Jump to content

Energy Weapon Patch Update.


197 replies to this topic

#181 Kompleks Ognevoi Podderzhki 320

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary Rank 8
  • 280 posts

Posted 18 October 2017 - 08:15 AM

View PostMalakie, on 16 October 2017 - 01:43 PM, said:

Another way to see what the imbalance has caused is in the faction game play... Innersphere pretty much is on the losing end 95% of the time.

When I can stand toe to toe with my Atlas, max armor, max weapons and heat sink with a medium mech and it just ******* away without effort, it becomes clear there is an imbalance.

Getting hit with constant 80 points of damage while the other mech hides due to its speed and agility, does not make for fun game play in an Assault mech, trust me.

I DON'T want to see things nerfed completely but balance I do hope to see so that our skill actually becomes more of a needed thing to win than a luck thing.

While I am no where near being a top player, it is frustrating to have 5 kills in a match only to get taken down by someone that can hammer you and hide without taking hardly any damage in return.

View PostMalakie, on 16 October 2017 - 01:43 PM, said:

Another way to see what the imbalance has caused is in the faction game play... Innersphere pretty much is on the losing end 95% of the time.

When I can stand toe to toe with my Atlas, max armor, max weapons and heat sink with a medium mech and it just ******* away without effort, it becomes clear there is an imbalance.

Getting hit with constant 80 points of damage while the other mech hides due to its speed and agility, does not make for fun game play in an Assault mech, trust me.

I DON'T want to see things nerfed completely but balance I do hope to see so that our skill actually becomes more of a needed thing to win than a luck thing.

While I am no where near being a top player, it is frustrating to have 5 kills in a match only to get taken down by someone that can hammer you and hide without taking hardly any damage in return.

Maybe becouse u newbies and trying to win vs premade pilots like IREX, RCW, 420m, EVIL ? Go to clans when this units will take conttact to IS.

Edited by Kompleks Ognevoi Podderzhki 320, 18 October 2017 - 08:16 AM.


#182 Grus

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Little Devil
  • Little Devil
  • 3,979 posts

Posted 18 October 2017 - 12:10 PM

View PostJay Leon Hart, on 17 October 2017 - 04:06 PM, said:

Trigger pull for trigger pull *at the same damage* Clan will be able to fire more often, due to better cooling.

The best match I can get with range, damage & duration profiles is;
WHM with 3x LL, 5x ERML, 325 LFE, 18 DHS = 52 damage, 360m optimal range, 1.1s duration
EBJ with 2x LPL, 4x ERML, 25 DHS = 52 damage, 400m optimal range, 1.25s duration

Have a look at how they compare here
ran it and red team won. But I'll change it to a meta build for EBJ and see.

#183 Jay Leon Hart

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Spear
  • The Spear
  • 4,667 posts

Posted 18 October 2017 - 12:54 PM

View PostGrus, on 18 October 2017 - 12:10 PM, said:

ran it and red team won. But I'll change it to a meta build for EBJ and see.

Yes, EBJ only wins at 400m or more, but look at their ability to fire. The EBJ gets extra shots in. The EBJ has greater DPS, burst damage and overall damage, but loses because the WHM has structure quirks. Without those quirks, the EBJ would win every time.

Edited by Jay Leon Hart, 18 October 2017 - 12:54 PM.


#184 Kl0Wn KiLLeR

    Rookie

  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 5 posts

Posted 18 October 2017 - 02:19 PM

While I agree that some sort of balance is needed (especially where it is clan vs IS) I am not sure if cooldown is the proper way to address it. I would hope that the skill tree would still allow "laser vomit" if you cared to spec your mech that way. Perhaps 'reflective armor' could be created as an option to counter it? Not sure but I thought I would throw that out.

#185 SatanDelete

    Rookie

  • Survivor
  • 1 posts

Posted 18 October 2017 - 03:52 PM

I enjoy reading PGI's pug level reasoning when looking at any kind of change. Thanks for the laughs.

Just get good.

#186 Peiper

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Dragoon
  • The Dragoon
  • 1,443 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • LocationA fog where no one notices the contrast of white on white

Posted 18 October 2017 - 04:11 PM

Battle Value.

If a mech, or a weapon, is worth more or less than it's weight in utility, then the mech gains or loses value.

Use battle value instead of tonnage to determine 'weights' for matchmaking.

Problem solved. I'm sure if you look back over the last four or five years, you'll find me and others posting about it.

Also, of course, sized hardpoints.

I also suggested an energy draw and recoil system about 3 years ago, where mechs that were not designed to carry as many or as large weapons as we put on them have penalties and/or take damage when using those weapons. I wrote essays on this and sent them into PGI and friends.

So, I guess there's nothing left to say. PGI is going to do what PGI does, and someday, we'll have a new, improved mechwarrior where the game is not based perfectly on tabletop, but balanced due to logical factors.

If not all like-sized tanks are create equal, and not all like-calibre guns are created equal, then it stands to reason that you shouldn't try to make them equal, but instead value them accordingly and balance out the sides vs. each other rather than try to make them all equal. If you have 5x 6'10" players facing 5x 4' players on a basketball court, that's not the fault of the players. That's the fault of the league organizers not taking into account that not all players are equal and adjusting the league rules to take that into account. PGI, you have been approaching this from the wrong angle since day one.

Is it too late to change?

No. Fix the balance issues by replacing tonnage with battle value. Adjust the matchmaker accordingly. Stop with the nerf hammers and trying to make IS tech as good as Clan tech. You're trying to fit round nails into square holes, which just ends up splitting the wood.

You'll be able to put less effort into balancing the game and get back to adding content like maps and starting to flush out community/faction warfare. You've been trying to balance the game for years. It's a waste of time and effort. We're getting bored. We need maps, variety, and a robust community warfare system including supply lines, combined arms, salvage, a black market, strategic and tactical decisions and so on. You know, what we all signed up for back in 2012.

You can then announce the new stuff as a re-invention of MWO can call it MWO 2.0. That might bring guys back.

Edited by Peiper, 18 October 2017 - 04:16 PM.


#187 rustyrat

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Mercenary Rank 3
  • 68 posts

Posted 18 October 2017 - 08:30 PM

Hi!

Don't nerf hopper - i got many - and dont use them any more. I'm trying - but lack of tankiness, slow torso twist, large profile, removed quirks make those bit bad. Only semi ok are the 5h that has till couple percentage points to the heat as an erll carrier.

Torso twist - i.e. engine decoupling - wrecked the usability of mid range mayhem of hoppers. Heat quirks been nerfed to the ground too. Even if you try to torso twist clan large lasers just obliterates your bot if any good team in FW. They feel sluggish and fragile now, peek and die bots.

EBJ, Marauder II and linebackers (just to name a few) are far far more stronger bots in actual play. I feel easy mode while dropping any of those in QP. What on space - consider 6srm 2mg mad cat madness - that messes with your IS bot in a snap. Shooting the agile and durable linebackers swarm just makes you feel stupid...

Consider also looking at uac5 heat + ppc heat. It's not right - I got many whr 6rs, and just cant make those work. Whm6D with laser vomit is only viable hammer as I see in FW nowadays. Gauss is no longer viable as i see (has it ever?) - damage output just falls short. Ok then you move to ac10, but notice your overall damage simply drops. Aiming ac10s is still situational, and to keep dps going you more or less face tank, where clan laser vomit kils your sidetorso. Ac20 + 2 stubb ppc is just too short ranged for slow bot, hot and situational considering maps and what IS player faces in FW. RAC5s too slow for big slow target (and weak) side torso bot, then you go to drop the whm 6D which feels right, even far too hot for hot maps.

I'm sure if you ask other players - they can give similar 'testimonial' and 'in play' feel comments. For example, I found bot NCIX (which I used to hate), pretty ok with new stub ppc + 3srm6. It's twistable & movable just enough, cool enough and pinpoint weapon group close together combination that makes the difference... If i start to drop those, for sure its stats will go up, this does not mean nerf those! They are still really bad bad bots... with odd weight class, that has one fit that makes them barely playable.

Cheers,
Rusty

ps Great Game !

Edited by rustyrat, 18 October 2017 - 09:02 PM.


#188 McHoshi

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary Rank 10
  • Mercenary Rank 10
  • 1,056 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationGermany

Posted 19 October 2017 - 03:44 AM

So why are the Clan Medium Pulse Laser also got nerfed by the Cooldown? Up from 3 to 3.5?
Patchnotes didn´t mentioned them being nerfed that way!

WtF is wrong with you guys @PGI? Posted Image

#189 TWIAFU

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Pest
  • The Pest
  • 4,011 posts
  • LocationBell's Brewery, MI

Posted 19 October 2017 - 04:05 AM

View PostGasoline, on 17 October 2017 - 03:14 AM, said:



Let's not make it too convoluted, shall we? I'm all for staying true to the original Battletech, but not everything translates well into a FPS. Random dice rolls deciding games is nothing we should aim for.



While we cannot really use the TT Heat Scale as we do not have Piloting and Gunnery Skills to roll against, the Heat Scale can be modified to accommodate MWO mechanics.

I am no coder, arm-chair or not. As a TT player, I understand the TT Heat Scale. It is familiar as it would be to all TT players of BT.

I would personally rather have a Heat Scale modified to work withing MWO. Incorporate Ghost Heat or eliminate and apply to a "classic" Heat Scale.

This is a good idea;

View PostOvion, on 17 October 2017 - 03:48 AM, said:



As to the heat chart, well you could easily adjust that to the game:
Each Heatsink provides 1 (2) Heat Capacity and 0.1 (0.2) per second heat dissipation.
Every mech will then have 10 (20) base heat capacity and 1 (2) from the 10 heat sinks from the engine.
Every second after it dissipates heat it applies cumulative effects based on how far over the mechs capacity it is:
+5 -16.2kph top speed (min 16.2kph top speed)
+8 light screenshake (like with MASC / JJ motion)
+10 -16.2kph top speed (-32.4 total, min 16.2kph top speed)
+13 increased screen shake
+14 8% chance of shut down
+15 -16.2kph top speed (-48.6 total, min 16.2kph top speed)
+17 increased screen shake
+18 +8% chance of shut down (16% total)
+19 8% chance of a crit (10 damage) on one random location (if it hits an ammo bin or gauss rifle, it explodes)
+20 -16.2kph top speed (-64.8 total, min 16.2kph top speed)
+22 +8% chance of shut down (24% total)
+23 +8% chance of a crit (10 damage) on one random location (16% total)
+24 increased screen shake
+25 -16.2kph top speed (-81.0 total, min 16.2kph top speed)
+22 +8% chance of shut down (32% total)
+28 +8% chance of a crit (10 damage) on one random location (24% total)
+30 +8% chance of shut down (40% total)


This is a good starting point to what I was thinking and trying to explain. It is a good framework to start from. Values and effects subject to change....

#190 Ovion

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Vicious
  • The Vicious
  • 3,182 posts

Posted 19 October 2017 - 05:37 AM

View PostPeiper, on 18 October 2017 - 04:11 PM, said:

Battle Value.

If a mech, or a weapon, is worth more or less than it's weight in utility, then the mech gains or loses value.

Use battle value instead of tonnage to determine 'weights' for matchmaking.

Problem solved. I'm sure if you look back over the last four or five years, you'll find me and others posting about it.
Yes, BV would be good. - not to determine weight, but as the balancing method itself.

If everything had a BV value (i.e. a 100T mech is 100BV + 1pt for each point of armour, each weapon has a BV based on weight, size, damage, range, etc)
Then you had a modifier based on your tier / pilot skill rating (it would need a seperate rating for each weight class too imo) with a base 1. Good players increase it (so a 'Tier 1' could be Pilot Skill 1.2, which would make the BV x1.2) and new / bad players decrease it (i.e. a 'Tier 5' pilot could be Pilot Skill 0.8, which would make the BV x0.8) which would then make the overall balancing even more accurate.

View PostPeiper, on 18 October 2017 - 04:11 PM, said:

Also, of course, sized hardpoints.
The more I look at them, the more I find sized hardpoints an awful, awful idea.

I much prefer the Mass System.
An equipments Mass is determined by Weight+Size/4(rounded up).
So a Medium Laser would be ME1, and an AC20 would be MB6.

Then instead of Hard Points, each component has a Mass Rating, which shows how much equipment it's designed to hold and cope with.
i.e.
Spoiler
This would all allow granualr balancing of hardpoints, and remove *some* of the silliness of some mechs (i.e the Raven being able to put an AC20 in an MG mount)

View PostPeiper, on 18 October 2017 - 04:11 PM, said:

Is it too late to change?
I don't think so.

View PostPeiper, on 18 October 2017 - 04:11 PM, said:

No. Fix the balance issues by replacing tonnage with battle value. Adjust the matchmaker accordingly. Stop with the nerf hammers and trying to make IS tech as good as Clan tech. You're trying to fit round nails into square holes, which just ends up splitting the wood.
I don't think this is really accurate honestly.
Yes, adding BV would be good. Adjusting some things would be good.
But balancing will still be an issue - that's just how online player driven games are.

View PostTWIAFU, on 19 October 2017 - 04:05 AM, said:

This is a good idea;

This is a good starting point to what I was thinking and trying to explain. It is a good framework to start from. Values and effects subject to change....
And I literally just spent a few minutes translating the chart pretty directly.

It's not hard to improve on that in the medium of MWO, you could cut that chart down to something like this:
Each Heatsink provides 1 (2) Heat Capacity and 0.1 (0.2) per second heat dissipation.
Every mech will then have 10 (20) base heat capacity and 1 (2) from the 10 heat sinks from the engine.
Every second after it dissipates heat it applies cumulative effects based on how far over the mechs capacity it is:
Every +5 -16.2kph top speed (min 16.2kph top speed)
Every +6 +screenshake (like with MASC / JJ motion)
Every +8 +8% chance of shut down
At +20 and every +4 after +8% chance of a crit (10 damage) on one random location (if it hits an ammo bin or gauss rifle, it explodes)

Edited by Ovion, 19 October 2017 - 05:38 AM.


#191 Doombug

    Rookie

  • Mercenary
  • Mercenary
  • 3 posts

Posted 19 October 2017 - 08:42 AM

In my humble opinion, a single solution could make much of the balancing troubles a whole lot easier. A thing which has been fun in some other mechwarrior game titles: SALVAGE.

Allow the use of mixed-tech in both clan and IS mechs.
That means that IS mechs can buy and equip clan engines, equipment and weaponry, and vice versa.

Perhaps such a thing needs to be unlocked in-play (by destroying mechs on the field that carry such items, i.e. you can only equip a number of salvaged parts from your KMDD's or single kills). However, one could handle that stuff different for faction loyalists and mercs. Or it could be bound to every single mech chassis.
It could become a long-time goal to collect such items.
And / Or, installing an item of the other tech type could disable that mech's chassis quirks.
And / Or, it might require a small fee to install the other tech type weapon on a chassis because the tech guys need to modify the weapon a bit so it can be screwed onto these different hardpoint sockets...

Just an idea.

#192 ThunderKats

    Member

  • Pip
  • Heavy Lifter
  • Heavy Lifter
  • 14 posts

Posted 20 October 2017 - 02:24 AM

Nerf, nerf, nerf, snarf...
What about boost? They been nerfing all short weapons all the time, that's why sniping laser vomit gauss long range clan is OP, they just take small risk and do high dmg...doble the HP in all mechs and all this discussion about laser vomit is over GG (just saying)

#193 VoodooLou Kerensky

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • Bridesmaid
  • 586 posts
  • LocationMember #2618

Posted 20 October 2017 - 09:28 AM

Blah blah blah Ballance blah blah. Balance means that all things considered the weapons are equal. So how is a weapon that has more burn time,heat (as well as Ghost heating significantly more than the IS versions)and range Balanced by more weight,space and shorter burn times? ITS NOT! Less range doesnt equal less weight and space or longer burn time, nor significant increase in ghost heat. Just like Firing one round that does 10 to 20 damage doesnt Balance firing 3 to 5 rounds to do the same damage.

#194 Y E O N N E

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Nimble
  • The Nimble
  • 16,362 posts

Posted 21 October 2017 - 12:34 PM

View PostDoombug, on 19 October 2017 - 08:42 AM, said:

In my humble opinion, a single solution could make much of the balancing troubles a whole lot easier. A thing which has been fun in some other mechwarrior game titles: SALVAGE.

Allow the use of mixed-tech in both clan and IS mechs.
That means that IS mechs can buy and equip clan engines, equipment and weaponry, and vice versa.

Perhaps such a thing needs to be unlocked in-play (by destroying mechs on the field that carry such items, i.e. you can only equip a number of salvaged parts from your KMDD's or single kills). However, one could handle that stuff different for faction loyalists and mercs. Or it could be bound to every single mech chassis.
It could become a long-time goal to collect such items.
And / Or, installing an item of the other tech type could disable that mech's chassis quirks.
And / Or, it might require a small fee to install the other tech type weapon on a chassis because the tech guys need to modify the weapon a bit so it can be screwed onto these different hardpoint sockets...

Just an idea.


Doesn't fix anything, everybody ends up taking the Clan weapons, engines, and heatsinks whenever they can in most cases because the IS ones are bunk even with quirks. And some quirks are also meant to help a chassis with poor design, not just band-aid tech imbalance.

#195 Invictus XVII

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 50 posts

Posted 27 November 2017 - 06:44 AM

I'm going to express what most people already know, but to add my voice to the pile.

BUFF INNERSPHERE FFS.
They cant hold a candle to clans in any scenario in FW. If both teams are highly skilled, clans win every day, in any scenario. IS only have 2-3 solid performers for FW like battlemaster & marauder while clans just have all kinds of mechs that outperforms pretty much anything IS have.

The only thing done right by IS in recent time is giving spiders and urbies more armor. Spiders still needs more hardpoints (shoulder mounted like cheeters, not more guns in the crotch/ankles) or spectacular quirks to make it even remotely viable in a serious game vs Clans. Infact, all innersphere mechs do.

Removing 1 ton or two on every balistic weapon on IS would be a start, theyre not worth the tonnage, also remove a slot so we could actually use the hardpoints on the mechs as intended, and not only have the option to either use an lbx5 or 2 large lasers. The choice is pretty obvious. Cause IS balistics suck as they are.

I can explain in detail if asked.
Please do, i have so much pent up rage over this situation ive nearly quit the game forever over these things.



Make innersphere great again!

Edited by Fishbaws, 27 November 2017 - 06:48 AM.


#196 MovinTarget

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary Rank 10
  • Mercenary Rank 10
  • 3,798 posts
  • LocationGreen Acres

Posted 27 November 2017 - 07:01 AM

View PostFishbaws, on 27 November 2017 - 06:44 AM, said:


BUFF INNERSPHERE FFS.



On one side I get what you say, on the other, how do we buff without tipping the scales (again) or basically making all the weapons homogenous and therefore the sides are nearly indistinguishable?

Adding hardpoints goes with that. If we just give some mechs more and more advantageous hardpoints, then someone else will be butthurt their favorite chassis didn't get that kind of love....

Soon we'll have people are both sides arguing "<insert faction here> has an advantage because they haz more mechs with high shoulder pardpoints!!! ZOMG PLZ NERF!!!"

The reason solutions can't be rushed is b/c solutions here won't be easy...

Edited by MovinTarget, 27 November 2017 - 07:02 AM.


#197 Syntillate

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • Bridesmaid
  • 67 posts
  • LocationUK

Posted 31 December 2017 - 03:01 AM

View PostInvictus XVII, on 27 November 2017 - 06:44 AM, said:

I'm going to express what most people already know, but to add my voice to the pile.

BUFF INNERSPHERE FFS.
They cant hold a candle to clans in any scenario in FW. If both teams are highly skilled, clans win every day, in any scenario. IS only have 2-3 solid performers for FW like battlemaster &amp; marauder while clans just have all kinds of mechs that outperforms pretty much anything IS have.

The only thing done right by IS in recent time is giving spiders and urbies more armor. Spiders still needs more hardpoints (shoulder mounted like cheeters, not more guns in the crotch/ankles) or spectacular quirks to make it even remotely viable in a serious game vs Clans. Infact, all innersphere mechs do.

Removing 1 ton or two on every balistic weapon on IS would be a start, theyre not worth the tonnage, also remove a slot so we could actually use the hardpoints on the mechs as intended, and not only have the option to either use an lbx5 or 2 large lasers. The choice is pretty obvious. Cause IS balistics suck as they are.

I can explain in detail if asked.
Please do, i have so much pent up rage over this situation ive nearly quit the game forever over these things.



Make innersphere great again!


I disagree, I significantly prefer innersphere mechs to clans. Between quirks and skill tree there are some real monsters. And some mechs you don't see much of; orions, dragons, awesomes, shadow hawks, javelins, commandos, vindicators... really are quite competitive.

On the subject of energy weapons, on paper clan weapons may look better but IS energy weapons typically trade off range and alpha for efficiency. Epic duration and good damage per heat and in some cases a higher threshold for ghostheat means you can do a lot more in less time, at the cost of range and tonnage.

With quirks you will win trades at range using ERLL's, the duration means you are much more precise and torso twisting some of their damage.
MLs are almost 50% less heat and 75% duration of clan ERs.
LPLs and MPLs again have significant duration and heat benefits.

Other weapons like uac5's are still great and better than clans. Uac2s are a good addition. Mrms work well. Heavy ppcs can be fun.

I don't think they need buffing at all, duration is such an important stat, and whilst the weapons are typically heavier, lower range and sometimes lower alpha they more than make up for it with heat and duration. Finally the rigidity of omni mechs through so many fixed slots can really reduce the viability of builds with many of them.



#198 BTGbullseye

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Fearless
  • The Fearless
  • 1,444 posts
  • LocationI'm still pissed about ATMs having a minimum range.

Posted 31 December 2017 - 03:30 AM

View PostSyntillate, on 31 December 2017 - 03:01 AM, said:

I don't think they need buffing at all, duration is such an important stat, and whilst the weapons are typically heavier, lower range and sometimes lower alpha they more than make up for it with heat and duration.

You also have to take into account that Clan mechs have between 50 and 75% the overall hitpoints of an IS mech... The overall damage per hitpoint ratio for Clan vs IS is almost identical, apart from a few IS mechs that are WAY overarmored for their weight class. *glances sideways at the Urbie*

Edited by BTGbullseye, 31 December 2017 - 03:31 AM.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users