Jump to content

The Great Gauss/ppc Poll


150 replies to this topic

Poll: PPCGauss Question (584 member(s) have cast votes)

Do you want GaussPPC to be viable again? This means that EITHER 3x PPC alphas OR 2x Gauss + 2x PPC alphas will be possible again.

  1. Yes. I want Gauss/PPC. (316 votes [54.11%])

    Percentage of vote: 54.11%

  2. No. I do not want Gauss/PPC back. (249 votes [42.64%])

    Percentage of vote: 42.64%

  3. Abstain. (19 votes [3.25%])

    Percentage of vote: 3.25%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 Mech The Dane

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary Rank 3
  • Mercenary Rank 3
  • 1,711 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationJarnFolk Cluster

Posted 11 February 2018 - 10:44 AM

Because PGI is annoying I can't post this poll in the General forum, or some other better forums for it. So I am posting it here in my FRR domain, because Jarls gonna Jarl.

Before voting please carefully read this thread. I recommend the majority of debate also be contained in that thread as well.

Do you want a return of 3x Gauss/PPC or do you want it to stay nerf'd?

You decide.

Edited by Mech The Dane, 11 February 2018 - 11:29 AM.


#2 Escef

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 7,921 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationNew England

Posted 11 February 2018 - 10:49 AM

Gotta love how the question and possible answers are phrased. It really displays the author's bias.

#3 Navid A1

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Wrath
  • Wrath
  • 4,260 posts
  • LocationVancouver, BC

Posted 11 February 2018 - 11:00 AM

View PostEscef, on 11 February 2018 - 10:49 AM, said:

Gotta love how the question and possible answers are phrased. It really displays the author's bias.

He is right though

#4 Rydiak

    Member

  • PipPip
  • WC 2017 Participant
  • WC 2017 Participant
  • 35 posts
  • LocationJarnfolk Cluster

Posted 11 February 2018 - 11:02 AM

View PostEscef, on 11 February 2018 - 10:49 AM, said:

Gotta love how the question and possible answers are phrased. It really displays the author's bias.


How do you find bias in a yes or no question??

#5 Tarogato

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Civil Servant
  • Civil Servant
  • 6,292 posts
  • LocationUSA (PA) ... Being a classical musician... and stuff.

Posted 11 February 2018 - 11:03 AM

I wouldn't bother discussing the topic in THIS thread. This is the poll. Moderators should lock this or something to funnel discussion into the

DISCUSSION THREAD.

#6 Revis Volek

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Vicious
  • The Vicious
  • 7,134 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationPlanet Weeaboo

Posted 11 February 2018 - 11:10 AM

View PostMech The Dane, on 11 February 2018 - 10:44 AM, said:



because Jarls gonna Jarl.



You decide.





I like the start of this already.

Voted FOR!

#7 Mech The Dane

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary Rank 3
  • Mercenary Rank 3
  • 1,711 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationJarnFolk Cluster

Posted 11 February 2018 - 11:29 AM

View PostEscef, on 11 February 2018 - 10:49 AM, said:

Gotta love how the question and possible answers are phrased. It really displays the author's bias.


I am not actually biased in the direction you think. I am not a huge fan of GaussPPC in heavy+ clan mechs.

How should I have worded it?

#8 Adalicia

    Member

  • Pip
  • The God
  • 11 posts
  • LocationCalifornia

Posted 11 February 2018 - 12:01 PM

It shouldn't come back unless mechs get general mobility buffs (especially lights).

#9 CainenEX

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Civil Servant
  • Civil Servant
  • 398 posts

Posted 11 February 2018 - 12:24 PM

I have voted for the return of guass PPC but I would like to note that I'm heavily in favor of making it work such that it would be that 3ER ppc is allowed. This 30 PPFLD is not very problematic due to the heavy investment in slots, weight and the excess heat it generates.

#10 Appogee

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God of Death
  • The God of Death
  • 9,992 posts
  • LocationOn planet Tukayyid, celebrating victory

Posted 11 February 2018 - 12:45 PM

I don't miss it.

Nor those well-known players who used it every match, camping halfway across the map, leaving the rest of us to brawl two men down...

I generally think MWO would be a better and more well-rounded game if it was a bit less PPFLD snipey and a bit more brawly.

Edited by Appogee, 11 February 2018 - 12:46 PM.


#11 Johnathan Tanner

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Patron Saint
  • The Patron Saint
  • 522 posts
  • LocationCurrently dodging the pugs war crimes tribunal

Posted 11 February 2018 - 01:04 PM

View PostAppogee, on 11 February 2018 - 12:45 PM, said:

I don't miss it.

Nor those well-known players who used it every match, camping halfway across the map, leaving the rest of us to brawl two men down...

I generally think MWO would be a better and more well-rounded game if it was a bit less PPFLD snipey and a bit more brawly.

Yes because we dont have enough linebacker assassin rush spam as it is lol.

#12 Navid A1

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Wrath
  • Wrath
  • 4,260 posts
  • LocationVancouver, BC

Posted 11 February 2018 - 01:07 PM

View PostAppogee, on 11 February 2018 - 12:45 PM, said:

I don't miss it.

Nor those well-known players who used it every match, camping halfway across the map, leaving the rest of us to brawl two men down...

I generally think MWO would be a better and more well-rounded game if it was a bit less PPFLD snipey and a bit more brawly.


Well, brawling died when all the brawlers got hammered with agility nerf.
it died when ACs were oblitrated
it died when SRMs spread to the size of a planet

#13 Spheroid

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 4,027 posts
  • LocationSouthern Wisconsin

Posted 11 February 2018 - 01:14 PM

I voted yes, but as a caveat I think the Clan cap should be 45 damage, with some amount of ghost on 60 damage.

#14 Navid A1

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Wrath
  • Wrath
  • 4,260 posts
  • LocationVancouver, BC

Posted 11 February 2018 - 01:16 PM

View PostSpheroid, on 11 February 2018 - 01:14 PM, said:

I voted yes, but as a caveat I think the Clan cap should be 45 damage, with some amount of ghost on 60 damage.


That is the idea... big penalty should be in place for 2G+2P

#15 Stinger554

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hungry
  • The Hungry
  • 203 posts

Posted 11 February 2018 - 01:38 PM

View PostMech The Dane, on 11 February 2018 - 11:29 AM, said:


I am not actually biased in the direction you think. I am not a huge fan of GaussPPC in heavy+ clan mechs.

How should I have worded it?

The wording for me isn't an issue...

It's that you lump 2xPPC/2xGauss into the same category as 2xPPC/1xGauss. Any possibility of the first is a huge hell no; the second is acceptable, but since they are grouped together people will vote no,in order to deny the first, or vote yes, in order to get the second.

The poll is FUBAR because of that. Kill it start again with more options if you want more accurate information.

#16 FupDup

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 23,633 posts
  • LocationThe Keeper of Memes

Posted 11 February 2018 - 02:25 PM

View PostRydiak, on 11 February 2018 - 11:02 AM, said:

How do you find bias in a yes or no question??

"Do you want GaussPPC to be viable again?"

Basically, the phrasing suggests that opponents don't want the weaponry to be viable or effective at all, which is going to naturally turn people away from that option. A more clear way to demonstrate the intention of the proposals would be something like "Do you believe the GaussPPC combo should be strengthened/restored?" or something else to that effect.

It should also include separate radio buttons or checkboxes for what exact threshold of PPC/Gauss the person is willing to accept. Current limit of two? Three of each? The full classic four? No limit period?

Edited by FupDup, 11 February 2018 - 02:38 PM.


#17 Tiewolf

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 270 posts

Posted 11 February 2018 - 03:27 PM

View PostMech The Dane, on 11 February 2018 - 10:44 AM, said:

Because PGI is annoying I can't post this poll in the General forum, or some other better forums for it. So I am posting it here in my FRR domain, because Jarls gonna Jarl.

Before voting please carefully read this thread. I recommend the majority of debate also be contained in that thread as well.

Do you want a return of 3x Gauss/PPC or do you want it to stay nerf'd?

You decide.

Sorry but I can`t take your vote seriously. It represents definitly not "the community" at all and is nothing but a hoax.

1. The most people who are affected by the PPC/Gauss at the receiving end are not on the forums or do not understand it yet what this change will mean to them.

2. The top players are overrepresented on the forums and they will vote with all their smurf accounts too, because they are the only winners from a change like that. Btw. to even argue with laservomit that can be spread and has a longer facetime by players who know this game well tells a story of its own. Just sad.

I assume you know 1+2 and still put up this vote. I was very entusiastic because of your vid and the movement you started. But now I am slowly but steady more and more disapointed by the path this "movement" takes. By putting up an unequal vote like this you only fed my suspicion that this is not about "the community" but to enhance the dominance and fun of the top 10% players at the expence of all others.
Anyway I still hope that you and the team that put so much work in this, get the right turn, so that in the end the majority of the players will agree that it was really for the community and not predominant for the ones that are like you. Please don`t blow this unique chance you created for the sake of all of us.

Edited by Tiewolf, 11 February 2018 - 03:41 PM.


#18 Wing 0

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary Rank 10
  • Mercenary Rank 10
  • 620 posts
  • LocationCalifornia

Posted 11 February 2018 - 03:35 PM

With the Fafnir coming, its a safe bet that will see the 2 HVY Gauss/PPC builds on them for sure. Clans cant use HVY Gauss to begin with. Sure lets have the PPC Gauss Combo return so it can even the playing field but make certain adjustments on limit. Right now its set for 2 and sadly, It should've been at 3 and anything above that point would not end well. It Would put some limit still on the combo for sure but it would give several mechs like the NTG for example, other uses. The other option would've been about nerf the I.S Tonnage by 10. I explained about what PGI should've done in Taro's thread and some people told me they agree which is why I voted Yes. Yes The Gauss Rifle itself is WAY vulnerable than any other ballistic out there but it had good trade offs to begin with if used properly until that idiocy nerf call came along. However; there should still be a limit on the combination. Right now, it's GH is way too high and was set to 2. if it was set to 3 instead and just be readjusted as time goes on, I'm sure most would be ok with it.

Almost forgot that some I.S mechs would gain some other way of uses too

I do very much support 2 ppc-1 gauss/2 gauss-1 ppc.

Edited by Wing 0, 11 February 2018 - 03:53 PM.


#19 Gas Guzzler

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Daddy
  • Big Daddy
  • 12,940 posts
  • LocationCalifornia Central Coast

Posted 11 February 2018 - 03:53 PM

Goooooooooood. Bring it back!!

(For the record I really just want 2 PPC 1 Gauss combos back, not that concerned with 2 Gauss 1 ppc)

#20 Mech The Dane

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary Rank 3
  • Mercenary Rank 3
  • 1,711 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationJarnFolk Cluster

Posted 11 February 2018 - 03:56 PM

View PostTiewolf, on 11 February 2018 - 03:27 PM, said:

Sorry but I can`t take your vote seriously. It represents definitly not "the community" at all and is nothing but a hoax.

1. The most people who are affected by the PPC/Gauss at the receiving end are not on the forums or do not understand it yet what this change will mean to them.

2. The top players are overrepresented on the forums and they will vote with all their smurf accounts too, because they are the only winners from a change like that. Btw. to even argue with laservomit that can be spread and has a longer facetime by players who know this game well tells a story of its own. Just sad.

I assume you know 1+2 and still put up this vote. I was very entusiastic because of your vid and the movement you started. But now I am slowly but steady more and more disapointed by the path this "movement" takes. By putting up an unequal vote like this you only fed my suspicion that this is not about "the community" but to enhance the dominance and fun of the top 10% players at the expence of all others.
Anyway I still hope that you and the team that put so much work in this, get the right turn, so that in the end the majority of the players will agree that it was really for the community and not predominant for the ones that are like you. Please don`t blow this unique chance you created for the sake of all of us.


If you de-legitmize the vote, then what does that leave us with?
You don't like my solution for this problem, but you don't offer a better one.

I could have just let the debate happen, with no effort to gain any sort of community consensus, and let Tarogato decide what he wants to do. But that didn't seem very... community-driven. I didn't want people to feel like their voices weren't being heard, but I also didn't want the people who made the loudest posts or biggest videos to get the best press. I wanted to give everyone a chance to have their say.

You postulate that the mwo forums are over-represented by competitive players. I don't think that is any where in evidence. I think that is an assumption you've made without tangible evidence to back it up. If you want to take a snap shot of everyone online in the last 24 hours, cross-reference their names with competitive leagues, and let me know how many of them are in Div A or Div B teams, I'd would be interested to know. I think many competitive players would easily assume the opposite of you though, that here on the forums they are the minority. Either way, if you actually want to prove your theory, I think you could doing the methods I indicated above.

As for top players having smurfs.. again IDK. I know many players in this game who have extra accounts. Some have an IS account and a Clan account, many have accounts they created just to understand the new player experience, others because previous accounts were banned or had a bad rep; point being there are many reasons for having it and to make it a competitive player only problem seems a bit of a stretch.

But really, I just end up back at my original argument. To me this seemed like the best way to actually gauge the communities feelings on this matter. To put the question to everyone here and free Tarogao's people up to continue working on other problems. I can't do better than that, I think.
If you know a better way, I'd certainly be interested.

Edited by Mech The Dane, 11 February 2018 - 04:00 PM.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users