657 replies to this topic

[SneekiBreeki]

Agent of Change, on 27 June 2018 - 10:26 AM, said:

*snip*

i'm glad to notice that you can recognize where the problem actually lies in regards to the percieved "short TTK", what i'm arguing about is the way people want the issue to be dealt with.

Implementing gauss recoil would not accomplish anything significant and would possibly make the weapon just an annoyance to use which would in turn make it an unpopular choice on several chassis. This would also make the dual gauss ebon jag which is already weaker than it's IS counterpart a chore to play when compared to it's stronger direct competitor: the dual gauss warhammer.

Also the low torso twist speed isn't "a bit" of an issue, reduced mobility compared to the pre-engine desync state of the game is the real issue here. Give mechs back their original mobility and i can assure you that TTK will indeed go up for the ones that can actually torso twist. Even better, rescale mechs like the poor firestarter and jenner and you'll see even more of an improvement within the game balance.

TL;DR: This game was in a better state one year ago pre-skill maze/SPL nerf/engine desyinc and was in an even better state during 2016 pre KDK release.

Bring it back to it's old glory and it'll become more fun to play tenfold.

Edited by SneekiBreeki, 27 June 2018 - 10:44 AM.

[Agent of Change]

Bennesto, on 27 June 2018 - 10:32 AM, said:

That's why everyone that uses a meta build will superperform on the battlefield. This statement just fails on so many levels of sense that it could break a normal persons sanity in one volley.
The reason TTK is low is because

a) Countergameplay is getting nerfed
Players defensive skill and positioning is bad
c) Mechs underperform because of being nerfed in agility and offensive stats

If you think otherwise you are obviously playing a different game. Or just spent more of your time in the forum than ingame.

It's a math problem right?

If you build can kill a Mech in 3 accurate shots and you have perfect accuracy And your less skilled opponents have the same build but 33% accuracy: You will kill 3 enemy mechs by the time you die.

If that is changes to require 6 accurate shots: you still get 3 before you die BUT for all your opponents teh quality of game increases becasue now they can take a few more shots from each other before dying.

In the first example a less skilled player is shot at 3-9 times and hit 3 times before dying by other less skilled players, in the second a player is shot at 6-18 times and hit 6 times before dying. objectively giving teh target player more time to react, return fire, get to cover etc...

Giving less skilled players in general more time to learn lessons in game and improve because they aren't dead as soon as contact is made with enemies. And since teh player with perfect accuracy aren't going to be the the rule but the exception, the gain for all players is positive. Less skilled players get to live a little longer to learn lesson in game and providing they are as skilled as they think they are (and many are) skilled players will perform the same with just a little more effort.

That is the underlying benefit of narrowing the power gap of damage output of the "super-meta builds" and the median builds. you still get a benefit but one that can only really be brought to full realization if you are good enough at teh rest of the game.

Edited by Agent of Change, 27 June 2018 - 10:43 AM.

[Dogstar]

Wow there are some [redacted] posts in this thread!

Stuff like this is why we can't have nice things - clan crocodile tears refuses to budge from their 'clan smash' attitude

Edited by Ibrandul Mike, 12 July 2018 - 05:36 PM.
CoC Violation

[SneekiBreeki]

Also regarding the bit about giving new players more time to learn the game: this is indeed an issue within the game but the right way of dealing with it would be better tutorials/matchmaking and possibly as i've already stated several times an actual PvE gamemode.

To cite an example: back on SD Gundam Online you were actually forced to play a set number of PvE matches before you could unlock the PvP matchmaking.

PvE would be a good way to give new players and people that just want to chill and shoot robits alike an avenue with which they can entertain themselves with, plus a veteran player could use it as a way to show new players the ropes.

Dogstar, on 27 June 2018 - 10:45 AM, said:

Wow there are some epic whining crybaby posts in this thread!

Stuff like this is why we can't have nice things - clan crocodile tears refuses to budge from their 'clan smash' attitude

[redacted]

Edited by Tina Benoit, 30 July 2018 - 05:32 PM.
nonconstructive

[Stinger554]

Kill2Blit, on 27 June 2018 - 06:11 AM, said:

buffing underperforming weapons doesn't decrease TTK, it just means people will die to more things.

I agree to your overall premise; however buffing underperforming(or really any weapon that isn't a part of gaussvom/laservom) will decrease average TTK across the game because current average TTK includes the current underperforming weapons.

Using current levels of laservom as the baseline is bad because they are too strong right now; buffing everything to that level isn't a good solution and indeed invokes powercreep at that point.

Edited by Stinger554, 27 June 2018 - 10:49 AM.

[Agent of Change]

SneekiBreeki, on 27 June 2018 - 10:40 AM, said:

*snip*

We can quibble on the perceived part... TTK is objectively short if you get shot at by anything more than 1 mech at a time. Now that is teh result of many factors depending on teh matchups, but mostly it has to do with mechs being likely to bring high alpha builds and the target not being able to effectively spread damage. But that is a quibble as i said... we agree limited movement is a and maybe the main problem.

Gauss change... as i said i'm on the fence... I'm not going to be gloom and doom about anything that might shake up a stale meta until i see it in action. It might be a huge deal, it might change nothing, hell it might not even be implemented if enough people give feedback and good reasons for it after testing it.

I don't think the mobility and twist is a cure all... but something in that direction would certainly actually make the game more fun by helping it be less static. Re-scaling mechs is something I tend to avoid because while I agree it's necessary in several cases... it's not something I expect to get done and therefore probably not worth the effort arguing for it.

My stance is pretty constant... IF a developer says they are looking at a direction, try to work the best out of that direction you can, anything else is likely spitting in the wind. Raging against it tends to gets ignored, but constructive discuss based on testing... that has a higher chance of success. Though depending on your salt levels at this point you may or may not believe that... I personally take a pinch whenever I read any dev post, but hope does spring eternal.

Edited by Agent of Change, 27 June 2018 - 10:55 AM.

[PobbestGob]

Dogstar, on 27 June 2018 - 10:45 AM, said:

Wow there are some epic whining crybaby posts in this thread!

Stuff like this is why we can't have nice things - clan crocodile tears refuses to budge from their 'clan smash' attitude

As a mostly IS pilot I feel bad for the clans, yeah. Any salt found here is probably because there have been numerous detailed and competent responses in how to fix the game and the balance updates usually target something completely different and unnecessary.

[Bud Crue]

Agent of Change, on 27 June 2018 - 10:41 AM, said:

It's a math problem right?

That is the underlying benefit of narrowing the power gap of damage output of the "super-meta builds" and the median builds. you still get a benefit but one that can only really be brought to full realization if you are good enough at teh rest of the game.

Admittedly I am using your argument above for my own purposes, so sorry about that in advance.

So on to math and the current situation:
Say you have 50 builds that use some combination of Gauss and Energy.
Now of those 50 lets say, only 10% are problematically OP.
The nerfs inquestion (Gauss recoil, and energy nerfs) are to be applied to not just the 10% (5) OP builds, but to all the builds.

So what percentage is nerfed by the proposal? 100% or all 50 of the mechs in existence that use the combination of weapons.

So tell me how does this proposal result in “narrowing the power gap”? All this proposal does is make that 10% a little less effective, but just as proportionally OP to the other 90% as they were before the nerfs. We are nerfing the MK-II but also the Shadowcat, when the Shadowcat (edit) is already mediocre. There will be no decrease in performance gap between the two in the system proposed.

Edited by Bud Crue, 27 June 2018 - 12:17 PM.

[SneekiBreeki]

Agent of Change, on 27 June 2018 - 10:50 AM, said:

*Snips about how the devs would just ignore request for rescaling and actual fixes*

In short you've given up on hoping that the devs will actually do something in a competent and thoughtful manner, i can respect that since most of the people that is against the constant wave of nerfs doesn't expect PGI to do much about the state of the game or not to do it in a timely nor competent and thoughtful manner neither.

For this same reason tho we still keep on arguing about their ways, people trusted PGI only to see them dragging this game's fun factor and quality down little by little, time and again over the years.

[PobbestGob]

Stinger554, on 27 June 2018 - 10:49 AM, said:

I agree to your overall premise; however buffing underperforming(or really any weapon that isn't a part of gaussvom/laservom) will decrease average TTK across the game because current average TTK includes the current underperforming weapons.

Using current levels of laservom as the baseline is bad because they are too strong right now; buffing everything to that level isn't a good solution and indeed invokes powercreep at that point.

Aside from er meds and maybe the heavy large I don't think lasers are too strong. what's weak is mobility. make mechs more mobile and that 1.55 second laser duration becomes much less scary. And I'm not suggesting only buffs, just that buffs are much needed because the trend has been nerf nerf nerf for longer than I can remember. It's draining. Average TTK would unlikely see much of a change with buffing weak weapons imo because nobody is often using them, and those that are are typically at a disadvantage. Buffing weak weapons paired with better mobility would make the game more fun and diverse while also slightly nerfing lasers cuz people could spread their damage more.

[Agent of Change]

Bud Crue, on 27 June 2018 - 10:57 AM, said:

So tell me how does this proposal result in “narrowing the power gap”? All this proposal does is make that 10% a little less effective, but just as proportionally OP to the other 90% as they were before the nerfs. We are nerfing the MK-II but also the Shadow Hawk, when the Shadow Hawk is already mediocre. There will be no decrease in performance gap between the two in the system proposed.

Ahh ok, a fair question... so here's the thing... are the under-performing chassis necessarily bad? or are they under-performing because teh builds they can put together compare (very)unfavorable to the 10% that were over-performing and setting the bar? The answer is probably a mix of both... but If the other builds the Shadowhawk CAN run are suddenly closer to the top of the power curve then it has benefited for example.

If a chassis viability is based solely on it's ability to run a weapon that is currently the most powerful available that is not an argument to keep the weapon... it's an argument to adjust the chassis. Now that falls firmly into the "things i don't really expect from PGI" category, but objectively to me that's the right answer.

If you come from the perspective that different builds will likely be viable it's easy to see how underperforming mechs might make a come back based on the relative power level of their currently underperfoming build now being closer to the top of the power scale.

[GweNTLeR]

Gas Guzzler, on 27 June 2018 - 10:32 AM, said:

No.
Works Cited:
Every single post I have ever made discussing Energy Draw, ever.

I'm unable to find any recent posts, so could you please share your thoughts a bit more widely? Because back then I can agree that it wasn't really a good solution...but now, I think we already have most of changes done anyway with gh changes, buffs and nerfs..
I think ED can stop all those nerfs.

Edited by GweNTLeR, 27 June 2018 - 11:26 AM.

[Agent of Change]

SneekiBreeki, on 27 June 2018 - 11:01 AM, said:

In short you've given up on hoping that the devs will actually do something in a competent and thoughtful manner, i can respect that since most of the people that is against the constant wave of nerfs doesn't expect PGI to do much about the state of the game or not to do it in a timely nor competent and thoughtful manner neither.

For this same reason tho we still keep on arguing about their ways, people trusted PGI only to see them dragging this game's fun factor and quality down little by little, time and again over the years.

Not all hope... but most of it. I've lowered my expectations. I mean after the whole Consumables, 3PV debacle way back when i took a multi year break because I didn't want anything to do with a company that would lie to it's players even at the behest of a publisher. And quite frankly i wouldn't be here if IGP was still involved.

I have seen some improvement during the time i was gone til i came back. and the game to me is far more fun now than it ever was before, even though i'm not as good as i used to be. Perspective shift is real.

I just think if we ask for little they can surprise us, if we ask for much more we will just continue being disappointed and angry, and quite frankly i just want to stomp robits with my unit. So on that note and though at the beginning it was contentious, it's been a good talk, see you out there.


o7

Edited by Agent of Change, 27 June 2018 - 11:12 AM.

[TheOrphanator]

Dogstar, on 27 June 2018 - 10:45 AM, said:

Wow there are some epic whining crybaby posts in this thread!

Stuff like this is why we can't have nice things - clan crocodile tears refuses to budge from their 'clan smash' attitude

People like you are why we can't have nice things. You ever stop to think for a second that it has nothing to do with clan vs IS? It's about taking away counterplay. Laser gauss is flavor of the month because everything else got nerfed. When the nerf bat comes around for LRMs and IS mechs because that's what the top players deem the best, will you have this same [REDACTED] attitude?

Engine desync was actually kinda necessary given how much of a mobility advantage the average clan mech had on the average IS mech (Clan XL > all IS engines). But that's fairly easily remedied, just add an offset to IS mechs to give them engine rating of like +50 in terms of mobility then the average is fixed.

A lot of this "high alpha" nonsense has nothing to do with clan mechs/weapons, it has to do with engine desync. Now there's no reason whatsoever to bring a bigger engine. Us min-maxers see "engine doesn't matter, drop engine, bring bigger guns" because there's really no consequence in doing that.

[SneekiBreeki]

Agent of Change, on 27 June 2018 - 11:11 AM, said:

Not all hope... but most of it. I've lowered my expectations. I mean after the whole Consumables, 3PV debacle way back when i took a multi year break because I didn't want anything to do with a company that would lie to it's players even at the behest of a publisher. And quite frankly i wouldn't be here if IGP was still involved.

I have seen some improvement during the time i was gone til i came back. and the game to me is far more fun now than it ever was before, even though i'm not as good as i used to be. Perspective shift is real.

I just think if we ask for little they can surprise us, if we ask for much more we will just continue being disappointed and angry, and quite frankly i just want to stomp robits with my unit. So on that note and though at the beginning it was contentious, it's been a good talk, see you out there.


o7

We're angry tho for a simple reason: we've been here for these several years and while we've been asking them for little in a polite and calm way most of our demands have been either ignored, turned down or implemented in the worst possible way.

Not to say that each little issue that hasn't been taken care of during the course of the years have piled up leading to the current state of the game.

Back in 2014 i would've even given them the benefit of the doubt when it came to shoddy feature development and implementation since they were "new and inexperienced" but nowadays after almost 6 years? No way.

Edited by SneekiBreeki, 27 June 2018 - 11:23 AM.

[MischiefSC]

Vxheous, on 26 June 2018 - 03:06 PM, said:

No mech has 80+ alpha at 800m, stop with the exaggerations. At 800m, you have 2 gauss + 2ERLL (for 52 damage). You don't get 80 alphas until you get within 500m or less. The anni can match that alpha at about the same range.

Fair enough. I was thinking about range at which you can start engaging. It's still punching full damage 200m+ further out - your HGauss + MPL/ML/ERML builds are certainly not hitting for 80 damage at 500m. At 500m even with all the range quirks your HGauss are hitting for like 2 pts each and your lasers are not much more where as the 2xCGauss, 2HLL, 2CERML build (or 6xcerml deathstrike) is punching at his full force. Your HGauss build is already starting to lose damage at 300m.

Not that I'm saying HGauss is weak - not at all, I'd argue that for its role the HGauss Cyclops is one of the best IS mechs and that the Anni and Fafnir are just about as good, just they need more support from their teams. I do think single HGauss is weak and single HGauss recoil needs removed.

CGauss is just flat out better than regular IS Gauss though. HGauss plays a totally different role. It's AC20+ with more than 2x the velocity. So while we're looking at 80+ alpha builds you put HGaussvomit vs CGaussvomit we need to keep in mind we're balancing a brawling loadout with a range trade loadout. For IS is there a 2xGaussvomit build you would recommend vs the CGauss vomit ones?

[Reno Blade]

Navid A1, on 26 June 2018 - 01:23 PM, said:

What are you even on about? Who is talking about GH?
What?!!

GH for Larges and meds... so 1 LL + 2 Meds gives you ghost heat?
GH for Gauss + PPC was not a good move at all. It created the current laser vomit problem.

The last sentence of my post that you have quoted, I had suggested the Large+Med laser GH.
And I thought I had spammed enough of my "crazy" stuff in the last few weeks/months (especially since the Community panel post), but here is the last post, rest is in my sig:

https://mwomercs.com...ost__p__6114207

TL;DR of my Balance suggestions and to answer your question:

GH max for Large Lasers raised to 3x for both factions
GH max for PPCs raised to 3x for all PPCs
GH Large and Med Laser grouped, so the max you can build is:
3x combination of ANY Large+Med, or only 6x Meds without Larges (as right now).

Some tweaks (similar to Community panel, but more focused on bringing OP stuff down than average stuff up) and few basic changes (e.g. all ACs using burst).
https://docs.google....UXElpK4lnCQd_M/
Heck, I even buff laser cooldowns and bring in new gameplay style with fast pulse lasers.

Quote

I believe that people who are for more nerfs think that bringing down ok weapon systems makes them able to compete and have fun. I believe they are wrong... as 6 years of constant nerfs have proved that they are wrong.

Also... if you are getting one-shot with the current state of the game... the problem is YOU!
Seriously?!
one-shot?!
you sure you are playing MWO?

You want to be able to face-tank a firing line in your LRM atlas and live for more than 5 seconds?
The problem of this game is that kind of mentality.
No amount of nerfs can make you survive a face-tanking encounter... NOTHING can save you.

I don't think you know my mentality, and it doesnt matter or belong here.
I don't play Atlas with LRMs, and I dislike most of my Assault mechs, because as a PUG, I often are too reliant on the other Puggers movement/coordination.
That said, I had some great games in my Mad Cat mk2 or Blood Asps and also some very bad ones, due to obvious mistakes in positioning and lacking team coordination.

But what is worst is to do mistakes in a brawling Medium mech, or my PPC/Gauss Marauder and leave the match with 50 dmg or something.

I don't want to face tank all day long (or I would take a Dakka Assault with RAC5s/UAC5s).
I want to play a game where it's possible to survive long enough to actually use my weapons, without waiting in the back of my team in a brawling medium mech until they are dead and I can "clean up" or die trying, just because otherwise I will eat one volley and get crippled ("one shot").

Quote

Guess what... those 80% of weapons down there are the ones that were nerf'd to that place... If you nerf the top 20% to that level, then you have to repeat the nerfs to weapons that will become the new 20%... and on and on and on it goes... until the likes of you gonna ask for jelly sticks because you are still getting one-shot.

That might be the reason why Lasers are better than PPCs now, but it doesnt change the fact that they are better and need to be aligned again.
If the GAP between the 80% and 20% is larger than the gap between all the 80%, then that's a huge gap to be closed.
If there is any more Gap inside that is "large", there will be another round of nerfs/changes, but if the gaps are then smaller and smaller, there is much more room for buffs.

Navid A1, on 26 June 2018 - 01:42 PM, said:

See these two comments people.
these are the problems.

If you are wondering how people die so fast in the first 5 minutes of the game... look no further. Here they are thinking that its the weapon's problem and not how they play!

So now you are ignoring the comments of these two also without actually replying to their explanation.
Probably too much paranoia that someone might actually use logic on you...

Lawrence Elsa, on 26 June 2018 - 02:08 PM, said:

You're absolutely right Navid. If someone is getting shot in the face and dies instantly there is no way a single mech did it to him, even if the 94 alpha dire existed and did it to him, he could twist after the gauss hit him and spread the laser damage (just like what you should do when being shot by laservom).
if he was out where the enemy team could see him and murder him from being shot by more than one person's alphastrike, its not the fault of the people who shot him.

I have never seen the 94 alpha dire in any game. I have seen 3 stagger-fire supernovas, and maybe 7 MadCats with heavy larges + Gauss that sit in the open long enough to get murdered by the three people who turn around to punch it in the face.
Being shot by more than one mech has almost always been what has meant the death of me or my enemies in QP. Only 1v1 light fights have been the exception. Its why the Dealthsrike never sits in the front line, because it will die if more than one person focuses on it.

Huh?
When you are fighting multiple targets (which is inevitable in a brawl that is not peak and hide), there will be times where you get shot from one side and you will not even notice the damage fast enough to twist, or you will just twist in the direction that someone else is facing you.

Sure there are enough times where you can survive a few people shooting you by twisting. I've done it often enough.
But a team that is coordinated enough will just focus on few targets and then your twisting will not make you live much longer with the dmg output possible in the current game - not only Lasers, but these are the easiest to hit with!

If you don't bring a heavy/assault with armor quirks (that's barely enough bonus for 2 med lasers)... you will get killed exponentially faster!



Again TL;DR:
I prefere a game where it's possible to survive longer, so the battles are longer.
- Higher % of BATTLE time > match time > waiting time = best buff (many dislike Solaris because the waiting and battle time is nearly equal).
- If a single Elite player can "carry" the game by "taking out" targets fast because he is using the strongest build (which is >20% better than other builds) instead of because he is just better player, the game is ot balanced enough!
- Elite players should not be feared because they bring 70-90dmg Laser Vomit meta, but because they can be deadly bringing ANY build (e.g. Summoners with PPCs or UAC20).

Daggett, on 26 June 2018 - 02:20 PM, said:

Generally i agree, almost all early deaths happen due to bad decisions. But the question is how forgiveful the game needs to be to not only appeal to the most competitive players but to more casual ones alike?

I think we can agree that oneshotting even some assaults like the direstar did would be too much for casuals. But where do we draw the line? Which amount of alpha would punish minor mistakes just enough that it matters for both competitive play as well as casual one without being frustrating in the latter environment?

Maybe the game could still be fun and playable on a highly competitive level without such big and devastating hits while also minimizing the frustration potential for the less skilled crowd?

Finally someone who understands the essence of all the "nerfing".
Without nerfing and with power creep you move towards a CS game where any mistake means instant death.
Mechwarrior should be about long time battle tactics and strategies rather than deathball overrun the target dummies.

Imperius, on 26 June 2018 - 02:24 PM, said:

If it has no effect then why make Gauss even more undesirable. I already don’t even play the game this just justifies my reason each pass.

Better yet just remove all guns let’s just hug guys!

You'r still here and QQing about your excile to get attention?
Here have some (gives cookie).

Imperius, on 26 June 2018 - 02:30 PM, said:

Dude I’ve used 2x ER-PPC 2x cGauss since I bought the Dire Wolf. I only Pilot assault mechs. Literally killed my play style and desire to play this game anymore. No point in arguing or trying to change things that are set in stone.

It seems to me that you are one of these people who like to pack the biggest punch and soak the most damage with one click.
I don't think that the nerfs made the build unplayable and there are other builds that should be fun...
oh wait, there is only power creep laser vom dominating your favorite PPC/Gauss build now.
wait wait wait... why are you not rooting for Laser nerfs then? Your favorite build would be useful again (as the Laser king would be reduced down to the same level).

Contradicting or hypocrite?

[MischiefSC]

Gas Guzzler, on 27 June 2018 - 09:34 AM, said:

I predict the same group of people will say "This is a great direction for MWO" and the other group will say "This is ridiculous... you can't fix bad play by nerfing certain playstyles"

I see we are still at the status quo. Balance by LCD.

I was going on a Archive Walkabout the other day. Almost 6 years ago PGI introduced taking damage when you overheat - before that you just shut down for a long, long time. Some people said 'Yay! Good idea!' some people said 'ZOMG NO you will kill the game and make it just everyone scraping each other with small lasers!'

Same with all the rafts of nerfs to the stupidly pants on head OP Clan weapons at Clan release. If you tried to roll all those changes back now there would be riots, because they were good ideas.

You can't listen to the MWO population about changes. You can't even necessarily listen to good players; there were a depressing number of people who know better saying that nerfing Clan tech wasn't needed and it was all skill-balanced back when Clan weapons were just stupidly, stupidly strong. Even a couple who said heat damage would 'kill the game'.

So I try to approach balance changes, even ones I don't like, with an open mind. I would rather CGauss not get recoil but 2xCgauss does and CGauss gets a health buff, all along with CLasers getting dialed back (it's only taken 4+ years, imagine how much healthier the game would be if we had started where we are now) and then look at some much needed buffs for small lasers and LBX and CBallistics.

If it sucks then the meta changes and the actual in game performance proves out how bad the change was and it changes back later and we get to add 'I was right on this balance change' to our balance cred spreadsheet. However as a solution to the flat out superiority of CGauss/CGauss vomit it's not a terrible choice.

[Gas Guzzler]

GweNTLeR, on 27 June 2018 - 11:11 AM, said:

I'm unable to find any recent posts, so could you please share your thoughts a bit more widely? Because back then I can agree that it wasn't really a good solution...but now, I think we already have most of changes done anyway with gh changes, buffs and nerfs..
I think ED can stop all those nerfs.

That's because ED hasn't been seriously discussed since 2016. I'm not going to waste my time rehashing everything out again. It was an interesting idea that ended up playing like garbage, and its gone.

MischiefSC, on 27 June 2018 - 11:45 AM, said:

I was going on a Archive Walkabout the other day. Almost 6 years ago PGI introduced taking damage when you overheat - before that you just shut down for a long, long time. Some people said 'Yay! Good idea!' some people said 'ZOMG NO you will kill the game and make it just everyone scraping each other with small lasers!'

Same with all the rafts of nerfs to the stupidly pants on head OP Clan weapons at Clan release. If you tried to roll all those changes back now there would be riots, because they were good ideas.

You can't listen to the MWO population about changes. You can't even necessarily listen to good players; there were a depressing number of people who know better saying that nerfing Clan tech wasn't needed and it was all skill-balanced back when Clan weapons were just stupidly, stupidly strong. Even a couple who said heat damage would 'kill the game'.

So I try to approach balance changes, even ones I don't like, with an open mind. I would rather CGauss not get recoil but 2xCgauss does and CGauss gets a health buff, all along with CLasers getting dialed back (it's only taken 4+ years, imagine how much healthier the game would be if we had started where we are now) and then look at some much needed buffs for small lasers and LBX and CBallistics.

If it sucks then the meta changes and the actual in game performance proves out how bad the change was and it changes back later and we get to add 'I was right on this balance change' to our balance cred spreadsheet. However as a solution to the flat out superiority of CGauss/CGauss vomit it's not a terrible choice.

Recoil is a dumb mechanic and I want it gone, regardless of Clan vs IS balance. Balance some other way please. I would prefer making IS Gauss less useless instead of adding recoil to CGauss.

Gauss vomit is already getting nerfed with the laser damage.

Also, the Dire Wolf is an unfortunate victim of all these nerfs. The mega alpha build is the only thing that makes that mech worth playing.

Edited by Gas Guzzler, 27 June 2018 - 11:53 AM.

[Imperius]

@Reno Blade

Or then my playstyle becomes the next target for unneeded nerfs. Short sighted much? That seems to be the modus operandi. Apparently you’ve never used the build? You’d know it’s not one click “tons of damage”.

Get attention? Nah, I could message who needs to be told this a the drop of a hat. I’m providing feedback (because it’s being asked for here) and even though it has a salty nature to it. It’s still constructive, because again this nerf to gauss serves zero purpose.

Did I say anything about lazers?

Good to see your feedback is helping kill the game and keep others like myself standing on an island shaking their head back and forth in disappointment and confusion. Literally how can you be so disconnected?

Edited by Imperius, 27 June 2018 - 12:00 PM.