1125 replies to this topic

[Reno Blade]

I had this kind of balance changes layed out long ago a few times with the last take being this one:
https://mwomercs.com...g-3060-weapons/

My main focus is to reduce alpha damage and make it harder to hit with the the full damage by increasing spread or durations while heat and cooldowns are more diverse overall.

Some samples quoted below:

[Fleeb the Mad]

Gas Guzzler, on 11 February 2018 - 07:50 AM, said:

Single Gauss 2 ER PPC builds at the very least would be the bigger part of that. Unlocks a lot of options.

If you rationally evaulate the state of the current game rather than tremble in fear at the thought of a time so long ago then it starts to make more sense.

I haven't forgotten. The Timber with a Gauss and 2 ER PPCs wasn't a showstopper before ghost heat. Don't see how it would magically become OP now, with the level of firepower being thrown around that has increased due to new tech.

If one mech with one build is all you're after I'm afraid the argument is terribly short sighted and doesn't belong in a weapon balance discussion. Those sorts of builds weren't the best because twin gauss was better. In the absence of the twin Gauss + PPC and twin gauss + 2 PPC builds, what've you got?

Still the best long range poke build compared to everything else that's limited by ghost heat.

Except none of the proponents of this are out to make that aspect of the game more balanced. All I'm seeing is people who were good at using PPC + Gauss wanting it included back into the game, because reasons. Rational ones, honest. With suspiciously no efforts to change ghost heat groups on less efficient weapons to match the same trigger pull damage.

Not buying it guy. Nobody has actually made a rational argument why it should be included, particularly over changes that haven't been mentioned at all like ER PPC ghost heat to 3. It's not part of broader long range gameplay changes. It's specific players representing their interests and nothing more.

[HammerMaster]

Fleeb the Mad, on 11 February 2018 - 11:15 AM, said:

If one mech with one build is all you're after I'm afraid the argument is terribly short sighted and doesn't belong in a weapon balance discussion. Those sorts of builds weren't the best because twin gauss was better. In the absence of the twin Gauss + PPC and twin gauss + 2 PPC builds, what've you got?

Still the best long range poke build compared to everything else that's limited by ghost heat.

Except none of the proponents of this are out to make that aspect of the game more balanced. All I'm seeing is people who were good at using PPC + Gauss wanting it included back into the game, because reasons. Rational ones, honest. With suspiciously no efforts to change ghost heat groups on less efficient weapons to match the same trigger pull damage.

Not buying it guy. Nobody has actually made a rational argument why it should be included, particularly over changes that haven't been mentioned at all like ER PPC ghost heat to 3. It's not part of broader long range gameplay changes. It's specific players representing their interests and nothing more.

While probably true. I see it as a symptom of preference.
You see I didn't chime in on Gauss because I shelved it. (Lame charge up)
I didn't chime in on ppc because I shelved it (low velocity save for quirked mechs)
I did chime in on mgs because I don't boat them
I didn't chime in on mlas/lplas spam because I don't do that (not a mix build ewww)
I didn't chime in on erlas because I mixbuild.
So... preference. They are speaking on what THEY use?

[Dogstar]

I've just said it elsewhere but as this is the big thread I'll redo it.

Remove all ghost heat and weapon combo limits but limit damage output to an absolute maximum of 30 per second.

This means physically preventing additional weapons from firing for a whole second after 30 points of damage has been fired. Weapon combination doesn't matter, it's easy to understand for even the dumbest potato, and easy to work with for the most skilled player (even though it caps their potential damage output).

Why 30? Because it allows for 45 point laser 'alphas' (assuming 1.5 sec burn time) where as a 40 point limit would allow for the annoying 60 point laser alphas we're getting right now that have caused this whole balance discussion. Also, it prevents headshots from gauss/ppc combos taking out assault mechs that aren't shutdown whereas a 35/40 point limit allows 'lucky shots' to screw up your whole game.

One thing this does do however is nerf skill, currently really good players can use weapon combos that exceed this level to easily chew through lesser players _really_ quickly - what this idea does is slow that down (by a couple of seconds so please don't cry about it).

and yes it's like energy draw but without all the stupid ghost heat ideas that PGI tried to throw together instead it's a simple hard limit of 30 damage per second (and it's really not that big of a deal)

Edited by Dogstar, 11 February 2018 - 01:20 PM.

[Kin3ticX]

I like mix builds too.

I like to mix Gauss and PPCs (unless PGI wants to force me to chainfire )

[HammerMaster]

Kin3ticX, on 11 February 2018 - 01:21 PM, said:

I like mix builds too.

I like to mix Gauss and PPCs (unless PGI wants to force me to chainfire )

Touche'

Edited by HammerMaster, 11 February 2018 - 02:17 PM.

[Jarl Dane]

Please continue the Gauss/PPC debate in this topic thread.

Lets refocus on other aspects of the proposed balance update here.

[Gas Guzzler]

Fleeb the Mad, on 11 February 2018 - 11:15 AM, said:

If one mech with one build is all you're after I'm afraid the argument is terribly short sighted and doesn't belong in a weapon balance discussion. Those sorts of builds weren't the best because twin gauss was better. In the absence of the twin Gauss + PPC and twin gauss + 2 PPC builds, what've you got?

Still the best long range poke build compared to everything else that's limited by ghost heat.

Except none of the proponents of this are out to make that aspect of the game more balanced. All I'm seeing is people who were good at using PPC + Gauss wanting it included back into the game, because reasons. Rational ones, honest. With suspiciously no efforts to change ghost heat groups on less efficient weapons to match the same trigger pull damage.

Not buying it guy. Nobody has actually made a rational argument why it should be included, particularly over changes that haven't been mentioned at all like ER PPC ghost heat to 3. It's not part of broader long range gameplay changes. It's specific players representing their interests and nothing more.

Okay "guy". The only "rational" argument against it is because it hurt people's feelings a long time ago. How does one come up with a rational argument against that, other than "you are full of ****".

And it's not one mech and one build. It's any heavy mech other than the Night Gyr that has a ballistic hardpoint and a couple energy hardpoints. Can't do laser vomit, but it can do a nice long range ppfld loadout.

In the absence of dual gauss and single PPC you have ER LL boating, Gauss vomit, and laser vomit. Are you selectively forgetting when the ER PPC Gauss Timber was basically irrelevant before the Night Gyr was in game? Sounds like you are. It's not like dual ER PPC Gauss builds were dominant up until ghost heat was added.

There is no way an ER PPC Gauss Timber (or ANY other mech with 2 PPC Gauss) is going to come back and dominate the meta. It can't poptart. It's not agile. It's not a lot of damage. How do I know? Because it wasn't dominating the meta before (not even talking about the Night Gyr, laser vomit was all over it), and now loadouts have become that much stronger, so if it wasn't dominating then, there is no way it will dominate now.

And uhh, anyone arguing for it to stay banned is just representing their personal interests. Nothing more.

Mech The Dane, on 11 February 2018 - 02:28 PM, said:

Please continue the Gauss/PPC debate in this topic thread.

Lets refocus on other aspects of the proposed balance update here.

Oh sorry... I saw that other post and had to respond. My b.

Edited by Gas Guzzler, 11 February 2018 - 04:13 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

I just noticed, are you sure that IS-LB10X should be getting a little buff? Being -1 ton and -1 slot from the AC10, i feel that it's already fine alternative to AC10. The other IS-LBXs on the other hand, they need the help cause the larger slot and equal ton isn't really giving a good enough alternative for their respective standard ACs.

[Andi Nagasia]

The6thMessenger, on 11 February 2018 - 04:20 PM, said:

I just noticed, are you sure that IS-LB10X should be getting a little buff? Being -1 ton and -1 slot from the AC10, i feel that it's already fine alternative to AC10. The other IS-LBXs on the other hand, they need the help cause the larger slot and equal ton isn't really giving a good enough alternative for their respective standard ACs.

i would say give all LBX 50% more Ammo/Ton than ACs(not including the IS-LBX10)
to compensate for LBXs(other than the IS-LBX10) being Heavier and Larger then ACs(IS) and UACs(Clan),

[Y E O N N E]

The6thMessenger, on 11 February 2018 - 04:20 PM, said:

I just noticed, are you sure that IS-LB10X should be getting a little buff? Being -1 ton and -1 slot from the AC10, i feel that it's already fine alternative to AC10. The other IS-LBXs on the other hand, they need the help cause the larger slot and equal ton isn't really giving a good enough alternative for their respective standard ACs.

It's the tiniest, most insignificant buff ever. It will make no difference in practical play.

I'm in the middle of constructing a set of tables featuring common builds at Close, Medium, and Long range brackets using all of the weapons with the values being proposed by the Jarl's Balance Pass. Some of the results so far are...interesting.

Also, Taro, the IS Streak-2 is running hotter than the Clan Streak-2, just an FYI.

[Leone]

MadBadger, on 11 February 2018 - 05:58 AM, said:

Nobody is going to close to brawl range when they get shot to pieces before they reach it.

You, Sir, are incorrect. Well, I mean, partially correct. See, on every map, until they release a 'Fields of New Ohio' map that's nothing but farmland, there's always brawling paths to take. I'd take brawl every mech, every match, 'cept my unit has decided to try this whole 'mid-range' thingy for maps like polar highlands an grim plexus, where' I'd rather just sneak around the brawling routes.

Anyways, I digress! You don't need to nerf long range to make brawling more viable. A fact, I might add, this whole balance pass concept seems to agree on. I may have reservations about the whole messing with ATM and LRM guidance thing, and the overall increase in weaponry effectiveness which'll decrease time to kill, but I do not mind the ideas behind it all.

That said, I also don't comp.

~Leone.

[Johnathan Tanner]

Is the 200 damage per ton of ballistic ammo still on the table? Or was PGI like "just no"

[Andi Nagasia]

Johnathan Tanner, on 11 February 2018 - 05:59 PM, said:

Is the 200 damage per ton of ballistic ammo still on the table? Or was PGI like "just no"

i dont think PGI has(at this point) an official stance on this,


personally i would like all weapons to have 200Damage/Ton,
-
but Damage/Ton could also be used to balance Spread weapons some,
200Damage/Ton for non-spread type weapons(UAC/AC/Gauss(IS-LBX10)
300Damage/Ton for spread type weapons(SRM/LRM/LBX/ATM/MRM)
(in this Case Spread Type weapons would have 50% more Ammo)
-
Another idea would give IS weapons 300Damage/Ton and Clan weapons 200Damage/Ton,
300Damage/Ton for IS weapons(to balance IS weapons being heavier)
200Damage/Ton for Clan weapons(as well as the IS-LBX10)
(in this Case IS weapons would have 50% more Ammo)
=
or a mix of both,
300Damage/Ton for IS non-spread type weapons(IS-UAC/IS-AC/IS-Gauss(IS-LBX10)
450Damage/Ton for IS spread type weapons(IS-SRM/IS-LRM/IS-LBX/MRM)
200Damage/Ton for Clan non-spread type weapons(C-UAC/C-AC/C-Gauss)
300Damage/Ton for Clan spread type weapons(C-SRM/C-LRM/C-LBX/ATM)
(in this Case IS weapons would have 50% more Ammo than Clan)
(& Spread Type weapons would also have 50% more Ammo)

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 11 February 2018 - 06:24 PM.

[Sjorpha]

Andi Nagasia, on 11 February 2018 - 06:23 PM, said:

but Damage/Ton could also be used to balance Spread weapons some,
200Damage/Ton for non-spread type weapons(UAC/AC/Gauss(IS-LBX10)
300Damage/Ton for spread type weapons(SRM/LRM/LBX/ATM/MRM)
(in this Case Spread Type weapons would have 50% more Ammo)

I like that idea

Also helps lights relatively speaking, since ammo dependent lights use spread damage weapons like srms, and ammo dependent lights could really use the little tonnage buff.

[Fleeb the Mad]

Gas Guzzler, on 11 February 2018 - 04:11 PM, said:

Okay "guy". The only "rational" argument against it is because it hurt people's feelings a long time ago. How does one come up with a rational argument against that, other than "you are full of ****".

And it's not one mech and one build. It's any heavy mech other than the Night Gyr that has a ballistic hardpoint and a couple energy hardpoints. Can't do laser vomit, but it can do a nice long range ppfld loadout.

In the absence of dual gauss and single PPC you have ER LL boating, Gauss vomit, and laser vomit. Are you selectively forgetting when the ER PPC Gauss Timber was basically irrelevant before the Night Gyr was in game? Sounds like you are. It's not like dual ER PPC Gauss builds were dominant up until ghost heat was added.

There is no way an ER PPC Gauss Timber (or ANY other mech with 2 PPC Gauss) is going to come back and dominate the meta. It can't poptart. It's not agile. It's not a lot of damage. How do I know? Because it wasn't dominating the meta before (not even talking about the Night Gyr, laser vomit was all over it), and now loadouts have become that much stronger, so if it wasn't dominating then, there is no way it will dominate now.

And uhh, anyone arguing for it to stay banned is just representing their personal interests. Nothing more.

Rational arguments tend to be logical with supporting information.

For example; as stated twice already, a gauss + PPC combination necessitates the rebalancing of other long range ghost heat groups. You can keep skirting around that, but the rest of what you've presented boils down to 'I want' with no substance. But if we're talking specifics, I believe the Timber Wolf was irrelevant in general before the Night Gyr hit the field. Given that gauss + 2PPC combination never existed in vacuum with its better alternatives barred by ghost heat, I'm still rather skeptical. That's even before we mention that all the current dominant high alpha builds operate at closer ranges. They'll still be there, but they won't be trading at 600m. Are they going to get replaced? Debateable. Are the other long range options going to be made irrelevant? Quite possibly. That's a balance problem.

The bigger issue is that it creates more problems than it solves. You're not even trying to propose alternatives or solutions to any of those things, such as that combination also being rather obviously Clan favorable. That sort of stuff is fairly important and relevant to any sort of balancing effort. Particularly one that's supposedly attempting to view weapons independent of the dominant chassis and quirks.

[Mystere]

Khobai, on 11 February 2018 - 03:31 AM, said:

which is why I suggested only allowing headshots if the mech is shut down, otherwise just have the damage go to CT.

I am not a fan of such arbitrary rules, especially the "magic force field" kind. I'd rather live with the increased risk of headshots.

Yeonne Greene, on 11 February 2018 - 04:47 PM, said:

It's the tiniest, most insignificant buff ever. It will make no difference in practical play.

If a change -- any change -- is that insignificant, why even bother doing it then?

Edited by Mystere, 11 February 2018 - 11:20 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

Mystere, on 11 February 2018 - 11:14 PM, said:

If a change -- any change -- is that insignificant, why even bother doing it then?

I already wrote a 1,995 word essay on Reddit whose first third made that exact case.

I do think the group that represents "consensus" on the spreadsheet page needs to re-examine what they are doing, because nickle-and-diming over a tenth here and there doesn't mean squat.

[Khobai]

Quote

I am not a fan of such arbitrary rules, especially the "magic force field" kind. I'd rather live with the increased risk of headshots.

it comes from battletech

you cant aim for peoples heads in battletech unless theyre shutdown or prone (or you have a targeting computer).

being able to aim for someones head and headshot them with dual heavy gauss rifle could be considered arbitrary too. Its a magic instadelete spell. just because they hit the magic pixel that instakills you.

besides we already have tons of arbitrary magic rules like ghost heat. lol.

Quote

But Damage/Ton could also be used to balance Spread weapons some,
200Damage/Ton for non-spread type weapons(UAC/AC/Gauss(IS-LBX10)
300Damage/Ton for spread type weapons(SRM/LRM/LBX/ATM/MRM)
(in this Case Spread Type weapons would have 50% more Ammo)

Ammo per ton should be handled on a weapon by weapon basis I think

the AC10 for example gets more damage per ammo ton than the AC20 because the AC10 is really bad compared to the AC20.

Its good to strive for uniform damage per ammo ton when its possible. But some underdog weapons like the AC10 just need the extra boost.

And on the flipside im not really sure weapons like LRMs need more ammo damage per ton. It already feels like you can spam way too much LRM ammo as is. I have like 2000 LRMs on my LRM warhawk.

Edited by Khobai, 11 February 2018 - 11:40 PM.

[Mystere]

Khobai, on 11 February 2018 - 11:26 PM, said:

it comes from battletech

you cant aim for peoples heads in battletech unless theyre shutdown or prone (or you have a targeting computer).

being able to aim for someones head and headshot them with dual heavy gauss rifle could be considered arbitrary too. Its a magic instadelete spell.

besides we already have tons of arbitrary magic rules like ghost heat. lol.

Then maybe, just maybe, one of the first goals of this "community-driven balance" effort is to reduce such arbitrary magic rules. Right?