657 replies to this topic

[Dopebear]

PGI keep trying to nerf lasers and the community collectively expresses how poor the concept is. Yet PGI keep trying and trying, as a whole ignoring any and all feedback about the topic.

Why does PGI compare things in a vacuum? Clan overall have more and stronger lasers? Well, it's what they have. Meanwhile IS overall have stronger mechs, far more options/customisation with mechs, and overall far better quirks. But no, lasers are generally better, so nerf clan lasers!

So silly.

[Navid A1]

Stinger554, on 26 June 2018 - 10:40 AM, said:

Do I really need to explain to you the difference between that and this? Maybe it's the doubled effective range, or better ammo supply......

Spreadsheet build to the core... That build is not sustainable or effective at all... even if we ignore the ocean of limitations that come with the direwolf.

[Bud Crue]

Stinger554, on 26 June 2018 - 10:46 AM, said:

My qualm here is how the PTS is structured...if it's 4v4 or something dumb like that then it won't really provide useful information.

Unless PGI incentivized the PTS (which they have never done, and if I recall correctly Russ (or maybe it was Paul) said something about the impracticality of doing so) the participation is typically not enough to fill 12v12 queues, at least historically that has been the case. Even the skills tree PTS, most folks who posted info did it based on observations from the testing grounds and that was the biggest change in the game since the arrival of clan mechs and even that was just a 4v4 PTS (again, I may be recalling that incorrectly). Add in the also historical predilection of PGI to run a nice juicy event in the regular game client at the same time as the PTS and you will have the typical minimal participation with inevitably skewed results that every PTS ever has provided.

That being said, I am nevertheless confident that THIS PTS will provide PGI with the data that it wants in order to lead to the outcome they want, namely nerfs, nerfs, and more nerfs and the higher TTK that Paul just a couple months ago said is the primary goal of all thier balance efforts.

[Noguchi-san]

So PGI is killing FP in the END.

Welcome to our IS Overlords then! ^^

[MischiefSC]

Navid A1, on 26 June 2018 - 10:34 AM, said:

angry stuff

Sincere question here because I absolutely defer to your experience on the builds over my own - no question.

However, why does a small recoil on CGauss wipe out all those builds when the huge recoil on HGauss doesn't? Especially given that it's coming with a reduction in CLaser burn duration/cooldown (along with damage reduction). It's still going to hit (potentially) about like the HGauss+laser builds do but out to 700+m instead of 300+m.

CGauss is flat out superior and probably needs some changes. The health changes just made it sorta janky to play - an unenjoyable sort of nerf. Sort of like how in tabletop UACs jam on a doubletap and the weapon can't be used for the rest of the match - it's just a sort of **** RNG thing.

So supposing the small recoil to CGauss works, health on CGauss is increased but it just makes them unplayable because of CLaser performance when you're comparing CGaussvomit to HGaussvomit with damage and range advantages accounted for. What changes need made then to CLasers to make CGaussvomit comparable to HGaussvomit?

Make sense? I don't think this is a terrible concept. It's also got a lot of symetry; IS HGauss vomit is beastly at close range, Clans will have a comparable but reasonably more limited (hotter, lower total DPS or whatever) equivalent with longer range.

[Navid A1]

CK16, on 26 June 2018 - 10:48 AM, said:

Great feedback as usual from the community...all pitch forks and torches but no real answers. If you botch about changes atleast give them ideas how to improve instead of sound like a whiney child....

Show proof why X,Y,Z changed are bad, or need refinement. The truth is there is issues with Alpha warrior online l lately FoR BOTH SIDESx nerfs need to happen to make the game better for all...work with dev's and stop throwing temper tantrum

[Redacted]

They are addressing the "alpha warrior" by changing the lasers... which are the main problem behind high clan alphas.... fair enough!


That gauss change is an indication of being out of touch by light years. It adds frustration and destroys an entire line of builds... only because they think the 94 damage alpha mech is ruining their game... funny thing is that I've never seen that mech Chris is referring to, even once!... and I play this game more than most, 10 times over.

Edited by draiocht, 26 June 2018 - 03:47 PM.
unconstructive

[MechaBattler]

It's a damage nerf. But it's a buff to other stats. It's not just a nerf. And they've acknowledged that IS defensive quirks might need to be reduced if damage is lowered. Curious how this will work out.

The recoil on the HGauss hasn't killed it's builds. So I doubt it will do any worse for the C-Gauss. It's why I supported that change.

Also they're not going to buff. They want to reduce ridiculous alphas. Remember how super quirked IS weapons had to be to be considered competitive to Clan weapons? 20% weapon cooldowns and other quirks.

[Tranderas]

For the love of the franchise, please stop nerfing things, Chris. I want the game to be fun, I want to do things that are powerful and I want there to be a variety of builds possible.

Reducing the power of clan lasers simply means that we have one less tool at our disposal. Except this time, you're eliminating our only tool. And making them into "DPS weapons" as you've stated in the past eliminates differences between the two sides, bringing them closer and closer to being functionally similar. Neither of these things is fun.

Paul has made conflicting statements, Chris- that he lets you do what you want balance-wise for the most part, and that weapon buffs are "power creep." I'm pleading to you- if Paul really does let you try new things, try buffing clan dakka. Try giving us more SRM quirks. Give us more options instead of leaving us with none.

Paul's comments suggest the power is in your hands. Don't use it to give us the worst possible option.

[RjBass3]

Daruwind, on 26 June 2018 - 10:04 AM, said:

NO MORE NERFS!
START BUFFING THINGS FOR CHRIST SAKE!!!!

This ^^^

Nerfs have proven in multiple games to be bad for business. While the linked video has been shown before, I really think Chris, Paul and Russ need to take a look at it if they have not already. But basically what it is saying, when you buff, the fun comes back, players feel like they are getting a bonus etc.. When you nerf, it feels like the fun is being taken away.

Instead of nerfing clans to come into line with IS, buff IS to bring it in line with the clans.

[Andi Nagasia]

Stinger554, on 26 June 2018 - 10:46 AM, said:

My qualm here is how the PTS is structured...if it's 4v4 or something dumb like that then it won't really provide useful information.

im hoping it will be 8v8, but we will need numbers to get that kinda data,
ill be on playing, and i hope to see everyone else whos in here on the PTS as well,

[Hellfire666]

CK16, on 26 June 2018 - 10:48 AM, said:

Great feedback as usual from the community...all pitch forks and torches but no real answers. If you botch about changes atleast give them ideas how to improve instead of sound like a whiney child....

Show proof why X,Y,Z changed are bad, or need refinement. The truth is there is issues with Alpha warrior online l lately FoR BOTH SIDESx nerfs need to happen to make the game better for all...work with dev's and stop throwing temper tantrum

See the community balance sheet - everything needed is right there!
Just try it on a PTS - worst case is it's way off base, best case it works.

They could at least TRY and give it the benefit of the doubt.

[Alilua]

Sure, any timetable on when you want the testing done and are there any specific builds you would prefer us to be using?

[Navid A1]

MischiefSC, on 26 June 2018 - 10:57 AM, said:

Sincere question here because I absolutely defer to your experience on the builds over my own - no question.

However, why does a small recoil on CGauss wipe out all those builds when the huge recoil on HGauss doesn't? Especially given that it's coming with a reduction in CLaser burn duration/cooldown (along with damage reduction). It's still going to hit (potentially) about like the HGauss+laser builds do but out to 700+m instead of 300+m.

CGauss is flat out superior and probably needs some changes. The health changes just made it sorta janky to play - an unenjoyable sort of nerf. Sort of like how in tabletop UACs jam on a doubletap and the weapon can't be used for the rest of the match - it's just a sort of **** RNG thing.

So supposing the small recoil to CGauss works, health on CGauss is increased but it just makes them unplayable because of CLaser performance when you're comparing CGaussvomit to HGaussvomit with damage and range advantages accounted for. What changes need made then to CLasers to make CGaussvomit comparable to HGaussvomit?

Make sense? I don't think this is a terrible concept. It's also got a lot of symetry; IS HGauss vomit is beastly at close range, Clans will have a comparable but reasonably more limited (hotter, lower total DPS or whatever) equivalent with longer range.

While I do not like the recoil with a single IS HGR, it is a weapon that has enough punch to overshadow that limitation.

When it come to clans, Ballistic weapons are absolute garbage, except for gauss. And if you consider tonnage, even less clan mechs can center around a gauss and remain useful. With how lightly clan mechs are armored, applying damage in the shortest possible duration is key to staying effective.

To make matters worse, among mechs that can pack a C-Gauss, only 3 variants can pack dual gauss AND be a problem with their alpha damage... and out of those 3, two have massive drawbacks.

Is a shadowcat with a gauss and 2 ERMLs a problem?
Ebon with a gauss and meds is a problem?
hellbringer?
summoner?
Sunspider?
Huntsman?

this change removes 1xGauss + lasers out of the picture... somthing that was not a problem to begin with.

Edited by Navid A1, 26 June 2018 - 11:10 AM.

[Cy Mitchell]

Please consider removing Coolshots from the game or changing the mechanics. That would go a long way towards reigning in those crazy Clan Laser Alphas. Also, if heat sinks provided increased dissipation but did not raise the heat cap then these Alphas would not be an issue because you could not sustain them in combat. Heat is supposed to be the limiting factor in BattleTech. I know the FPS crowd hates having to think about it and make allowances (build compromises) for it but the issue of double Coolshots that came along with the ST and the overall ability to ignore heat is what has made Lasers so stupid strong.

Along with this I support a reduction in damage for cerML, cHML and cHLL along with an increase in damage for cSPL. Maybe my mind will change once I get to actually test these settings.

I look forward to testing and giving feedback on the PTS and I hope that anyone who is concerned about weapon and tech balance will make the effort to do the same so that the PTS will not be a ghost town like it usually is when there is something to test.

Navid A1, on 26 June 2018 - 11:09 AM, said:

this change removes 1xGauss + lasers out of the picture... somthing that was not a problem to begin with.

I do hope they do not destroy cGauss the way they did cUAC. Because some Mechs like the Kodiak and Night Gyr could boat UACs they implemented increased jam chances and longer jam duration that killed me using a couple UACs on my Hellbringer prime because they are so unreliable. Now, like everyone else, all my successful Hellbringers are laser boats. Out of pure stubbornness, I still have 3 mixed ballistic/laser builds but they typically score 50-100 lower match scores that the pure laser builds. IMO they took the easy way to solve UAC boating and totally missed the mark, Laughably, UAC boating is still strong but singles and doubles are bad.

Edited by Rampage, 26 June 2018 - 11:20 AM.

[MischiefSC]

Back in the golden days before Clans were released a 40-50pt alpha was BIG. It was a dangerous, potentially broken mech. 2xAC20 and 2xGauss builds were considered high firepower, high risk. Now we're at a point where 64 is a mediocre alpha. Not great but if it's got great range or high DPS you can make it work. Actually rolling back the last 4 years of power creep would be a literal 50% reduction in firepower; I don't think that's what's going on here.

At release Clan weapons were stupidly OP. Every time they get dialed back everyone says it ruins everything and makes it no fun - however if you tried to roll Clan weapons back to their release stats you'd get a firestorm of rage. If you then buffed IS weapons into the stratosphere to match them and it was largely 1 or 2 shots to kill anyone/everyone by anyone/everyone people would scream again.

There's absolutely stuff that needs buffs. lots of ballistics, a couple lasers, some missile options that need buffs. IS FF needs buffs, honestly IS Endo and IS XL need buffs.

However some other stuff needs nerfs. The CGauss 0 health thing is a crappy balance mechanic and needs removed but are we saying the CGauss is the standard to which all other weapons need raised?

[GweNTLeR]

Wait WHAT? MORE LURMS YOU SAID?
Joking aside, I got used to HG recoil and even managed to make alpha strikes combined with PPC(on my Banshee 3S-snub+HG+something esle). Guess clanners could get used to it too. So I think this will not change much for clanners. I mean, you still could do those scary(sarcastic) alpha strikes on deathstrike, right? Just shoot gauss after duration,lol.
Lasers are a different thing. The core of this game is around lasers. They ARE everywhere. Changing lasers leads to dramatic changes of the game, which should be (but wont be of course, since we are talking about PGI) followed by proper rework on quirks, hardpoints, gh limittations (of other weapons too) and MOST IMPORTANTLY, AGILITY CHANGES.
So nope.

[MischiefSC]

Navid A1, on 26 June 2018 - 11:09 AM, said:

While I do not like the recoil with a single IS HGR, it is a weapon that has enough punch to overshadow that limitation.

When it come to clans, Ballistic weapons are absolute garbage, except for gauss. And if you consider tonnage, even less clan mechs can center around a gauss and remain useful. With how lightly clan mechs are armored, applying damage in the shortest possible duration is key to staying effective.

To make matters worse, among mechs that can pack a C-Gauss, only 3 variants can pack dual gauss AND be a problem with their alpha damage... and out of those 3, two have massive drawbacks.

Is a shadowcat with a gauss and 2 ERMLs a problem?
Ebon with a gauss and meds is a problem?
hellbringer?
summoner?
Sunspider?
Huntsman?

this change removes 1xGauss + lasers out of the picture... somthing that was not a problem to begin with.

So HGauss is okay with recoil because the HGauss is the bulk of the firepower. I would say single HGauss needs no recoil as well because there's already no real single HGauss builds that are viable.

So how about only small recoil on dual gauss (CGauss, HGauss but not regular IS Gauss?) but no recoil on single CGauss/HGauss? Hgauss damage is offset by huge size requirement, big tonnage and short range. It doesn't need recoil on singles with it.

That sound more reasonable?

[Vesper11]

Chris Lowrey, on 20 June 2018 - 05:15 PM, said:

PTS I Change list:

• Clan Gauss Rifle
  
  • Small Recoil added
• Clan Lasers
  
  • Damage Reduced
    
  • Other attributes such as Heat, Cooldown, Laser Duration may be edited to account for the reduction in damage.

I don't know how recoil will affect cGauss but if it'll create a playstyle of its own and not be useless it wouldn't be bad.
Now lasers, I hope they won't become IS lasers with clan preffix and playstyles like ranged (cLPL/cHLL) harasser will remain viable. What usually happens with every laser nerf is heavies/assaults simply switch their loadout to the next most effective while lights and mediums who lack the tonnage to do so become even less popular.

p.s. reading about "IS XL needs buff"... what if ST with XL structure got extra hp? It's still risky but as a trade off STs will actually live a little longer.

Edited by Vesper11, 26 June 2018 - 11:18 AM.

[Bud Crue]

Alilua, on 26 June 2018 - 11:05 AM, said:

Sure, any timetable on when you want the testing done and are there any specific builds you would prefer us to be using?

Of the 27 or so of us that typically participate in the PTS, lets all agree to just run stock Vindicators (in honor of the WC). I’ll run a super scary 94 alpha build and you guys can all kill me since I can’t aim for ****. That way it will provide a data baseline for PGI that cannot be refuted: clan gauss vomit needs a buff and Vindicators are OP. That’ll blow their minds.

[GweNTLeR]

MischiefSC, on 26 June 2018 - 11:14 AM, said:

So HGauss is okay with recoil because the HGauss is the bulk of the firepower. I would say single HGauss needs no recoil as well because there's already no real single HGauss builds that are viable.

So how about only small recoil on dual gauss (CGauss, HGauss but not regular IS Gauss?) but no recoil on single CGauss/HGauss? Hgauss damage is offset by huge size requirement, big tonnage and short range. It doesn't need recoil on singles with it.

That sound more reasonable?

Would be great to balance all the ballistics/missiles alpha strikes this way.