Gas Guzzler, on 19 September 2017 - 01:37 PM, said:
DAMAGE
Pretty much this. For virtually the same survivability and speed, I can get enough extra damage from a Clan mech that simply invalidates any other perceived advantage of an IS mech.
1
Just Facepalming At The Balance Patch Notes, More Proof That Pgi Doesnt Know How To Balance
Started by Jun Watarase, Sep 18 2017 05:34 PM
123 replies to this topic
#101
-
-
- The Nightmare
- 12,074 posts
Member
- LocationKansas City, MO
Posted 19 September 2017 - 01:39 PM
DAMAGE
Pretty much this. For virtually the same survivability and speed, I can get enough extra damage from a Clan mech that simply invalidates any other perceived advantage of an IS mech.
#102
-
-
- Big Daddy
- 14,274 posts
Member
- LocationCalifornia Central Coast
Posted 19 September 2017 - 01:41 PM
JC Daxion, on 19 September 2017 - 01:39 PM, said:
So clans need more nerfs?
WTB IS Heavy Large Lasers 15 damage, 5 tons, can fire 3 w/o GH
#103
-
-
- Elite Founder
- 62 posts
Member
Posted 19 September 2017 - 02:14 PM
You left out the part where the strategic strike changes were a swing and a miss because the people who are most complaining about them are the people who don't use any consumables as they need to save their cbills for parts and mechs, making them weaker wont help because the issue isn't their potency it is their accessibility.
Furthermore if you want to reduce the amount of strategic strikes used then remove the enhancements from the skill tree completely. Why? Because even if you can afford to use them without worrying about the cost it is still wasteful to fire off a weak version, so you put the points in to improve it and while you are unlocking it you get a second strike by default.
People would complain just as much about all the deaths and damage they take due to coolshot too, if it were as obvious the source of the damage they were taking was the result of a pay to win item and consumables are pay to win, the reason they don't complain is because they don't know the other guy essentially cheated by using an ability that was softly unavailable to them.
Strategic strikes should perhaps do less damage with an increased hit chance and longer duration, so that it is an area denial weapon, promoting movement rather than an instagib punishment on anyone who doesn't see smoke which is extremely easy to miss. When someone uses their special move, it should definitely do something but there should be no chance of basically crippling a company of mechs.
The damage patterns on airstrike and arty lead them to be used in somewhat different ways, arty with its wide and random circular pattern is not necessarily directed at a specific mech, but rather an area where as the line of an airstrike means you are more likely to direct the blast at a specific target and hope to also pick up secondary hits on other mechs as a bonus.
By increasing the flee time and reducing the bombardment time you will make artillery much less attractive vs airstrike now if you drop an arty into an area the chances of you doing anything will be greatly reduced and make using it at all questionable - it is likely the only thing you can expect to yield is movement, not direct damage so you wont get any points for your action. (This matters because the reward system shapes the actions and behaviours of the community.)
It is already a mixed bag that many of the shells from artillery will hit the smoke instead of the general area to the degree that people leave out the 'bonus' of more accurate targeting in the skill tree, with a slower deployment time this variable is even more pronounced.
When you use an airstrike it is common practice to deploy the smoke behind cover so that it is more difficult or even impossible for the target/s to avoid it therefore the deployment time increase has much less affect on airstrike and will do little to curtail its use.
Regarding other things, I welcome the range buff on mrm, don't mind particularly about the spread though it could be tightened up a little bit, I quite like that its a bit spray and pray. The speed aspect while not unwelcome presumably does make it more resistant to ams, particularly at close ranges an accelerating missile might be better than a linear speed? Though I am not sure how much this would actually change the amount of missiles destroyed?
Increasing the max number of rotary from 2 was certainly required but I do have to question why it is still limited to 3? If the 5 does double the damage and you are paying tonnage and slots for the extra accuracy and range etc. why cant you have 4? and can you even mount more than 4? should it be restricted at all? By the time you had 4 rotary 2 on your mech you would probably have invested 50 tons, with ammo, you don't want to run out and you will cook.
Sure they are fun, but they have a spool up time and require face time and attract a lot of attention and they weigh a lot and use ammo, too much ammo, I really don't think they need ghost heat as well.
Think about it, if you had 4 rotary 2 and you fire them at someone til they jam and don't shut down you will have put out about 100 damage in 5 seconds of telling everyone where you are and to shoot you in the face/leg/gun. Its not pinpoint damage, you could throw out 120 damage from mrm in a fraction of that time and go back to avoiding incoming damage while your heat dropped off and weapons reloaded.
Who is going to fit 3 rotary 2 anyway? Its a strange restriction, there must be a lot more mechs that could fit 2 guns on each side than would presumably side load 3 and have a shield arm. A centurion can have 3 but a rifleman has to use dual 5's? Why? I sorry to go on at you about this point, but the more I think about it the more insane it is, ghost heat is hugely unpopular but necessary artificial restriction shoe horned into the game to fix the garbage design that some dude pulled out of a hat a million years ago for a fancy board game with pencils and dice, to stop every non cannon mech being a heatsink shaped medium laser battery with legs. Why would you ever give anything ghost heat unless it was absolutely vital? Its not a cool and inspirational balancing tool that other people will copy, its salty garbage we have to endure because we don't have anything better yet. For the love of all systems being nominal don't use it willy nilly.
and fyi the last time I used an ultra 10 (skill tree perked but not mech perked) it jammed every single time I tried to fire it. Is there finesse to ultras? or is it just rng? I don't like to complain about rng so I would be ok with being told to stop mashing my keyboard like that angry German kid but even so mech jam chance quirks should be a boon not a base requirement for using the weapon. Surely jam chance should increase the more Picard flies the enterprise apart (dammit) not just lock up like a prison warden every time your cat looks at the space bar.
Guffrus
they are right, play the game and not all together on VoIP, individually into match maker over and over until you sigh at the first sight of the nascar and throw another game into the urbie.
Furthermore if you want to reduce the amount of strategic strikes used then remove the enhancements from the skill tree completely. Why? Because even if you can afford to use them without worrying about the cost it is still wasteful to fire off a weak version, so you put the points in to improve it and while you are unlocking it you get a second strike by default.
People would complain just as much about all the deaths and damage they take due to coolshot too, if it were as obvious the source of the damage they were taking was the result of a pay to win item and consumables are pay to win, the reason they don't complain is because they don't know the other guy essentially cheated by using an ability that was softly unavailable to them.
Strategic strikes should perhaps do less damage with an increased hit chance and longer duration, so that it is an area denial weapon, promoting movement rather than an instagib punishment on anyone who doesn't see smoke which is extremely easy to miss. When someone uses their special move, it should definitely do something but there should be no chance of basically crippling a company of mechs.
The damage patterns on airstrike and arty lead them to be used in somewhat different ways, arty with its wide and random circular pattern is not necessarily directed at a specific mech, but rather an area where as the line of an airstrike means you are more likely to direct the blast at a specific target and hope to also pick up secondary hits on other mechs as a bonus.
By increasing the flee time and reducing the bombardment time you will make artillery much less attractive vs airstrike now if you drop an arty into an area the chances of you doing anything will be greatly reduced and make using it at all questionable - it is likely the only thing you can expect to yield is movement, not direct damage so you wont get any points for your action. (This matters because the reward system shapes the actions and behaviours of the community.)
It is already a mixed bag that many of the shells from artillery will hit the smoke instead of the general area to the degree that people leave out the 'bonus' of more accurate targeting in the skill tree, with a slower deployment time this variable is even more pronounced.
When you use an airstrike it is common practice to deploy the smoke behind cover so that it is more difficult or even impossible for the target/s to avoid it therefore the deployment time increase has much less affect on airstrike and will do little to curtail its use.
Regarding other things, I welcome the range buff on mrm, don't mind particularly about the spread though it could be tightened up a little bit, I quite like that its a bit spray and pray. The speed aspect while not unwelcome presumably does make it more resistant to ams, particularly at close ranges an accelerating missile might be better than a linear speed? Though I am not sure how much this would actually change the amount of missiles destroyed?
Increasing the max number of rotary from 2 was certainly required but I do have to question why it is still limited to 3? If the 5 does double the damage and you are paying tonnage and slots for the extra accuracy and range etc. why cant you have 4? and can you even mount more than 4? should it be restricted at all? By the time you had 4 rotary 2 on your mech you would probably have invested 50 tons, with ammo, you don't want to run out and you will cook.
Sure they are fun, but they have a spool up time and require face time and attract a lot of attention and they weigh a lot and use ammo, too much ammo, I really don't think they need ghost heat as well.
Think about it, if you had 4 rotary 2 and you fire them at someone til they jam and don't shut down you will have put out about 100 damage in 5 seconds of telling everyone where you are and to shoot you in the face/leg/gun. Its not pinpoint damage, you could throw out 120 damage from mrm in a fraction of that time and go back to avoiding incoming damage while your heat dropped off and weapons reloaded.
Who is going to fit 3 rotary 2 anyway? Its a strange restriction, there must be a lot more mechs that could fit 2 guns on each side than would presumably side load 3 and have a shield arm. A centurion can have 3 but a rifleman has to use dual 5's? Why? I sorry to go on at you about this point, but the more I think about it the more insane it is, ghost heat is hugely unpopular but necessary artificial restriction shoe horned into the game to fix the garbage design that some dude pulled out of a hat a million years ago for a fancy board game with pencils and dice, to stop every non cannon mech being a heatsink shaped medium laser battery with legs. Why would you ever give anything ghost heat unless it was absolutely vital? Its not a cool and inspirational balancing tool that other people will copy, its salty garbage we have to endure because we don't have anything better yet. For the love of all systems being nominal don't use it willy nilly.
and fyi the last time I used an ultra 10 (skill tree perked but not mech perked) it jammed every single time I tried to fire it. Is there finesse to ultras? or is it just rng? I don't like to complain about rng so I would be ok with being told to stop mashing my keyboard like that angry German kid but even so mech jam chance quirks should be a boon not a base requirement for using the weapon. Surely jam chance should increase the more Picard flies the enterprise apart (dammit) not just lock up like a prison warden every time your cat looks at the space bar.
Guffrus
they are right, play the game and not all together on VoIP, individually into match maker over and over until you sigh at the first sight of the nascar and throw another game into the urbie.
Edited by Guffrus, 19 September 2017 - 02:18 PM.
#104
-
-
- Nova Captain
- 8,133 posts
Member
- LocationFrom a distance in an Urbie with a HAG, delivering righteous fury to heretics.
Posted 19 September 2017 - 02:18 PM
Khobai, on 19 September 2017 - 06:30 AM, said:
x3 RAC2s weighs more than x2 RAC5s though
the RAC2s shouldnt match the RAC5s, they should be BETTER
RAC2s need to do like 8dps minimum
the RAC2s shouldnt match the RAC5s, they should be BETTER
RAC2s need to do like 8dps minimum
They ARE better cause they should be doing the same DPS of the 2x RAC5 at a considerable range. It would be understandable to have them do even more damage if they have the same range profile as the RAC5 -- low velocity and low effective range, but no the RAC2 could be used at a range better than the RAC5, so we have to take account for that.
Please stop being self-serving, and look at the big picture.
Edited by The6thMessenger, 19 September 2017 - 02:20 PM.
#105
-
-
- The Death Wish
- 2,529 posts
Member
- LocationTFS Aurora, 1000km up.
Posted 19 September 2017 - 02:18 PM
Guffrus, on 19 September 2017 - 02:14 PM, said:
~snip~
A way to change airstrikes is to center the strike on the smoke and have it go in a random direction instead of making it facing based. There is no need to reduce the damage either do.
You aren't supposed to carry that many RACs. They were so powerful, so hot, and ate so much ammo in BT you simply couldn't carry as much. Directly relating TT stats of the RACs would give them 16 to 18 DPS each!
Ultra 10s I do use on a few mechs (Bushwacker, Dragon), but they do require more fineness than their clan counterparts... and what you on about there at the end.
Edited by Athom83, 19 September 2017 - 02:27 PM.
#106
-
-
- Moderate Giver
- 7,698 posts
Member
Posted 19 September 2017 - 02:18 PM
PGI Logic is kind of like saying Marxist Democracy. Neither of those two things exist.
#107
-
-
- Elite Founder
- 62 posts
Member
Posted 19 September 2017 - 02:23 PM
2 x RAC2 ARE better than RAC5, they have more range, faster shot and a small cone of fire, so they are more accurate, doesnt matter much if you are close or cant aim but at range it would make a difference.
#108
-
-
- Elite Founder
- 94 posts
Member
Posted 19 September 2017 - 02:28 PM
You seem to think that Russ, the president of PGI is in favor an even balance between IS mechs and Clan mechs. He prefers IS tech.
#109
-
-
- Big Daddy
- 14,274 posts
Member
- LocationCalifornia Central Coast
Posted 19 September 2017 - 02:30 PM
Vancer2, on 19 September 2017 - 02:28 PM, said:
You seem to think that Russ, the president of PGI is in favor an even balance between IS mechs and Clan mechs. He prefers IS tech.
LOL that's why the best mechs in the game are Clan mechs?
#110
-
-
- The Infernal
- 8,881 posts
Member
Posted 19 September 2017 - 03:41 PM
Don't necessarily agree with all the OPs conclusions but agree with him fully about PGI's seemingly lack of ability to balance.
Firestarter FS9-S Nerf - Why? Seriously when was the last time you have seen one of these in game? I think I see a Firestarter about once every 50-100 matches because most people, including myself, feel they are obsolete. But despite this, they are OP and must be nerfed, are you serious Chris?? If anything they need a buff to make them more popular.
Wolfhound WLF-2 Nerf - Ok it is a decent mech and it maybe be powerful with the -10% heat gen quirk but again, like the Firestarter, they aren't a mech I see all the commonly in the game. Sure a scattering few here and there but there aren't enough that it matters if they are performing a bit above the curve.
Assassin-21 Nerf - Again why? Do they really think that is going make a difference or change the performance profile for the Assassin and while they are a popular mech, you still don't see them in every match so who the hell cares if they are a bit above the curve.
Dragon DRG-1C - yet another mech that you rarely see. I the Dragon in general has become a bit more used after all quirks were added but like the firestarter it is a completely obsolete mech that only a few people use. Does it actually being good with the quirks really make a difference?
Hunchback IIC-A - Ok so this mech is getting a nerf because of competitive play? Seriously, how many players engage in competitive play? I don't and I bet 90% of the player base doesn't so why do we get screwed just because it does well in competitive play? This is about like them nerfing every KDK because the KDK-3 over performs, just silly.
Warhawk C - Come on now PGI, who the hell plays Warhawks anymore? Another obsolete mech that is in need of buffs to make it more popular yet its OP so must be nerfed. Yeah right.
Supernova 1 - Another joke. I think own every one of the Supernova Variants and in my eyes the Supernova 1 is the weakest of them all. The only reason to play it was it had a bit better mobility than the rest but nope, not any more. Also again just how many do you see in matches every day, one in every ten matches maybe, if that??
Also I would like Chris to point to all the threads in the General Discussion where there were any complaints about these mechs being OP and needed a nerf. Actually I doubt he could point me to one so why the hell nerf them?
Seriously these nerfs do absolutely nothing to improve anything about game play. All they do is piss off the few players who actually like and run these mechs and for most of the ones listed above, make already unpopular mechs, less popular. Perfect way to encourage diversity if you ask me, as long as your definition of diversity is everyone playing 1 of 10 meta mechs each and every match.
Seriously, these Nerfs are just silly and have zero positive impact on the game at all. What a waste of time and effort on PGI's part.
Firestarter FS9-S Nerf - Why? Seriously when was the last time you have seen one of these in game? I think I see a Firestarter about once every 50-100 matches because most people, including myself, feel they are obsolete. But despite this, they are OP and must be nerfed, are you serious Chris?? If anything they need a buff to make them more popular.
Wolfhound WLF-2 Nerf - Ok it is a decent mech and it maybe be powerful with the -10% heat gen quirk but again, like the Firestarter, they aren't a mech I see all the commonly in the game. Sure a scattering few here and there but there aren't enough that it matters if they are performing a bit above the curve.
Assassin-21 Nerf - Again why? Do they really think that is going make a difference or change the performance profile for the Assassin and while they are a popular mech, you still don't see them in every match so who the hell cares if they are a bit above the curve.
Dragon DRG-1C - yet another mech that you rarely see. I the Dragon in general has become a bit more used after all quirks were added but like the firestarter it is a completely obsolete mech that only a few people use. Does it actually being good with the quirks really make a difference?
Hunchback IIC-A - Ok so this mech is getting a nerf because of competitive play? Seriously, how many players engage in competitive play? I don't and I bet 90% of the player base doesn't so why do we get screwed just because it does well in competitive play? This is about like them nerfing every KDK because the KDK-3 over performs, just silly.
Warhawk C - Come on now PGI, who the hell plays Warhawks anymore? Another obsolete mech that is in need of buffs to make it more popular yet its OP so must be nerfed. Yeah right.
Supernova 1 - Another joke. I think own every one of the Supernova Variants and in my eyes the Supernova 1 is the weakest of them all. The only reason to play it was it had a bit better mobility than the rest but nope, not any more. Also again just how many do you see in matches every day, one in every ten matches maybe, if that??
Also I would like Chris to point to all the threads in the General Discussion where there were any complaints about these mechs being OP and needed a nerf. Actually I doubt he could point me to one so why the hell nerf them?
Seriously these nerfs do absolutely nothing to improve anything about game play. All they do is piss off the few players who actually like and run these mechs and for most of the ones listed above, make already unpopular mechs, less popular. Perfect way to encourage diversity if you ask me, as long as your definition of diversity is everyone playing 1 of 10 meta mechs each and every match.
Seriously, these Nerfs are just silly and have zero positive impact on the game at all. What a waste of time and effort on PGI's part.
#111
-
-
- The Nightmare
- 12,074 posts
Member
- LocationKansas City, MO
Posted 19 September 2017 - 03:43 PM
Viktor Drake, on 19 September 2017 - 03:41 PM, said:
Warhawk C - Come on now PGI, who the hell plays Warhawks anymore? Another obsolete mech that is in need of buffs to make it more popular yet its OP so must be nerfed. Yeah right.
Supernova 1 - Another joke. I think own every one of the Supernova Variants and in my eyes the Supernova 1 is the weakest of them all.
Supernova 1 - Another joke. I think own every one of the Supernova Variants and in my eyes the Supernova 1 is the weakest of them all.
Both of these were nerfed because of their strength in comp, pretty sure. Not that there is a problem with that since just because it isn't popular in potato smasher queue doesn't mean they aren't powerful. Meta can take 8+ months to finally trickle down through potato smasher queue.
Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 19 September 2017 - 03:44 PM.
#112
-
-
- Big Daddy
- 14,274 posts
Member
- LocationCalifornia Central Coast
Posted 19 September 2017 - 03:44 PM
Quicksilver Kalasa, on 19 September 2017 - 03:43 PM, said:
Both of these were nerfed because of their strength in comp, pretty sure.
Going to be forever salty about the SNV-1.
#113
-
-
- The Nightmare
- 12,074 posts
Member
- LocationKansas City, MO
Posted 19 September 2017 - 03:45 PM
Gas Guzzler, on 19 September 2017 - 03:44 PM, said:
Going to be forever salty about the SNV-1.
I mean it was silly they nerfed it even based on comp queue since it had a decent balance between the MAD-IIC and it.
Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 19 September 2017 - 03:46 PM.
#114
-
-
- Nova Captain
- 2,186 posts
Member
Posted 19 September 2017 - 04:32 PM
Good God, there is no such thing as "balance".
This is the same as a "well regulated militia" and a vast majority have zero idea that that really means........
There has never been balance not should there be. One side is always one step ahead of the other. It's been that was in the MW universe since "forever" so why expect it now?
Geeze
This is the same as a "well regulated militia" and a vast majority have zero idea that that really means........
There has never been balance not should there be. One side is always one step ahead of the other. It's been that was in the MW universe since "forever" so why expect it now?
Geeze
#115
-
-
- The 1 Percent
- 3,920 posts
Member
- LocationThe Omega Company compound on Outreach
Posted 20 September 2017 - 04:05 AM
Gas Guzzler, on 19 September 2017 - 01:41 PM, said:
WTB IS Heavy Large Lasers 15 damage, 5 tons, can fire 3 w/o GH
WTB a UAC of any flavor that doesn't spazz fire half a dozen pellets every time it fires.
WTB a Heavy Gauss
WTB RACs for Clan mechs (which happen in 3069. Guess that's why PGI stopped the clock at 3067).
WTB Clan MRMs.
Shall I continue?
#116
-
-
- The Angel
- 2,439 posts
Member
Posted 20 September 2017 - 05:56 AM
Willard Phule, on 20 September 2017 - 04:05 AM, said:
WTB a UAC of any flavor that doesn't spazz fire half a dozen pellets every time it fires.
Clan UAC2 fires single shots.
Willard Phule, on 20 September 2017 - 04:05 AM, said:
WTB a Heavy Gauss
Clans don't get them in lore/TT, so they won't get them in MWO. You wouldn't want them anyway, 'cause AC20s are better.
Willard Phule, on 20 September 2017 - 04:05 AM, said:
WTB RACs for Clan mechs (which happen in 3069. Guess that's why PGI stopped the clock at 3067).
Clan RACs aren't introduced until 3104.
Willard Phule, on 20 September 2017 - 04:05 AM, said:
WTB Clan MRMs.
Clans don't get those in lore/TT either. Besides, ATMs are better.
Edited by Zergling, 20 September 2017 - 06:08 AM.
#117
-
-
- The 1 Percent
- 3,920 posts
Member
- LocationThe Omega Company compound on Outreach
Posted 20 September 2017 - 07:08 AM
Zergling, on 20 September 2017 - 05:56 AM, said:
Clans don't get them in lore/TT, so they won't get them in MWO. You wouldn't want them anyway, 'cause AC20s are better.
That one kinda goes hand in hand with Clan ERPPCs doing 15 points of damage to a single location until PGI got a hold of them.
Zergling, on 20 September 2017 - 05:56 AM, said:
Clan RACs aren't introduced until 3104.
True, but HAGs were introduced in 3068...one year past where they stopped the timeline. Love me some HAGs.
Zergling, on 20 September 2017 - 05:56 AM, said:
Clans don't get those in lore/TT either. Besides, ATMs are better.
Except the PGI version that get swatted out of the air by AMS easier than LRMs. Here in MWO, if you're not boating 9s or 12s, there's no point in using them.
#118
-
-
- Legendary Founder
- 7,709 posts
Member
Posted 20 September 2017 - 07:13 AM
Willard Phule, on 20 September 2017 - 07:08 AM, said:
Except the PGI version that get swatted out of the air by AMS easier than LRMs. Here in MWO, if you're not boating 9s or 12s, there's no point in using them.
MRMs have the same problem. Not with AMS, but with mechs basically needing to boat massive amounts of MRMs to make them worthwhile.
#119
-
-
- The Angel
- 2,439 posts
Member
Posted 20 September 2017 - 07:19 AM
Willard Phule, on 20 September 2017 - 07:08 AM, said:
That one kinda goes hand in hand with Clan ERPPCs doing 15 points of damage to a single location until PGI got a hold of them.
One is a balancing, the other is faction base weapons. PGI is very unlikely to budge from lore in regards to what weapons each faction gets.
Willard Phule, on 20 September 2017 - 07:08 AM, said:
True, but HAGs were introduced in 3068...one year past where they stopped the timeline. Love me some HAGs.
Wait for the next round of new weapons/tech; I want to see HAGs too, along with LACs and other stuff.
Willard Phule, on 20 September 2017 - 07:08 AM, said:
Except the PGI version that get swatted out of the air by AMS easier than LRMs. Here in MWO, if you're not boating 9s or 12s, there's no point in using them.
Yet ATMs are still the better weapon system.
Edited by Zergling, 20 September 2017 - 07:21 AM.
#120
-
-
- Ace Of Spades
- 3,314 posts
Member
- LocationAt work, cutting up brains for a living.
Posted 20 September 2017 - 07:37 AM
I actually don't have much complaint about the patch. It didn't break anything and buffed a few things that needed buffing. Anyone else feel like OP's rant was just nitpicking to be nitpicking because he has decided he doesn't like PGI?
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
