123 replies to this topic

[Luminis]

Y'all go on splitting hairs about the AC10. I'll just stay over here, laughing my butt off because the SNV and WHK got nerfed while my MCII-DS can continue its reign of terror unimpeded.

Same for the "modest reduction of Energy-based quirks" on the DRG-1C (while the hero retains its tripled of these quirks), actually.

Edited by Luminis, 19 September 2017 - 12:37 AM.

[kapusta11]

What did you expect? The guy doesn't even play the game.

[drifter bob]

Khobai, on 18 September 2017 - 10:44 PM, said:

there is no reason to use an AC10 ever again

there was hardly a reason to use it before

anyhow i don't know where pgi got this idea that pre nerfing the uac 10 would stop its standard counterpart from being made redundant. Its hard to obsolete a weapon that was never used in the first place at least we get to see an i.s ballistic with the letters ac and 10 in it

[Jun Watarase]

I bet all the over performing DRG-1C builds were some guy using 3x LPL anyway.

So whoever does that will just boat 3x LPL on another mech (like, you know, the thunderbolt) and everyone using ML/MPL on DRG-1Cs get shafted even though those aren't powerful at all.

They dont actually play the game so they have no idea what people bring in actual matches, they just look at stats and go "oh these guys do well with these builds so it means it's OP", while completely ignoring the mass warhammers, grasshoppers, black knights and battlemasters. And because those mechs are so popular, you are bound to have lots of average-bad players dragging their average stats down so it doesnt look OP to PGI.

[LordNothing]

until it hits its just theory. of course the track record is that when balance changes hit, they generally dont work as intended.

[Bud Crue]

Jun Watarase, on 19 September 2017 - 04:14 AM, said:

I bet all the over performing DRG-1C builds were some guy using 3x LPL anyway.

So whoever does that will just boat 3x LPL on another mech (like, you know, the thunderbolt) and everyone using ML/MPL on DRG-1Cs get shafted even though those aren't powerful at all.

They dont actually play the game so they have no idea what people bring in actual matches, they just look at stats and go "oh these guys do well with these builds so it means it's OP", while completely ignoring the mass warhammers, grasshoppers, black knights and battlemasters. And because those mechs are so popular, you are bound to have lots of average-bad players dragging their average stats down so it doesnt look OP to PGI.

Now this I can agree with.
Been saying the same thing for awhile as it is the only explanation for a lot of past nerfs to bad variants while leaving better, even meta variants alone. In math these are called statistical outliers and are accounted for, often by disregarding them. In this game they more often than not are the subject and even the primary subject of many of PGI's balance decisions. When they then look at these outliers and decide to nerf all things like them...that's when things get real stupid real quick. Be happy they stuck with just the 1C and didn't decide to hit all Dragons or all 60 tonners or all mechs capable of mounting energy weapons.

[SOL Ranger]

LMG double dipping heavy handed nerf without compensating any properties nor realising that the nerf affects the extreme boating least while few LMG using mechs suffer the most. If you want to address boating effectively without major mechanical changes then severely reduce the ammo/t, go from 2500/t to 1500/t while granting some extra range, that should make their performance more in line with their weight cost and then having the CoF change apply as well, I always had a problem with it being so precise anyway, give some more extra range for that too. That way they retain their raw performance and flexibility for heavier mechs but less precise while becoming less boating friendly for lighter ones. The damage multiplier reduction was completely over the top and I suspect Chris is well aware of that yet wanted to appease the whinge crowd, it needs to be pulled back.

Also the utter failure of identifying RAC2 as in need of improvements is enough for me to claim that I doubt they play the game, RAC2 needs at least 7dps to compete.

[The6thMessenger]

SOL Ranger, on 19 September 2017 - 04:38 AM, said:

Also the utter failure of identifying RAC2 as in need of improvements is enough for me to claim that I doubt they play the game, RAC2 needs at least 7dps to compete.

7.275 to be exact, or 1 damage/shot. So that 3x RAC2 would actually match 2x RAC5.

[LordNothing]

i think the biggest issue is the one month iteration time for balance tweaks. the xml files for these things are not huge, so i dont see why they dont have weakly balance adjustments with the big stuff staying on the monthly cycle. its just one guy changing values in notepad, and run the commit script every friday.

[Bigbacon]

Stonefalcon, on 18 September 2017 - 06:40 PM, said:

But what do I now do with my 3 Dragon 1Cs? I renamed one of my Awesomes Danerys Targaryen cause it ran it with the 3 1Cs in CW.

too bad they nerfed it based on FP and not QP....thanks.

[Khobai]

Quote

7.275 to be exact, or 1 damage/shot. So that 3x RAC2 would actually match 2x RAC5.

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

Edited by Khobai, 19 September 2017 - 06:31 AM.

[Asym]

OP, I'm not sure it's really a question of "do they know" anymore...

The entire platform of weapons, armor, mobility has been "tinkered" with for years and all of the changes have upstream and downstream consequences that PGI never anticipated or even considered.......

The errors in the game compound across the weapons, armor and mobility platforms and create new meta "opportunities" that light up the forums in the form of "Oh the SpL spam", "the LMG spam" the "Laser vomit issue", etc....

All are reaction and are not planned..... So, there is an underlying concern I have: can Solaris survive with the weapons, armor and mobility as it is currently deployed? Solaris is where PGI is going in creating a FPS stadium game..... The problem is, the weapons, armor and mobility are too dangerous in their current configurations for Solaris to "really work." PGI needs games that last more than 3 minutes....... PGI needs matches that run 10+ minutes and are competitively close.....stomps will not work.

To do that, all weapons, armor and mobility will need to be significantly neutered..... Imagine a 1v1 where two mechs march out and within 10 seconds a Hvy Gauss hits the enemy cockpit and kills the other mech....... How fun was that? Even if the arena is 1000 meters long? So, PGI has been reducing "hit box precision" and "weapons precision." Drawing the whole game "inward" to support Solaris gameplay..... Imagine Polar if your weapons max effective range is 500 meters?

Just food for thought..... I am not an expert at MWO and I'm here going on 8 months now and, a super spud potato; but, I've been paying attention to the developing patterns over those 8 months.... One example: I have not seen a headshot from a Gauss on Polar since the skill tree change nor have I been able to do so over 500 meters.....and, I've tried over dozens of matches.... Before the skill tree change, yes and working towards the skill award.... The friends I have in this game have tried as well: yes to before and no to anything over 500 meters after May's change and under 500 meters is coincidence not precision shooting....

Does the word "ponderous" sound familiar? Night Gyr's, Timberwolves and many others have been mobility nerf'd: why? Huge Assaults that only move under 55 mph....... LBX's nerf's from being close in killers to somewhat effective? LRM nerf's and quirk changes reducing their efficiency and range..... There is a pattern to all of this: the battlespace in getting smaller and less precise and agile...... Thinks of a FPS arena, much smaller than the "Duncan Fisher" variety we saw before....

Again, I may be wrong but consider, many really good players left MWO just after the Skill Tree change in May: why? The one's I've talked to saw the "writing on the wall" and are waiting till PGI either drops the other shoe or this all works itself out somehow?

Just my opinion.

[Athom83]

Khobai, on 19 September 2017 - 06:30 AM, said:

RAC2s need to do like 8dps minimum

Or just go full lore and give them 16DPS ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°).

Although, they did do what I suggested and set RAC/2s to ~6 DPS and RAC/5s to ~12DPS as a start for later balance checking.

Athom83, on 29 June 2017 - 12:02 PM, said:

RACs;
2: This needs a massive buff. UAC/2s while double tapping have a much higher DPS, and this is supposed to be the DPS weapon. Possibly around 6 DPS would be a good starting point for the next PTS (if there will be more).
5: Similar as the above, not enough DPS to justify the heat, weight, and jam. If this was buffed to around 12 DPS, then it would be fine.

Side note; on mechs with ballistic cooldown quirks, you can easily get UAC/2s to fire at 8 DPS (4 shells a second) per gun. And those mechs can usually carry 2-3 of them! Yah, the RACs need a buff to justify their drawbacks.

Edited by Athom83, 19 September 2017 - 06:53 AM.

[Luminis]

PGI can't reasonably nerf 'Mechs for Solaris matches to last 10 minutes or more.

Only way to do that is to do a "best of X rounds" system, with or without a dropdeck.

[PyckenZot]

I came looking for another saltpost and found a something that actually made sense,... what is this world coming to?

[KingCobra]

LOL this topic rocks but you all don't understand RUSS,BRIAN and PGI they played Mechwarrior4Mercinaries on the Mektek servers and NHUA=no heat unlimited ammo so the shorter the matches with outrages overpowered mechs is normal to them and normal gameplay.

That's why they made MWO a WOT FPS CLONE and want it to be a E-Sport game which for this IP =FAIL miserably and all the buffs and nerfs to weapons mobility ETC it not going to fix this game.PGI would be better off leaving balance alone buffing armor and getting rid of the Alpha Strike mechanism and making weapons cycle times a bit longer and gameplay times would get like AVG 10 min matches.

But many of the problems with weapons in MWO have to do with maps in MechWarrior4Mercinaries we had 500 unique maps and 20 different game modes that you could take varied loadouts on and each type of weapon was useful from city maps to huge wide open missile maps.

The other problem with MWO is you don't have savable loadouts for each mech in the mechlab and you cannot choose you mech after you know the map this is one of the things in Mechwarrior2- mechwarrior4 that was great and you could change mechs and loadouts on the fly per match.

[Sjorpha]

Their solution to IS tech being way weaker than clan tech is...to nerf some IS mechs?

Still no changes to make IS engines balanced with clan engines.

Still nothing to compensate IS weapons/equipment for being larger and heavier. PGI treats clan and IS gauss the same despite the 3 ton/1 slot difference, they nerf both LMGs despite only the clan one seeing any serious use and the IS one being twice as heavy.

But yeah, while we continue to leave clan weapons and engines strictly superior let's gradually remove all quirks on IS mechs that don't even see competitive play...

So stupid.

If you want to get rid of the IS quirks, fine. You can do that once you've BALANCED THE TECH ton for ton and crit for crit.

Edited by Sjorpha, 19 September 2017 - 07:18 AM.

[Nightbird]

Change
1) heavy gauss to 10 slots (must be torso mounted still) until crit splitting is implemented
2) IS UAC10 needs single slug
3) IS UAC20 dual slug
4) MRMs stream out faster

[Jackal Noble]

NlGHTBlRD, on 19 September 2017 - 07:49 AM, said:

Change
1) heavy gauss to 10 slots (must be torso mounted still) until crit splitting is implemented
2) IS UAC10 needs single slug
3) IS UAC20 dual slug
4) MRMs stream out faster

2. NOPE

3. NOOOOOEEEEEEP

[Jackal Noble]

Sjorpha, on 19 September 2017 - 07:16 AM, said:

Their solution to IS tech being way weaker than clan tech is...to nerf some IS mechs?

Still no changes to make IS engines balanced with clan engines.

Still nothing to compensate IS weapons/equipment for being larger and heavier. PGI treats clan and IS gauss the same despite the 3 ton/1 slot difference, they nerf both LMGs despite only the clan one seeing any serious use and the IS one being twice as heavy.

But yeah, while we continue to leave clan weapons and engines strictly superior let's gradually remove all quirks on IS mechs that don't even see competitive play...

So stupid.

If you want to get rid of the IS quirks, fine. You can do that once you've BALANCED THE TECH ton for ton and crit for crit.

How was this month not a net buff to Inner Sphere mechs, Sjorpha?
3 IS mechs got minor nerfs
1 IS mech got relegated to second line (Dragon)
4 mechs got armor buffs, 2 to a net positive.

vs.

a 50 tonner got nerfed to 20 friggin degrees pitch. Now even a commando can practice on the mediums before going on to the big boys.

The Mad-dog H made running 2 missile launchers cool again, but had its nerf coming. Sweet, now it's a heavy laser platform.

The WHK-C some how got caught up in some sort of Eye of Sauron/ Forumite OCD syndrome event.

And finally the Supernova-1 got nerfed just because it looks funny. Apparently having a 325 max engine size, isn't nerf enough.

So ya, IS net positive in buffs

and Clan net negative.

Basically, save for the HPPC every other IS weapon got buffed.