1125 replies to this topic

[Prof RJ Gumby]

Bud Crue, on 23 February 2018 - 04:57 AM, said:

(...)

Personally, I wouldn't even mind all the nerfing if they went to nerf the actual overperfoming weapons and combos.

[Bud Crue]

Prof RJ Gumby, on 23 February 2018 - 05:01 AM, said:

Personally, I wouldn't even mind all the nerfing if they went to nerf the actual overperfoming weapons and combos.

The core of my complaint with the current approach is that there are NO weapons or combos that are overperforming. Only specific variants that have advantages that other mechs do not have which makes that specific variant with that specific build into an “over performer”. Consider the Machine gun. As it is a lone MG is as close to an irrelevancy as you can get as far as a weapon load out is concerned. Now give a 20-30 ton mech the ability to move at 130 ish KPH and run 6-8 of them plus additional weapons and what is the result? Well according to PGI it is that MGs are OP and they must be nerffed. All machine guns on all mechs got nerfed, when only 3-4 chassis are even remotely “OP” and only because they can boat them. But to PGI it is the humble MG that is the over performer not the variants in question.

Nefing the weapon here is not going to solve ANYTHING other than to make their incidental use on other mechs irrelevant. They did the same thing with the Kodiak 3 and UACs. They did the same with SPL. They did the same thing with Gauss/PPC. Hurting the weapons or their combinations on all mechs when only a few mechs using them were problematic. This will not increase TTK. It only makes folks switch to different more optimal weapons, which at best keeps TTK where it is at or even in some cases makes it lower. But THAT is how PGI has balanced since the skills tree. It is absurd, shortsighted, bad statistical analysis and, in my opinion self-defeating to their stated goals; especially when you consider that they have the tools (quirks) and the historical basis of using those tools with which to address overperforming variants instead of broad brush nerfs to entire weapons.

Edited by Bud Crue, 23 February 2018 - 05:14 AM.

[fat4eyes]

Tarogato, on 23 February 2018 - 04:35 AM, said:

What we have to get through to Paul is that TTK is determined by the most effective weapons being fielded with regularity. If laservomit is the fastest killing weapon(s) right now (generally), overall TTK will not go down when alternatives to it are buffed. Buffing a small laser or RAC2 doesn't cause laservomit to kill mechs faster. To achieve overall faster TTK, you would have to buff other weapons so much to the point that they are BETTER at killing mechs than laservomit currently is. But until that point, you're not really reducing overall TTK, you're just increasing the variety of weapons that can achieve the present TTK.

You don't die faster or more. But you die in a greater variety of manners.

I'd have to disagree on this one. This is only true if everyone is using laservomit, which in quick play is very much not true. If you buff the other weapons to match laservomit, then TTK _will_ go down in an environment where not everyone is using vomit. You've got to also consider environments where not everyone takes optimal builds (i.e. quickplay and especially lower tier levels of quickplay). There are only 2 ways to decrease TTK: increase health, or reduce (effective) DPS. Can't get around that.

Edited by fat4eyes, 23 February 2018 - 06:01 AM.

[Squarebasher]

I would like to repeat what Kanajashi said in his video about this, which goes for both IS and clan, and that is ERLs should have there maximum ranges reduced. It is far to easy for laser boats to just sweep across mechs with no real need for accuracy, bring back the skill and make ERPPCs and AC2s etc the weapons to take for long range.

[Nema Nabojiv]

Prof RJ Gumby, on 23 February 2018 - 05:01 AM, said:

Personally, I wouldn't even mind all the nerfing if they went to nerf the actual overperfoming weapons and combos.

PGI is doing exactly that. They nerf "overperforming" weapons and chassis, then the next best thing becomes "overperforming" and they nerf that thing, then another thing becomes overperforming relatively to those already nerfed and the cycle continues.

[Sereglach]

Mystere, on 23 February 2018 - 04:01 AM, said:

Well, also do not forget that other solo-only players deliberately ignored the solo queue by creating one-person units, and we were legion!

Very true; and the whole reason (at least from my perspective, I'm sure other people have their own reasons and beliefs) that happened is because the mercenary career wasn't even available for solo players and lone wolves got nothing. It just exacerbated the whole problem. But of course . . . PGI "tried it", so as awesome as it could be we'll likely never see it again.

Peter2k, on 23 February 2018 - 04:38 AM, said:

Well like so many PGI implementations of things the community asked for was terribly executed/implemented
The basic idea is sound

Completely agree. I really wish it would have worked out and they would have listened to all the people pointing out the flaws in their attempt. However, I think the flaws in the attempt were intentional just so PGI could say they "tried it" . . . because they were otherwise too glaringly obvious to the average observer.

[Daurock]

Bud Crue, on 23 February 2018 - 05:12 AM, said:

The core of my complaint with the current approach is that there are NO weapons or combos that are overperforming. Only specific variants that have advantages that other mechs do not have which makes that specific variant with that specific build into an “over performer”. Consider the Machine gun. As it is a lone MG is as close to an irrelevancy as you can get as far as a weapon load out is concerned. Now give a 20-30 ton mech the ability to move at 130 ish KPH and run 6-8 of them plus additional weapons and what is the result? Well according to PGI it is that MGs are OP and they must be nerffed. All machine guns on all mechs got nerfed, when only 3-4 chassis are even remotely “OP” and only because they can boat them. But to PGI it is the humble MG that is the over performer not the variants in question.

Nefing the weapon here is not going to solve ANYTHING other than to make their incidental use on other mechs irrelevant. They did the same thing with the Kodiak 3 and UACs. They did the same with SPL. They did the same thing with Gauss/PPC. Hurting the weapons or their combinations on all mechs when only a few mechs using them were problematic. This will not increase TTK. It only makes folks switch to different more optimal weapons, which at best keeps TTK where it is at or even in some cases makes it lower. But THAT is how PGI has balanced since the skills tree. It is absurd, shortsighted, bad statistical analysis and, in my opinion self-defeating to their stated goals; especially when you consider that they have the tools (quirks) and the historical basis of using those tools with which to address overperforming variants instead of broad brush nerfs to entire weapons.

Love this post.

The people at PGI too often look at one Mech/Weapon combo, and forget to notice that it's usually the combination that becomes deadly instead of just 1 or the other part of the equation. I agree that it's important to carefully look at overperforming combinations and ask "Is it 1 weapon, 1 combo, or one mech build as a kit that's the problem" and aim any nerfs accordingly. To be fair, sometimes the problem actually really is the the weapon combo, regardless of the mech the combo is placed in. Something like the HLL+ERML combo is probably too strong regardless of what mech you stick it in.

I think It'd be a really good discussion sometime to actually define an appropriate nerf for something like an MG light, where the problem is the entire package, and not the individual peices. . The first glance answer (Chassis and / or pod quirk nerfs) has been done in the past, and when it's been done people have cried rivers over it. (The TBR pods, for example) Still, a specific pod nerf (Let's use as an example, something like a 5 or 10% ballistic fire rate nerf per MG pod) just might be the correct answer. Interesting discussions to be had there.

[R Valentine]

Bud Crue, on 23 February 2018 - 05:12 AM, said:

The core of my complaint with the current approach is that there are NO weapons or combos that are overperforming. Only specific variants that have advantages that other mechs do not have which makes that specific variant with that specific build into an “over performer”. Consider the Machine gun. As it is a lone MG is as close to an irrelevancy as you can get as far as a weapon load out is concerned. Now give a 20-30 ton mech the ability to move at 130 ish KPH and run 6-8 of them plus additional weapons and what is the result? Well according to PGI it is that MGs are OP and they must be nerffed. All machine guns on all mechs got nerfed, when only 3-4 chassis are even remotely “OP” and only because they can boat them. But to PGI it is the humble MG that is the over performer not the variants in question.

Nefing the weapon here is not going to solve ANYTHING other than to make their incidental use on other mechs irrelevant. They did the same thing with the Kodiak 3 and UACs. They did the same with SPL. They did the same thing with Gauss/PPC. Hurting the weapons or their combinations on all mechs when only a few mechs using them were problematic. This will not increase TTK. It only makes folks switch to different more optimal weapons, which at best keeps TTK where it is at or even in some cases makes it lower. But THAT is how PGI has balanced since the skills tree. It is absurd, shortsighted, bad statistical analysis and, in my opinion self-defeating to their stated goals; especially when you consider that they have the tools (quirks) and the historical basis of using those tools with which to address overperforming variants instead of broad brush nerfs to entire weapons.

You can't just nerf 1 variant, though. That's the nature of this game. How can you possibly nerf Deathstrike without nerfing all other clan laser mechs? Hardpoints are unnerfable. PGI has NEVER changed a mechs hardpoints, ever. They've also never adjusted a mechs hitboxes, nevermind it's hitboxes that hold a TON of IS mechs back. Awesome? Mauler? Thanatos? Nightstar? All of those mechs have garbage hit boxes that PGI has never even attempted to adjust. They just throw useless structure quirks at them, which were made even more useless with the release of the Parana. Another mech that can't be nerfed without nerfing ALL machine gun mechs. What exactly are they going to nerf about that thing? Make it a pig? It's a light mech. Make it twist slower? ...It's a light mech. They can't touch its speed. That's tied to engine rating. Make it bigger? They haven't rescaled in forever now and the last time they did they caused more harm than good.

PGI never thinks before they release crap. They just slap hardpoints on a mech, release it, and then either it's broken as all hell or sucks fat donkey balls. Case and point, Parana vs. Thanatos. Uziel vs. Mad Cat Mk. II. Mechs on the extreme side of the spectrum. They never thought to ask themselves, "Would 12 machine guns be OP? Even 8 is kind of out of control right now." Nope nope nope. All about dat cash. Sell dem mechpacks. Balance? What's that? We'll break it wide open with 2 ballistic and 6 lasers on a clan mech.

[Bud Crue]

Kiran Yagami, on 23 February 2018 - 01:20 PM, said:

You can't just nerf 1 variant, though. That's the nature of this game. How can you possibly nerf Deathstrike without nerfing all other clan laser mechs? Hardpoints are unnerfable. PGI has NEVER changed a mechs hardpoints, ever. They've also never adjusted a mechs hitboxes, nevermind it's hitboxes that hold a TON of IS mechs back. Awesome? Mauler? Thanatos? Nightstar? All of those mechs have garbage hit boxes that PGI has never even attempted to adjust. They just throw useless structure quirks at them, which were made even more useless with the release of the Parana. Another mech that can't be nerfed without nerfing ALL machine gun mechs. What exactly are they going to nerf about that thing? Make it a pig? It's a light mech. Make it twist slower? ...It's a light mech. They can't touch its speed. That's tied to engine rating. Make it bigger? They haven't rescaled in forever now and the last time they did they caused more harm than good.

PGI never thinks before they release crap. They just slap hardpoints on a mech, release it, and then either it's broken as all hell or sucks fat donkey balls. Case and point, Parana vs. Thanatos. Uziel vs. Mad Cat Mk. II. Mechs on the extreme side of the spectrum. They never thought to ask themselves, "Would 12 machine guns be OP? Even 8 is kind of out of control right now." Nope nope nope. All about dat cash. Sell dem mechpacks. Balance? What's that? We'll break it wide open with 2 ballistic and 6 lasers on a clan mech.

Sure they can. Timber S ring any bells? But they have other options too on a variant level. Example: if the Deathstrike is OP with gause vomit as the build, give it a cooldown quirk that screws with the timing of those two weapon types or increased heat production or whatever. But there is no reason to hit all MKiis because 1 variant with 1 particular build is OP. They've done this sort of thing before. Moreover they could also do positive quirks to entice alternative builds. All depends on the variant and what is "OP" atnthe moment on that variant.

[OmniFail]

The silly heat buffs to the LRM's shows how disconnected the authors of this patch are from any true understanding of LRM's.

Edited by OmniFail, 23 February 2018 - 01:43 PM.

[Sjorpha]

OmniFail, on 23 February 2018 - 01:43 PM, said:

The silly heat buffs to the LRM's shows how disconnected the authors of this patch are from any true understanding of LRM's.

There is no changes to LRMs this patch so I'm not sure what you're talking about. MRMs got a heat nerf, not a buff.

LRMs do need significant buffs though given how underpowered they are.

[Kalimaster]

Buff damage on both IS and Clan laser pulse
Leave ER Clan laser damage alone
Clan heat for weapons in tree raised to 1% per unlock
Guass Rifle cool down 4.0 and 5% range increase
Return LRM range to 1000 meters and then remove their range adjustments from the tree.

[The6thMessenger]

Tarogato, on 23 February 2018 - 04:35 AM, said:

We still have a 25% damage buff for RAC2s.
And a 50% reduction to the horrendous artificial spread that both RACs have. Initially we had removed the spread entirely, but some people commented that pinpoint RACs could be overpowered, so we stepped it back a little bit.

So where is that on the open-letter?

Tarogato, on 23 February 2018 - 04:35 AM, said:

Also lol @ commenting about proposal not able to be taken seriously because it's all buffs... and then asking for more buffs.

Because RACs NEED this buff. Buffs is fine, but where's the nerfs? I have a few nerfs in mind, but just shot down cause it ain't "fun".

https://mwomercs.com...ross-the-board/

Tarogato, on 23 February 2018 - 04:35 AM, said:

You don't die faster or more. But you die in a greater variety of manners.

Other weapons though such as lasers that serves the meta, needs toning down. I'd rather have a global laser-duration increase (with quirk-buffs to those mechs heavily dependent to be viable on laser builds), to answer the vomits being totally meta.

Bud Crue, on 23 February 2018 - 05:12 AM, said:

The core of my complaint with the current approach is that there are NO weapons or combos that are overperforming. Only specific variants that have advantages that other mechs do not have which makes that specific variant with that specific build into an “over performer”. Consider the Machine gun. As it is a lone MG is as close to an irrelevancy as you can get as far as a weapon load out is concerned. Now give a 20-30 ton mech the ability to move at 130 ish KPH and run 6-8 of them plus additional weapons and what is the result? Well according to PGI it is that MGs are OP and they must be nerffed. All machine guns on all mechs got nerfed, when only 3-4 chassis are even remotely “OP” and only because they can boat them. But to PGI it is the humble MG that is the over performer not the variants in question.

I agree, that's stupid. Although what of other weapons such as Lasers? Lasers are too easy to use, with unlimited ammo, even lighter than other weapons. Why use AC5 with 2 tons of ammo when you can use 2 Large-Lasers (and ER), or 10 Medium Lasers -- or 6 medium lasers with 4 heat-sinks, and they don't have the ammo constraints.

There's also why they are meta -- it's the ease-of-use -- that point-and-click that serves well with the shoot-and-scoot tactic, no convergence issue, no target leading, no cockpit shake that makes it less noticeable, and the only things holding it back is the range for some weapons and the heat after firing them. So there's not really a lot that's enticing us to use other weapons when there's the meta to consider lest you irresponsibly gimp yourself.

Bud Crue, on 23 February 2018 - 05:12 AM, said:

Nefing the weapon here is not going to solve ANYTHING other than to make their incidental use on other mechs irrelevant. They did the same thing with the Kodiak 3 and UACs. They did the same with SPL. They did the same thing with Gauss/PPC. Hurting the weapons or their combinations on all mechs when only a few mechs using them were problematic. This will not increase TTK. It only makes folks switch to different more optimal weapons, which at best keeps TTK where it is at or even in some cases makes it lower. But THAT is how PGI has balanced since the skills tree. It is absurd, shortsighted, bad statistical analysis and, in my opinion self-defeating to their stated goals; especially when you consider that they have the tools (quirks) and the historical basis of using those tools with which to address overperforming variants instead of broad brush nerfs to entire weapons.

That sounds more like poorly-handled nerfing. I agreed with the idea of nerfing CSPL, but putting it at less damage than the CERSL is just stupid. I agree with the Gauss-PPC change though.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 23 February 2018 - 04:01 PM.

[Sereglach]

Bud Crue, on 23 February 2018 - 01:32 PM, said:

Sure they can. Timber S ring any bells? But they have other options too on a variant level. Example: if the Deathstrike is OP with gause vomit as the build, give it a cooldown quirk that screws with the timing of those two weapon types or increased heat production or whatever. But there is no reason to hit all MKiis because 1 variant with 1 particular build is OP. They've done this sort of thing before. Moreover they could also do positive quirks to entice alternative builds. All depends on the variant and what is "OP" atnthe moment on that variant.

Very true, they can and did nerf and buff individual pods and variants to try to deal with problem builds. Then people cried that certain other OP builds could be replicated on pods that didn't have the nerfs (even if they weren't as good) . . . and eventually PGI has decided that variant diversity has mostly gone out the window and we mostly have uniform quirks throughout any given chassis now. All of those quirks went away with the introduction of the skill tree "so the new feature could settle in", and they never revisited them as a useful balancing too.

While there's still "some" diversity left it's not enough to amount to much . . . it's not even enough to notably help some of the lesser variants, of some chassis, compete with their superior variants.

[Tarogato]

The6thMessenger, on 23 February 2018 - 03:47 PM, said:

So where is that on the open-letter?


Because RACs NEED this buff. Buffs is fine, but where's the nerfs? I have a few nerfs in mind, but just shot down cause it ain't "fun".

https://mwomercs.com...ross-the-board/

Sorry, the letter/doc isn't being maintained, it will be updated all at once when we make our next post.

For now, the the "CONSENSUS" sheet on the spreadsheet shows all the current changes as we agree on them. It's been in a constant state of flux as we sift through the feedback on the forums/reddit/etc.

OmniFail, on 23 February 2018 - 01:43 PM, said:

The silly heat buffs to the LRM's shows how disconnected the authors of this patch are from any true understanding of LRM's.

We only buffed the Innersphere LRM heat.

Somebody brought it up, so we looked at some mech builds that are similar between Clan and IS. LRM builds are fairly analogous between the two factions, the only real difference being the streamfire drawback of Clan. Even with quirks considered, we found the IS LRM builds run very much hotter than similar Clan builds. In fact, a MDD could churn out better DPS than an AWS, despite the 20-ton disparity and extra 5% heat gen quirk for IS.

So we lowered the heat on IS LRMs. This does not affect their recycle rate (burst DPS), but it does improve their ability to deal DPS after they have reached their heat cap, bringing it a little closer to what similar Clan builds achieve.

[The6thMessenger]

Tarogato, on 23 February 2018 - 06:30 PM, said:

For now, the the "CONSENSUS" sheet on the spreadsheet shows all the current changes as we agree on them. It's been in a constant state of flux as we sift through the feedback on the forums/reddit/etc.

I see.

Anyways just to add, I don't think LPPCs should have 6 PPFLD, but 2.5 CD instead (like how 2x PPC = AC20, 2x LPPC = AC10). That will make LPPCs less of a filler, and something that, lights can go for since they are made for them. They won't have good PPFLD damage, but they will get good DPS.

[Tarogato]

The6thMessenger, on 23 February 2018 - 06:33 PM, said:

Anyways just to add, I don't think LPPCs should have 6 PPFLD, but 2.5 CD instead (like how 2x PPC = AC20, 2x LPPC = AC10). That will make LPPCs less of a filler, and something that, lights can go for since they are made for them. They won't have good PPFLD damage, but they will get good DPS.

Then my question to you is... in their present state, are you usually already firing LPPCs at their maximum possible firing rate?

If the answer to that is "yes, almost always" then a CD buff will help LPPCs. If your answer is "only half of the time or less" then a damage buff might be more appropriate.

[Khobai]

LPPC isnt fun because of the zero damage deadzone. Thats the very first thing that needs to be fixed.

Quote

Anyways just to add, I don't think LPPCs should have 6 PPFLD, but 2.5 CD instead

then why would anyone ever use pulse lasers? if LPPCs have better dps, better range, and are PPFLD instead of beam duration?

LPPCs should definitely not be energy dps weapons because thats what pulse lasers are for.

The role of LPPCs should be as a PPFLD alternative to ISERMLs.

Edited by Khobai, 23 February 2018 - 07:04 PM.

[Tarogato]

Khobai, on 23 February 2018 - 06:40 PM, said:

LPPC isnt fun because of the zero damage deadzone. Thats the very first thing that needs to be fixed.

Removing the deadzone doesn't help the LPPC in its intended niche. It just turns it into another Snub. There's a reason it has more range than the Snub, and that's because it isn't supposed to be used for brawling. If you want to brawl, go mount a Snub, SRMs, or small/medium lasers instead.

[FupDup]

Tarogato, on 23 February 2018 - 06:51 PM, said:

Removing the deadzone doesn't help the LPPC in its intended niche. It just turns it into another Snub. There's a reason it has more range than the Snub, and that's because it isn't supposed to be used for brawling. If you want to brawl, go mount a Snub, SRMs, or small/medium lasers instead.

By that logic Gauss, ERLL, ERPPCs, AC/2s, etc. should also have a min range deadzone.

It's not about being good at brawling, it's just about having a fighting chance. Other stats like heat and inefficient damage per ton (compared to stuff like MPLs or MLs) will ensure that it won't suddenly obsolete proper brawl guns.