having chargeup way more than light gauss. and ive never liked chargeup on normal gauss either.

but light gauss also needs to get bumped upto 10 damage. because at 8 damage its just not worth the tonnage when you can take a normal gauss for 3 more tons and double your damage.

Quote

IS AC/20 ghost heat removed (UAC/20 kept).

uh no. if anything they need to crackdown on ghost heat more for weapon combinations that do high PPFLD. linking gauss and ppc in the same ghost heat group would be one of the best things they could do to stop PPFLD abuses.

Edited by Khobai, 05 July 2017 - 03:34 PM.

[Gas Guzzler]

Khobai, on 05 July 2017 - 03:26 PM, said:

The patch is still 2 weeks away so im sure well get one more PTS session before then

Based on the wording of the post, no, there will not be another PTS session.

[MadRover]

Khobai, on 05 July 2017 - 03:26 PM, said:

The patch is still 2 weeks away so im sure well get one more PTS session before then



there is no good reason why it should do 15 PPFLD.

the CERPPC doesnt get 15 PPFLD. so why should the IS HPPC? you think just because it weighs a couple tons more it should do 5 more PPFLD. yeah no thats not how it works.

whats next youre gonna be asking for the IS gauss to do 20 damage? or for IS SRMs to do 4 damage per missile?

13/1/1 with removal of the 90m deadzone is already good enough as far as damage goes. All it needs is a heat reduction because its heat is still way too high.



they should remove chargeup for all gauss rifles. heavy gauss gets screwed by having chargeup way more than light gauss. and ive never liked chargeup on normal gauss either.

but light gauss also needs to get bumped upto 10 damage. because at 8 damage its just not worth the tonnage when you can take a normal gauss for 3 more tons and double your damage.



uh no. if anything they need to crackdown on ghost heat more for weapon combinations that do high PPFLD. linking gauss and ppc in the same ghost heat group would be one of the best things they could do to stop PPFLD abuses.

To be fair I wasn't expecting it to escalate...

[Khobai]

Quote

Based on the wording of the post, no, there will not be another PTS session.

well there needs to be.

[Gas Guzzler]

Khobai, on 05 July 2017 - 03:36 PM, said:

well there needs to be.

Eh.. I don't think there is any game breaking issues

[Monkey Lover]

Gas Guzzler, on 05 July 2017 - 03:37 PM, said:

Eh.. I don't think there is any game breaking issues

We have no idea , they're going to change values and release it into the live without testing.

Thats not even counting game breaking bugs(for some people) they always have because they dont test the final builds.

Edited by Monkey Lover, 05 July 2017 - 03:42 PM.

[MadRover]

Monkey Lover, on 05 July 2017 - 03:41 PM, said:

We have no idea , they're going to change values and release it into the live without testing.

We all know how that works.

Badly. It works very badly.

[Jay Leon Hart]

Khobai, on 05 July 2017 - 03:26 PM, said:

there is no good reason why it should do 15 PPFLD.

the CERPPC doesnt get 15 PPFLD. so why should the IS HPPC? you think just because it weighs a couple tons more it should do 5 more PPFLD. yeah no thats not how it works.

Yeah, it's not like the AC10 does more damage than the AC5 because it's larger and heavier. Or the AC20 compared to the AC10. Or the Large class lasers compared to the Medium class lasers. Or the PPC compared to the LPPC.

You're right, weapons simply don't get more damage for being larger and heavier...

[Kaptain]

Khobai, on 05 July 2017 - 03:26 PM, said:

there is no good reason why it should do 15 PPFLD.

the CERPPC doesnt get 15 PPFLD. so why should the IS HPPC? you think just because it weighs a couple tons more it should do 5 more PPFLD. yeah no thats not how it works.

A "couple"? As in one or two, a few? 66% is NOT a "couple". Since you can't think of any reason ill give you several.

ERPPC vs HPPC
6tons vs 10tons (That's is a 66% increase in weight HPPC)
2slots vs 6slots (that's a 100% increase in bulk for the HPPC)
14 vs 15 heat
810 vs 540 range (that's a 50% better range for the ERPPC)
zero minimum range vs drop off from 90
1300 vs 1200 travel speed

Khobai, on 05 July 2017 - 03:52 PM, said:

That is not at all the same thing. heavier IS weapons get more damage than lighter IS weapons. sure

But IS weapons dont get more damage than Clan weapons just for being heavier.

In the case of the HPPC it would get more damage because its Hotter, Heavier, Bulkier, Shorter ranged, slower AND has a minimum range drop off. Not "just" for being heavier as you claim.

You are clearly not trying to understand the side of your opposition in this discussion just trying to shut it down. Well, its transparent.

Edited by Kaptain, 05 July 2017 - 04:16 PM.