24 replies to this topic

[kapusta11]

cERML damage reduced to 6
cERML heat reduced to 5.5
cERML Ghost Heat cap reduced to 5

Design notes:
We figured that cERML dealing 2 more damage compared to IS alternative stacked 6 times is too much of an advantage and results in too high alphas.

cGauss damge reduced to 14:

Design notes:
We looked at cGauss, then at IS Gauss, then at Light Gauss and back at cGauss and asked ourselves a simple question: WTF? The days of cGauss being better than the IS alternatives are over. Deal with it.

Gauss PPC Ghost Heat cap increased to 3

Design notes:
We felt like nerfing play style that can potentially counter problematic build was a dumb idea. We'll keep GH at 3 for now.

Edited by kapusta11, 19 October 2017 - 12:50 AM.

[N0ni]

kapusta11, on 19 October 2017 - 12:48 AM, said:

cGauss damge reduced to 14:

Design notes:
We looked at cGauss, then at IS Gauss, then at Light Gauss and back at cGauss and asked ourselves a simple question: WTF? The days of cGauss being better than the IS alternatives are over. Deal with it.

Better by 3 tons and 1 less crit. Functions the exact same otherwise.

But making that comparison with Light Gauss and completely skipping over Heavy Gauss?

[Nema Nabojiv]

kapusta11, on 19 October 2017 - 12:48 AM, said:

Gauss PPC Ghost Heat cap increased to 3

Good thing you're not working at pgi.

[Mcgral18]

If you wanted to appease the Clam Apologists, you could probably reduce the 100% chance to blow on the cGauss


And also put the Sphere a 50% chance at 10 damage
(vs 90% at 20 dam)

[The6thMessenger]

Quote

RAC2 Damage/shot from 0.8 to 1.0. (DPS from 5.82 to 7.275)
RAC2 Heat/Shot from 0.2749 to 0.3665 (HPS from 2.0 to 2.6667)

RAC2 Ammo/Ton from 300 to 240

Design Notes:

We've realized that RAC2 is completely underpowered in terms of weight and weapon combinations. This should equalize 3x RAC2 builds and 2x RAC5 builds, while still retaining the long-range ability of RAC2s due to the heavier weapon combination.

Was that so hard PGI?

Or

Quote

RAC2 Rate of Fire from 7.275 to 9.094

Design Notes:

We've realized that RAC2 is completely underpowered in terms of weight and weapon combinations. This should equalize 3x RAC2 builds and 2x RAC5 builds, while still retaining the long-range ability of RAC2s due to the heavier weapon combination.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 08 November 2017 - 06:14 AM.

[El Bandito]

Better than PGI's solution, for sure.

kapusta11, on 19 October 2017 - 12:48 AM, said:

cGauss damge reduced to 14:

Design notes:
We looked at cGauss, then at IS Gauss, then at Light Gauss and back at cGauss and asked ourselves a simple question: WTF? The days of cGauss being better than the IS alternatives are over. Deal with it.

I'd reduce CGauss damage to 12 and buff back its health.

Edited by El Bandito, 19 October 2017 - 02:36 AM.

[kapusta11]

El Bandito, on 19 October 2017 - 02:35 AM, said:

I'd reduce CGauss damage to 12 and buff back its health.

Nah, I'd rather start small and see where it goes.

[Verilligo]

Don't forget about buffing Light Gauss from 8 to 10 damage.

[Sjorpha]

Heavy Gauss - decent optimal range and make the kickback effect a quick bump rather than a miniature epileptic attack.
IS LB 2,5 and 20 - Aligned design with the LB10 and are all now 1 ton smaller and lighter than their AC counterparts.

ISXL - Survives a ST loss with slightly lower penalties than cXL.
LFE - No penalties for ST loss.
STD - Doubles torso structure. (or something, or leave it obselete, big deal)

IS DHS - cooling increased to be comparable with clan when the average number of DHS on energy boats is used, So something like 18-22 IS DHS should have comparable cooling to 25-30 cDHS.

IS Machine guns - Higher DPS or range to compensate for being heavier.

LRMs - Dumbfire and LoS+lock (direct fire) changed to fire in a lower arc with higher velocity. IS LRMs min range changed to gradual dropoff like cLRMs.

And so on, basically go through every weapons and make sure they are equally strong on both sides.

Edited by Sjorpha, 19 October 2017 - 01:11 PM.

[Stinger554]

Sjorpha, on 19 October 2017 - 01:07 PM, said:

Heavy Gauss - decent optimal range and make the kickback effect a quick bump rather than a miniature epileptic attack.
IS LB 2,5 and 20 - Aligned design with the LB10 and are all now 1 ton smaller and lighter than their AC counterparts.

ISXL - Survives a ST loss with slightly lower penalties than cXL.
LFE - No penalties for ST loss.
STD - Doubles torso structure. (or something, or leave it obselete, big deal)

IS DHS - cooling increased to be comparable with clan when the average number of DHS on energy boats is used, So something like 18-22 IS DHS should have comparable cooling to 25-30 cDHS.

IS Machine guns - Higher DPS or range to compensate for being heavier.

LRMs - Dumbfire and LoS+lock (direct fire) changed to fire in a lower arc with higher velocity. IS LRMs min range changed to gradual dropoff like cLRMs.

And so on, basically go through every weapons and make sure they are equally strong on both sides.

Or instead of essentially making IS tech Clan tech, just allow mix tech.

Edited by Stinger554, 19 October 2017 - 02:33 PM.

[Sjorpha]

Stinger554, on 19 October 2017 - 02:32 PM, said:

Or instead of essentially making IS tech Clan tech, just allow mix tech.

Mix tech doesn't balance the tech at all, it just makes IS tech obselete and transforms all mechs into clan mechs. It's a completely useless "solution."

Also I'm not suggesting making IS tech Clan tech, I'm suggesting making IS tech as strong as clan tech. Completely different things that apoligists keep deliberately misunderstanding so they can throw this "sameness" strawman as a wrench in the discussion, it's a strategy meant only to derail and obscure the issue so that no progress can happen, and they all know exactly how dishonest and self serving it is.

Edited by Sjorpha, 19 October 2017 - 03:19 PM.

[Kin3ticX]

the 7 damage on the C/ERML is a sacred cow

[Stinger554]

Sjorpha, on 19 October 2017 - 03:19 PM, said:

Also I'm not suggesting making IS tech Clan tech, I'm suggesting making IS tech as strong as clan tech.

For all intents and purposes making IS tech as strong as clan tech accomplishes the same thing functionality wise as allowing mix tech where everyone will be using clan tech.

If the two tech bases are functionally the same it is no different than everyone using the same tech in the first place... Hence might as well allow mixtech.

I'm not sure if that last bit is directed at me or not but I've no intention of strawmanning anything. As IS tech needs to be buffed, but I don't see the point when allowing mixtech does the same thing.

[Sjorpha]

Stinger554, on 19 October 2017 - 03:45 PM, said:

For all intents and purposes making IS tech as strong as clan tech accomplishes the same thing functionality wise as allowing mix tech where everyone will be using clan tech.

If the two tech bases are functionally the same it is no different than everyone using the same tech in the first place... Hence might as well allow mixtech.

I'm not sure if that last bit is directed at me or not but I've no intention of strawmanning anything. As IS tech needs to be buffed, but I don't see the point when allowing mixtech does the same thing.

You are strawmanning the issue by pretending that being equally strong is the same as being similar.

Here's and example: The IS LPL before the nerfs were about equally strong as the Clan LPL. Were they similar? Nope, they were very different, but they were both comptitively strong weapons that wer about equally desirable, some clan mechs would even have liked to mount an IS LPL is they could. Now? Nope, the cLPL is much superior now. Actually they are more similar now than before, so in this case similarity is the opposite of equal strength.

And example from another game: Team fortress 2 the medic and heavy are quite well balanced, about equally strong I'd say. Are they similar? Nope completely different.

I actually want IS and Clan to be as different as possible, but they need to be equally strong.

Can you stop confusing these categories now?

[Stinger554]

Sjorpha, on 19 October 2017 - 03:56 PM, said:

You are strawmanning the issue by pretending that being equally strong is the same as being similar.

No I'm not because I never said anything like that.

What I said was buffing IS tech to the point where it's on par with Clan tech is the accomplishes the same goal of balance as allowing everyone to use Clan tech.

You know if we're both using C-LPL, C-XL, C-DHS then it's balanced.

[FantasticMrDark]

I would much rather tech be equal* or allow mixed tech than the current system of EVERY IS mech having to have an extra 20 CT Structure/armour, 15 ST Structure/Armour, 10% Energy Range, -10% Energy Duration, etc etc.

(except the Stalker, the Stalker just doesnt really get quirks for some reason)

Edited by FantasticMrDark, 19 October 2017 - 04:26 PM.

[Sjorpha]

Stinger554, on 19 October 2017 - 04:03 PM, said:

No I'm not because I never said anything like that.

What I said was buffing IS tech to the point where it's on par with Clan tech is the accomplishes the same goal of balance as allowing everyone to use Clan tech.

You know if we're both using C-LPL, C-XL, C-DHS then it's balanced.

Except there will be no viable IS tech and no difference between how the factions play, that's a pretty big difference. I want the IS tech to be equally strong so that IS and Clan can play differently while being equally competitive.

There was a very brief period in the end of 2015 and beginning of 2016 for example where IS was actually slightly stronger at extreme long range and brawling, while Clan tech ruled mid range and long range below 800m. The two factions actually played differenly but weren't obviously imbalanced during this short period.

Now it wasn't the best kind of design because this was based on some IS mechs having very strong quirks, but it was at least something and much better than now. I want the same kind of balance we had then but based on tech balance rather than quirks.

Edited by Sjorpha, 19 October 2017 - 04:22 PM.

[Stinger554]

Sjorpha, on 19 October 2017 - 04:20 PM, said:

Except there will be no viable IS tech and no difference between how the factions play, that's a pretty big difference.

I'm aware, but buffing IS to be effectively clan(or vice versa) only makes it a name difference from allowing mixtech; which is just dumb imo.

Sjorpha, on 19 October 2017 - 04:20 PM, said:

I want the IS tech to be equally strong so that IS and Clan can play differently while being equally competitive.

See the problem there is that relies on either quirking mechs as you stated has been done previously and isn't not a good way to do so, buffing IS tech to be effectively Clan AKA equal to clan, or nerf Clan tech to be effectively IS tech AKA equal to IS.

With numbers 2&3 you are effectively allowing mixtech just under a different name and number 1 has already been done and was determined to be bad. Sooooooo....

I get I really do but making IS tech equal to Clan tech while avoiding the issue of "might as well have implemented mixtech" is nigh on impossible.

[Rick T Dangerous]

Although I'm against mixtech, making clan and IS gauss equal in tons and crits would make sense given the tech advancement. At the same time, increasing both weapon's effective range to about 800m, together with light gauss buff to 1200m and heavy gauss to 500m. Plus a decent health buff for all gauss.

[Lykaon]

kapusta11, on 19 October 2017 - 12:48 AM, said:

Design notes:
We looked at cGauss, then at IS Gauss, then at Light Gauss and back at cGauss and asked ourselves a simple question: WTF? The days of cGauss being better than the IS alternatives are over. Deal with it.

So 6 crits vs 7 crits isn't better?
And 12 tons vs 15 tons isn't better?

A clan mech mounting a Gauss rifle and 3 tons ammo is equal in weight to just a Gauss Rifle for I.S. mechs. And that's not better?

or do you mean light gauss? at 12 tons but only 8 damage? how is that better than a Clan Gauss at the same weight?

Heavy Gauss maybe? 11 crits huh? so no LFE or XLs no arm mounting and 22 crits for two dealing 50 damage. OR...

KDK 3 with four clan gauss rifles same limitation with no XL engine but better range and damage deployed in a cooldown cycle than paired hvy Gauss.

Still looks pretty good for the clan advantage to me.