1125 replies to this topic

[Gyrok]

Kin3ticX, on 10 February 2018 - 11:50 AM, said:

FP is basically abandonware so if you are coming at techbase balance from an FP angle, maybe someone would care in 2015.

Most of my top mechs are clan but most of them have also been nerfed.



and i dont even have deathstrikes or supernovas.

Besides, in MWOWC, they were using majority Clams too.

We have not participated in FP since 2015...so no. We just want Gauss/PPC back...give the game a high skill ceiling FFS.

[Tarogato]

Kin3ticX, on 10 February 2018 - 11:50 AM, said:

FP is basically abandonware so if you are coming at techbase balance from an FP angle, maybe someone would care in 2015.

Most of my top mechs are clan but most of them have also been nerfed.

[chart of stuff]

and i dont even have deathstrikes or supernovas.

Besides, in MWOWC, they were using majority Clams too.

What is this, your personal mechs that you tracked individually on a spreadsheet while playing FP? About 300-matches worth?
Any other data concerning the matches, like what the matchmaking (lol) was like, etc?

[Andi Nagasia]

Kin3ticX, on 10 February 2018 - 10:45 AM, said:

you are assuming PGI's implementation of AMS means doubling AMS damage would counter faster LRMs (2x faster).

ive done the Math, on paper it would, to 96 - 99% efficiency,

Kin3ticX, on 10 February 2018 - 10:45 AM, said:

I dont think AMS even responds fast enough to shoot down really fast missiles. That would create more work for PGI than just changing an XML entry.

AMS fires off 10 Damage Ticks a second, so that 3.5 Damage is actually 0.35Damage every 1/10th sec,
so 1AMS can shoot down 3.5Missiles(assuming 165AMS Range, and 165Velocity Missiles(1Sec for AMS to fire)
these 10Ticks a sec is how 2AMS can shoot down 7 missiles, ect. so it would be a XML Edit, now a programing rework,

Kin3ticX, on 10 February 2018 - 10:45 AM, said:

I don't think people are going to install AMS if you make LRMs stronger, they are just going to come to the forums and start complaining. The reason is....LRM counterplay sucks and it gets boring. Ive been around since closed beta when LRMs did 2 damage and ive seen whats thats like.

well if people complain about LRMs killing them and they dont want to equip AMS, thats their choice,
i understand that, sometimes you need that 2-3tons, more weapons or DHSs, but again thats a choice,
its Tonnage spent to make your mech more Missile Resistant, a health boost vs Missiles,
-
when you buy a Mech and it comes with half its available Armor, you max that armor out, thats a choice,
but in that case thats bonus health vs all attacks, but its still a choice, AMS is no different than maxing armor,
(adding in Reflective or reactive Armor would work identical to AMS, its Crits/Tonnage for Bonus Health)

[Kin3ticX]

Tarogato, on 10 February 2018 - 11:57 AM, said:

What is this, your personal mechs that you tracked individually on a spreadsheet while playing FP? About 300-matches worth?
Any other data concerning the matches, like what the matchmaking (lol) was like, etc?

thats my QP stats with anything sub 50 matches removed. Like I said though, KDK-3 and NGT etc etc have since been nerfed (once the sales dried up)

Gyrok, on 10 February 2018 - 11:56 AM, said:

We have not participated in FP since 2015...so no. We just want Gauss/PPC back...give the game a high skill ceiling FFS.

Sounds good to me

[HammerMaster]

CainenEX, on 10 February 2018 - 11:52 AM, said:

I found ECM to be very underwhelming in its current state to very overwhelming before it was addressed. I do not even bring it anymore. I think it should be addressed at somepoint in the future outside of the current weapons debate.

What are your suggestions for addressing ECM? Do these suggestions requires small xml changes or require code edits?

Clearly code edits.

[Y E O N N E]

Gyrok, on 10 February 2018 - 11:47 AM, said:

How is "no change" to most weapon systems a net buff? I saw the UAC changes, and frankly those are worthless with current Ghost heat being so restrictive on how many you can run at a time. If you are predicating the majority of your "net buff" on the UACs and the small laser buffs...then I would say that is a fail.

Clan Gauss got nothing, Clan PPCs got nothing and ghost heat is staying the same, meanwhile the IS counterparts are being buffed strongly, and the proposal calls for allowing 3 SNPPCs at once.

Did you not see the laser changes?

cSPL get damage buffed to 5 with a considerably better damage-heat ratio than now.
cLPL down to 8.5 heat, duration down to 1 second.
cERSL heat down to 3.
cHSL damage up to 7 and you can fire 6.
cHML heat down to 7 and now you can fire a 45 alpha with them instead of 40 before ghost heat with the same duration as cERLL (hello weapon synergy!)
cHLL get a slightly better efficiency.

What did the IS lasers get?

All Smalls do 4 damage with increased DPS.
LPL damage is back to 11.
isML gets its cooldown set back to pre-nerf levels.
isERML cooldown -0.5 s, not even where it was before the nerf.
Aaaand that's it.

All the problems the IS have with smaller alphas and damage output at the line are still there, yet overall the Clan 'Mechs run colder than on live with tighter damage grouping than on live. The IS ERLL continues to be completely inadequate without a quirk.

The PPC changes are about the only solid IS buff in the document, and they are still going to run hot for the damage output with plenty of built-in, and frankly crippling, drawbacks to be gamed.

There are plenty of duds in the document, including IS laser heat, IS ERLL range, Clan pulse laser max ranges. Gauss+PPC was originally brought back with a limit of 3 (more or less, three of any Gauss or PPC combo), but there was a lot of pushback. It's all still a work in progress.

[Khobai]

Quote

All the problems the IS have with smaller alphas and damage output at the line are still there, yet overall the Clan 'Mechs run colder than on live with tighter damage grouping than on live.

Yep. I said it before that its ridiculous to even discuss weapon balance before balancing the fundamentals.

engines, heatsinks, ferro/endo should all be balanced before anything else.


phase 1 should be balancing fundamentals and the core of the tech bases

phase 2 should be weapon balance

phase 3 should be mech balance, quirks, and fine tuning

Edited by Khobai, 10 February 2018 - 12:11 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

Khobai, on 10 February 2018 - 12:09 PM, said:

Yep. I said it before that its ridiculous to even discuss weapon balance before balancing the fundamentals.

engines, heatsinks, ferro/endo should all be balanced before anything else.

Don't worry, I relayed as much on Reddit. As much as we butt heads and differ over how we want the game to play, we're at least on the same page there.

[Bud Crue]

Khobai, on 10 February 2018 - 12:09 PM, said:

Yep. I said it before that its ridiculous to even discuss weapon balance before balancing the fundamentals.

engines, heatsinks, ferro/endo should all be balanced before anything else.


phase 1 should be balancing fundamentals and the core of the tech bases

phase 2 should be weapon balance

phase 3 should be mech balance, quirks, and fine tuning

Yes, but it sounds like Russ, Chris, etc. are not interested in hearing from the community in regard to items 1 and 3. So that leaves 2. Alas, you work with what you can.

Edited by Bud Crue, 10 February 2018 - 12:12 PM.

[Khobai]

Quote

Yes, but it sounds like Russ, Chris, etc. is not interested in hearing from the community in regard to items 1 and 3. So that leaves 2. Alas, you work with what you can.

well the community needs to tell them otherwise

ISXL needs to survive side torso blowout (and we can buff LFE and STD engines appropriately to make that work)

ISDHS need to be true double heatsinks because they are obscenely bulky compared to CDHS and dont fit in a lot of locations CDHS can fit in

and IS ES/FF should be where IS get their structure/armor quirks from rather than getting them for free.

At least get IS and clan mechs performing within ~10% of eachother at the base level before you move onto weapon balance. The game is never going to be perfectly balanced, its just not gonna happen with two vastly different techbases, but im confident we can get it within 10%.

Edited by Khobai, 10 February 2018 - 12:18 PM.

[dario03]

Khobai, on 10 February 2018 - 12:14 PM, said:

well the community needs to tell them otherwise

ISXL needs to survive side torso blowout (and we can buff LFE and STD engines appropriately to make that work)

ISDHS need to be true double heatsinks because they are obscenely bulky compared to CDHS and dont fit in a lot of locations CDHS can fit in

and IS ES/FF should be where IS get their structure/armor quirks from rather than getting them for free.

ISXL does not need to survive ST destruction. Surviving ST loss is one option but it isn't the only option.
For instance we have had IS mechs be top mechs while using XL before due to quirks.

[Khobai]

Quote

ISXL does not need to survive ST destruction. Surviving ST loss is one option but it isn't the only option.
For instance we have had IS mechs be top mechs while using XL before due to quirks.

yes it does need to survive ST destruction.

because the advantage clans get from CXL over LFE/ISXL is tremendously unbalancing. it always has been.

Quote

For instance we have had IS mechs be top mechs while using XL before due to quirks.

and IS superquirks are also stupid and need to be removed. the very fact that nearly every IS mech needs to have superquirks to compete with clan mechs should send up red flags for anyone looking to balance the game properly.

quirks should not be used to balance the two tech bases.

quirks should only be used to differentiate otherwise similar mechs and help underperforming mechs.

Edited by Khobai, 10 February 2018 - 12:24 PM.

[Kin3ticX]

Andi Nagasia, on 10 February 2018 - 11:57 AM, said:

ive done the Math, on paper it would, to 96 - 99% efficiency,


AMS fires off 10 Damage Ticks a second, so that 3.5 Damage is actually 0.35Damage every 1/10th sec,
so 1AMS can shoot down 3.5Missiles(assuming 165AMS Range, and 165Velocity Missiles(1Sec for AMS to fire)
these 10Ticks a sec is how 2AMS can shoot down 7 missiles, ect. so it would be a XML Edit, now a programing rework,


well if people complain about LRMs killing them and they dont want to equip AMS, thats their choice,
i understand that, sometimes you need that 2-3tons, more weapons or DHSs, but again thats a choice,
its Tonnage spent to make your mech more Missile Resistant, a health boost vs Missiles,
-
when you buy a Mech and it comes with half its available Armor, you max that armor out, thats a choice,
but in that case thats bonus health vs all attacks, but its still a choice, AMS is no different than maxing armor,
(adding in Reflective or reactive Armor would work identical to AMS, its Crits/Tonnage for Bonus Health)

By all means, I want to see what 2x LRM speed is like, I almost dare PGI to do it. But lets face it, its just more mod work for you in the forums.

[Bud Crue]

Khobai, on 10 February 2018 - 12:14 PM, said:

well the community needs to tell them otherwise

ISXL needs to survive side torso blowout (and we can buff LFE and STD engines appropriately to make that work)

ISDHS need to be true double heatsinks because they are obscenely bulky compared to CDHS and dont fit in a lot of locations CDHS can fit in

and IS ES/FF should be where IS get their structure/armor quirks from rather than getting them for free.

You of all people know better than that. How many times have you, or I, or many of the people in this thread posted on these topics here, on reddit on Russ's twitter, etc.? Thousands. PGI knows damn well about these issues. Hell, a while back Chris (or was it Russ? I really don't remember) even acknowledged some willingness to look at the ISXL/clanXL imbalance for one. Yet THAT is not what they appear to be willing to talk about at the moment. Remember who you are dealing with here, beyond the CW and Comp round tables they have NEVER given any real indication that they are willing to listen to a community driven effort, advice, or even thought. But here we are, so lets stick with what they are willing to hear. Yes, I fully expect this effort to be mostly ignored, but lets not push it, so that we have the best chance at getting ANYTHING changed.

[dario03]

Khobai, on 10 February 2018 - 12:20 PM, said:

yes it does need to survive ST destruction.

because the advantage clans get from CXL over LFE/ISXL is tremendously unbalancing. it always has been.



and IS superquirks are also stupid and need to be removed.

quirks should not be used to balance the two tech bases

quirks should only be used to differentiate otherwise similar mechs and help underperforming mechs

No, it doesn't.
You can have ISXL die from ST loss but give other bonuses over CXL so that they are about equal while still being different.

[Khobai]

Quote

You of all people know better than that

Its true lol. Unfortunately I seem to have let other peoples misguided optimism rub off on me, and that the game might actually improve.

I should just go back to what I do best, trolling and laughing at the inevitable trainwreck lol

Quote

No, it doesn't.
You can have ISXL die from ST loss but give other bonuses over CXL so that they are about equal while still being different.

They wouldnt be different. ISXL would function identically to how CXL functions now. Other than CXL taking up two less crit slots.

Like I said balance is never going to be 100%. But that is much closer to balanced than what we have now.

Edited by Khobai, 10 February 2018 - 12:32 PM.

[Andi Nagasia]

Kin3ticX, on 10 February 2018 - 12:21 PM, said:

By all means, I want to see what 2x LRM speed is like, I almost dare PGI to do it. But lets face it, its just more mod work for you in the forums.

im assuming you mean that their will be more (feedback) here, about that change?
well that happens anyway, every patch, some like the change some dont, some thing X is OP, some dont,
as long as the Discussion is on topic, and Civil then everything should be fine here,

[Navid A1]

Gyrok, on 10 February 2018 - 11:44 AM, said:

I know a few groups consisting of 100s of players that want PPC/Gauss back as it was for clans. If you want the playerbase to keep shrinking, and no one returning...then you can celebrate the death of the game along with my absence.

Then tell them to come here or on reddit and voice their opinion.
we had to retreat from our initial GH limit of 3 for Gauss + PPC combos because 4 people spammed fear mongering posts!

Edited by Navid A1, 10 February 2018 - 12:31 PM.

[dario03]

Khobai, on 10 February 2018 - 12:27 PM, said:

They wouldnt be different. Other than CXL taking up two less crit slots.

They would be different. Adding bonuses to ISXL and having it still die to ST loss makes them different. Its been done before, no reason it can't be done now. Only difference is making the bonuses engine specific instead of mech specific.

[Gyrok]

Yeonne Greene, on 10 February 2018 - 12:05 PM, said:

Did you not see the laser changes?

cSPL get damage buffed to 5 with a considerably better damage-heat ratio than now.
cLPL down to 8.5 heat, duration down to 1 second.
cERSL heat down to 3.
cHSL damage up to 7 and you can fire 6.
cHML heat down to 7 and now you can fire a 45 alpha with them instead of 40 before ghost heat with the same duration as cERLL (hello weapon synergy!)
cHLL get a slightly better efficiency.

What did the IS lasers get?

All Smalls do 4 damage with increased DPS.
LPL damage is back to 11.
isML gets its cooldown set back to pre-nerf levels.
isERML cooldown -0.5 s, not even where it was before the nerf.
Aaaand that's it.

All the problems the IS have with smaller alphas and damage output at the line are still there, yet overall the Clan 'Mechs run colder than on live with tighter damage grouping than on live. The IS ERLL continues to be completely inadequate without a quirk.

The PPC changes are about the only solid IS buff in the document, and they are still going to run hot for the damage output with plenty of built-in, and frankly crippling, drawbacks to be gamed.

There are plenty of duds in the document, including IS laser heat, IS ERLL range, Clan pulse laser max ranges. Gauss+PPC was originally brought back with a limit of 3 (more or less, three of any Gauss or PPC combo), but there was a lot of pushback. It's all still a work in progress.

Joy to the world! Let us relegate clan mechs to the droll and boring meta they have had for the better part of 3 years! Let us reduce skilled play by all facets and make lasers the preferred medium for the art of destruction! Be gone with anything that requires muscle memory and skill to use effectively, and that promotes interesting and divergent gameplay from the currently stale laser meta we have had since time was born.

Who wants diverse gameplay anyway? Let lasers forever be the hallmark of the clans...there can be no other possible option for them to use effectively!

/s