657 replies to this topic

[A Headless Chicken]

Tesunie, on 28 June 2018 - 09:12 PM, said:

PS: I've done the AC2 thing vs a dual H Gauss mech... Twisting did not save me. It just lost me my side torso that much faster, if HSR was even nice enough to register that I twisted... (Then again, heavy mech vs assault mech... not exactly a good place to be in. Then again, several of my teammates vs an assault mech wasn't too bad to sacrifice myself to sometimes...)

This, gents, is the player that wants to fix the game. Bringing AC2s in a knife fight against Dual Heavy Gauss of all the things in the videogame.

As I said, buffing alternative playstyles that counter vomit like brawl and poptart which are currently dead, which allows free reign of vomit in the current meta will solve the issue. But then again, we can't have you getting killed by more weapons, can we? Gotta fix convergence, add shake and nerf everyone's aim, which is definitely constructive because everyone will still be in the same food chain.

Also, I wonder what Clan Mechs actually mount Gauss Rifles and Vomit and have a "high alpha"... No, it can't be the Deathstrike or Dire Wolf, haha!

Edited by A Headless Chicken, 28 June 2018 - 09:28 PM.

[Tesunie]

Yeonne Greene, on 28 June 2018 - 09:11 PM, said:

This is simply wrong.

If you are playing AC/2 properly, you are already exposed, at around 900 meters, because that's what it has to do to maximize its utility in its role. The Gauss has to expose against you, which gives you the advantage in firing solution time. You do not have to spool up, you begin doing damage immediately, before the enemy's guns even clear the ridge. The damage will not spread, because your would-be assailant can't acquire you if he's not looking for you and he has to keep his Gauss trained while he charges them unless he peaked barely, you fail to move, and then he can pre-charge and let fly on the next go.

The AC/2 boat has every advantage here.

You once again assume that the AC2 build already knows where the opponent is to open fire "before their barrels even clear cover"... Yeah...

You know what... I wasn't even referring to half of what is now being discussed. People took a one line comment, and RAN WAY OFF WITH IT. You've made it into something else entirely... something I never intended nor even said.

For the record, what was original stated:
"What about builds that require stare time? Such as AC2 spam, LRMs (locks), etc?

Just as a counter example/statement."

And it was in regards to rewarding people for twisting to redistribute damage. But, as typical, people read more than was actually written, and so, I'm not even going to go on this roller coaster anymore.

PS: I've very much been enjoying my Quad AC2 Sunspider.

Oh, and did you consider... Jump snipers?

A Headless Chicken, on 28 June 2018 - 09:12 PM, said:

We're not advocating the removal of anything but correcting a whole list of misconceptions that you have about a handful of weapon systems, and one measly technique within the videogame.

"correcting a whole list of misconception" says the person who has as of yet to provide any feedback other than "buff everything, always"...

I'm just going to let that sit for a moment.

Oh, and also the person who panics "but my accuracy" when any topic of delayed convergence or cone of fire comes up, when it's already been explained that it probably wouldn't be enough to "make all your shots miss". But no matter how many times we might say it (even with examples), you just refuse to grasp it.

But by all means, continue to tell me how bad of a player I am from... wait... I don't really care if I'm "a super wonderfully skilled" or "local dumpster diver of skill" player. And you still don't grasp that I do know said mechanics... which you've been of about zero help actually stating it besides in broad strokes. "You twisting bad" isn't exactly "explaining the mechanic" (which I've already done at least once in the last thread about high alphas, just to demonstrate that I do understand the mechanic).


Of course, you can always continue to attack the player (at this point), rather than the ideas. Which you just go "but what about sustained damage builds" and then flip to "but what about Gauss builds" and then back to "what about sustained damage builds"... Already answered each case for you... so stop trying to find some other "tiny point" and reading "sixteen million miles beyond what was actually said"...

[Tesunie]

Yeonne Greene, on 28 June 2018 - 09:14 PM, said:

And, again, you can amplify this effect in your favor if you swap to Ultra AC/2.

The JM6-DD is very strong with 5x AC/2. The MAL-MX90 with 6x AC/2.



Take a 'Mech that can both continue to DPS while also spreading damage...like the Marauder.

Not every 'Mech is going to behave the same in every scenario even with the same loadout.



You were too close.

And jam.

Was working with mechs I've used.

I was trying to visual general builds, not specific chassis and specific builds, and specific specific specific for a one up half explained example of a small statement that has been read into about to billion times more than it by all rights should have been read into....

Of course not every mech behaves the same way. Not every mech uses the same build the same.

How would you know? And, that is what happens when you round a corner, and there they are... but... doesn't matter.

Don't care.

Really don't care.

Not making specific specific specific examples for a tiny insignificant point that wasn't even suppose to be taken this far... so once again I'm not going to specific specific builds from across all of BT about what would be best for best for best, and counter it with the best of the best of the best... and then example one with an Annihilator vs a Mauler, then another with a Catapult vs a Jagermech, then another with a Sunspider vs a flea, then another with a locust vs an assassin, then... How far do we need to go into specifics and possible builds on possible battlefields on possible maps... This starts to get tiresome and convoluted very quickly.

For example, I bring up the dual Gauss cat. You counter by saying the MC MKII does that better. I bring up the quad AC2 (U, LBx or normal, not specified) Sunspider, you mention the six AC2 King Crab that does it better... and round and round we go.


Come back when it's relevant again.

[A Headless Chicken]

I mean, judging from the mass of arguments that we had over mis/appropriate usage of a single weapon system, which entails simple damage/cd numbers and basic engagements, maybe you'd feel like rethinking whether your CPU bloom plan is sustainable, well thought out with all aspects of the game in mind or will even change things, when I'm sure most people with a decent head on their shoulders (not me) would just say "Buff playstyles that counter vomit because those playstyles are not viable right now."

And you should care about these little points, because it goes to show how you as a player are not willing to improve, are ignorant of the game, and instead fall back to keep calling for PGI to nerf and nerf and implement new mechanics and nerf. Relevant enough?

Edited by A Headless Chicken, 28 June 2018 - 09:39 PM.

[Tesunie]

A Headless Chicken, on 28 June 2018 - 09:25 PM, said:

This, gents, is the player that wants to fix the game. Bringing AC2s in a knife fight against Dual Heavy Gauss of all the things in the videogame.

As I said, buffing alternative playstyles that counter vomit like brawl and poptart which are currently dead, which allows free reign of vomit in the current meta will solve the issue. But then again, we can't have you getting killed by more weapons, can we? Gotta fix convergence, add shake and nerf everyone's aim, which is definitely constructive because everyone will still be in the same food chain.

Also, I wonder what Clan Mechs actually mount Gauss Rifles and Vomit and have a "high alpha"... No, it can't be the Deathstrike or Dire Wolf, haha!

Poptart? Dead?

And this is the player that wants to buff everything till every weapon deals thousands of damage and every mech has billions of health on it. (That is what happens if you only ever buff everything.)


I give.

[A Headless Chicken]

Tesunie, on 28 June 2018 - 09:36 PM, said:

Poptart? Dead?

Is this where we must begin? You don't have to give, because this is the single thing that confirms how in touch you are with the game.

[NocturnalBeast]

A Headless Chicken, on 28 June 2018 - 09:42 PM, said:

Is this where we must begin? You don't have to give, because this is the single thing that confirms how in touch you are with the game.

Lords exploiting Poptarting was what started the whole trend of whining-based, knee-jerk buffing and nerfing back in beta (long before Clans were introduced).

[justcallme A S H]

Tesunie, on 28 June 2018 - 08:20 PM, said:

Okay. Here is a situation for you.

Quad AC2 vs Dual Gauss at long range poke warfare.

They each poke out and shoot. The Gauss lands basically 30 points of damage into a single location on the Quad AC2 build. The AC2 build shoots back, spreading two volleys of AC2s into two separate location before each relocate behind cover.
AC2 build has taken 30 points into a single location, meanwhile the dual Gauss took 16 points of damage, probably in two separate locations due to the dual Gauss being able to twist after shooting.

Tesuie... Dude, Ima stop you right there. You've made a grave mistake here. 30pts of damage from dual Gauss? That is wrong.

Why? Lets start with some maths...

1. Gauss is a pinpoint high damage weapon. It shoots and has to wait for a reload, some 5s.
2. AC2 is a low damage / high DPS weapon that is good at area supression and pin-point, if you can aim. It has 0.72s cooldown.

In 5s 4xAC2 mech has outputted 28.8 damage.
In 5s 2xGauss has 30 damage.

So damage is the same, the second you go over 5s AC2s are winning for the next 4 seconds. The issue you are missing here is range and weapon purpose.

The AC2 build must be @ 900m-1000m+ to be considerered viable against Gauss if you are attempting to trade against Gauss. So if you do sit at the proper ranges all of a sudden you are significantly out-DPSing the Gauss. Why?

1. The Dual Guass mech is either a NTG/WHM or Assault. This means it is moving no faster than around 64km/h.

2. The quad AC2 mech is much faster, assuming it is RFL for instance. It must kite the Assault. Given it runs some 10-15km/h faster, that is easily done.

Play the advantage, always, win more.

Tesunie, on 28 June 2018 - 08:20 PM, said:

In a different situation, that AC2 build, as you already mentioned, needs to stare down a high alpha build. The alpha build takes off a side torso of the AC2 built (to try and be fair), while the AC2 build peppers damage all over the twisting alpha build.

Again incorrect. The high alpha build, say a 71pt Laser Vom build. At 900m is effectively doing about 10 damage, maybe 15 damage. So again you are winning with AC2s hands down against a big alpha build because generally, they are range limited. There are only a few VERY select mechs that win the range game to AC2s.

I mean look at how dominate AC2 useage is in Solaris on even skirmisher builds. They win because the high DPS... The big issue is it only works well if you can aim.


TBH - and in no way am I being rude here - But it seems you aren't really getting MWO, weapon role and how to engage/counter within the game and it's various aspects. I was literally on comms today, for an hour, talking build theory with the comp team I'm playing with post practice sessions. We were coming up with ideas/counters like a game of chess and that is what MWO is a lot of the time IMO.

Edited by justcallme A S H, 28 June 2018 - 10:26 PM.

[A Headless Chicken]

Ed Steele, on 28 June 2018 - 10:23 PM, said:

Lords exploiting Poptarting was what started the whole trend of whining-based, knee-jerk buffing and nerfing back in beta (long before Clans were introduced).

And Night Gyrs with a 45 PPFLD poptarting continued a whole trend of whining-based, knee-jerk buffing and nerfing. It's not even OP.

[Ishii]

I apologize for cheap English, I typed the text in the online translator.

In my opinion it is easier to remove clantech from the game, because then nobody will complain about the total superiority of clantech over sphertech ( sarcasm alert ).

In fact - have sphertech and clantech its advantages, I am sincerely sorry for those players who can't understand and whine about the fact that cleantech not balanced and it need nerf.The sphere also has a lot of advantages over clantech, for some reason many fans sphertech turn a blind eye. Next - my subjective opinion, it is not necessary to consider it as the truth in the first instance. How about the strongest armor in many sphere mechs? Clantech can only envy. Huge damage in close battle and the lack of mad heating due to, for example, 2x AC20 ( Hello, Victor, and don't care that he gives three alphastrikes before overheating ). Examples can be to argue still long, but what in this sense, if adequate players all this understand?

I don't have the right to dictate to You what to do better ,but let me give you my opinion about what would be great to see in the game. It would be great to see the optimization, it is not enough in the game. It would be great to see in the game Russian localization ( do not want to do it on their own, so let the modmakers ), personally, it does not bother me, but it would increase the interest of the Russian community to the game, not enough people recently in the game.
About maps and game modes - here I do not know what to say, like everything is enough, but it is in my opinion.

PGI, please, stop following the whiners, who will always be not satisfied. I love Your project and I do not know anything like it, it is unique in its own way. It will be great if you focus on the real problem (in my opinion ) of the project - small online. It will be great to see more players on the battlefields. Yes, and for You that promises profit, because the more people - more donation ( I love Your steampacks, the most honest and best model of donation from everyone that I've seen ).
Thank you for listening.

[NyxSilence]

Can we just let From Software buy out MWO and all MW assets to fix this?

Tangent aside this nerf was not warranted. To even be viable in a fight with 2x clan gauss I have to have 4 tons of ammo and people still just run away with my kills. Now instead of 40 shots for a max of 600 damage its now been brought down to 520. Great. 80 damage off. Thanks. Oh removing cool shots? Here lets also forget coolant was in most Mechwarrior games too. That moment when a single heavy small laser is more viable than an CERM. Just whatever. Recoil is fine, has been fine and I don't know why ballistics haven had this since the beginning. But every time I turn around there are more nerfs. This post has been here for 8 days and you guys got nothing but grief for it. Maybe you should listen and watch what you're doing before you watch people just walk away because all you do is nerf their equipment.

[NyxSilence]

Tesunie, on 28 June 2018 - 05:50 PM, said:

I'll get to the rest of the people who responded to my posts... in due time. But this one will be easy to go with...



WOW! So helpful. I never saw it from that perspective before. Thanks for your feedba...

...

Oh. Sorry. I confused you with someone who was actually providing feedback and constructive advise on a subject.


To be more serious;
So, what you just said there is to ignore all that is Battletech.

Well then, I've got a game idea just for you. How about I make a new Halo game. It's going to have all the Halo characters in it. It's going to use swords, spears and metal shields. The only ranged weapon available will be throwing stars. All the aliens in the game will carry fish, that will shoot out minnows that swim in the air and explode.

Wait. What do you mean that isn't Halo? It says it right in the title that it's a Halo game. Books? Previous game titles? No. No one is interested in that junk.


The above situation is what you basically are trying to say here. If we ignore all the previous Battletech history (novels, TT and even other MW games), then would it still be Battletech? Or should we call it "some random robot game shooter extreme" instead?

Your whole post just doesn't even make any sense here.

I mean, I don't mind changes from lore for better game play and balance. But at the same time, we really should look at and reference to lore when possible, at least for possible inspiration and idea. Even if it doesn't pan out, it's good for a Battletech game to reference to all other things Battletech.

I mean to be completely fair here NOTHING in mwo is anywhere close to lore or even tabletop numbers comparison just for the sake of "balance". I mean hell look at battletech. You use ANY mech, ANY OF THEM, they actually feel like battlemechs. In here its just different flavored COD or some would argue Battlefield. Honestly even a Stalker in battletech has WELL OVER 130 CT armor. So lets be real here: balance in this game is no where to be seen except on the field of what is now becoming pvp mmo mechwarrior.

[Y E O N N E]

Spoiler

Tesunie, on 28 June 2018 - 09:27 PM, said:

You once again assume that the AC2 build already knows where the opponent is to open fire "before their barrels even clear cover"... Yeah...

You don't get it: it doesn't matter. Both of them have to scan for a target, but only one of them has to first clear the terrain in his face. One of them will be scanning while the other one is still exposing. With great distance, you can scan large areas at once, and if you are well-positioned you limit the angles you need to worry about. Ergo, our well-positioned AC/2 boat has the edge. Lose a trade because you aren't positioned well? Don't try to keep trading. Reposition and wait for a better opportunity to deploy.

Quote

You know what... I wasn't even referring to half of what is now being discussed. People took a one line comment, and RAN WAY OFF WITH IT. You've made it into something else entirely... something I never intended nor even said.

For the record, what was original stated:
"What about builds that require stare time? Such as AC2 spam, LRMs (locks), etc?

Just as a counter example/statement."

And it was in regards to rewarding people for twisting to redistribute damage. But, as typical, people read more than was actually written, and so, I'm not even going to go on this roller coaster anymore.

So you were attempting to imply that face-time builds are generally disadvantaged because they can't afford to torso twist, we pointed out that they are not disadvantaged when used within their niches, and your counter to that was, in so many words, that these same weapons are disadvantaged outside of their niche.

Bruh...

Quote

PS: I've very much been enjoying my Quad AC2 Sunspider.

Great! I'm not here to judge your builds, only how well you can use them based on what you've been saying here and, therefore, how qualified your statements on what the game needs are. You are attempting to catch us out with examples you think we haven't thought of. The unfortunate thing is that you don't seem to actually understand your own examples, generalized or not.

Quote

Oh, and did you consider... Jump snipers?

Jump snipers are and have been countered by massed ER Large lasers where the HBK-IIC and SMN are concerned. The rest handle like dump-trucks and/or are as hot as the surface of the sun thanks to the Gauss+PPC ghost heat link...and still get countered by massed ERLL. Did you not watch MWOWC last year and the year before?

Tesunie, on 28 June 2018 - 09:34 PM, said:

And jam.

Not enough to matter, especially not when you have 4+. They weren't meta on the HBK-IIC for nothing, they out-traded dual ERPPC and traded well with 5x ERLL. Still kinda do.

Honestly, too many people put too much of a demerit on the jams. Even with jams, Ultras have higher average output.

Quote

Was working with mechs I've used.

Maybe broaden your scope of thought?

Quote

I was trying to visual general builds, not specific chassis and specific builds, and specific specific specific for a one up half explained example of a small statement that has been read into about to billion times more than it by all rights should have been read into....

That's fine, but 1.) your generalized builds need to be equitable when you compare them, and 2.) you have to demonstrate you understand how those builds work, where they are strong, where they are not. Players like Proton and such can rack up ridiculous scores in damn near anything because they understand these things. From statements you have made...you don't seem to.

Quote

How would you know? And, that is what happens when you round a corner, and there they are... but... doesn't matter.

You. Were. Too. Close.

There is a particular way you should move and position with AC/2 builds, just like with SRM builds or mid-range laser vomit builds. Maneuvering through buildings at danger-close is not one of them. Running with the squad at the front is also not one of them. Peaking out alone without the rest of the team to draw aggro or a big range advantage...also also not one of them.

And at that, sometimes you just get a tough break. That has nothing to do with damage output being too high, that has everything to do with getting caught outside the role your 'Mech was built for regardless of how you intended to use it. It sucks, but it happens. Lights when they get jumped by Streaks. LRM boats when they get jumped by Lights. ERPPC poptarts when they get focused by ERLL boats. HGauss when they encounter ERPPC poptarts or LRMs.

C'est la vie.

Quote

Not making specific specific specific examples for a tiny insignificant point that wasn't even suppose to be taken this far... so once again I'm not going to specific specific builds from across all of BT about what would be best for best for best, and counter it with the best of the best of the best... and then example one with an Annihilator vs a Mauler, then another with a Catapult vs a Jagermech, then another with a Sunspider vs a flea, then another with a locust vs an assassin, then... How far do we need to go into specifics and possible builds on possible battlefields on possible maps... This starts to get tiresome and convoluted very quickly.

For example, I bring up the dual Gauss cat. You counter by saying the MC MKII does that better. I bring up the quad AC2 (U, LBx or normal, not specified) Sunspider, you mention the six AC2 King Crab that does it better... and round and round we go.

As I said above, the issue is that you are not making examples that are equitable and you are not demonstrating that you understand the nuances of how your examples work and interact. It's not about one-upsmanship and proposing counters, I was simply matching the investment in weapons of one build to match the other.

[GweNTLeR]

justcallme A S H, on 28 June 2018 - 10:25 PM, said:

Why? Lets start with some maths...

1. Gauss is a pinpoint high damage weapon. It shoots and has to wait for a reload, some 5s.
2. AC2 is a low damage / high DPS weapon that is good at area supression and pin-point, if you can aim. It has 0.72s cooldown.

In 5s 4xAC2 mech has outputted 28.8 damage.
In 5s 2xGauss has 30 damage.

Its actually 56 damage in 5s for 4xAC2.
And since gauss CD is actually a 5+0.75(and 0.75 is not affected by CD quirks/nodes), it loses even more in DPS.
The formula: n*d*(1+fix(T/CD))= 4*2*(1+fix(5/0.72))

Edited by GweNTLeR, 28 June 2018 - 11:44 PM.

[FromHell2k]

Hey there,
I just had the ultimate idea how to solve the problem once and forever!
Cut all damage in half / double the amount of HP on each mech.

Benefits:
Fights would be more tactical (not just stupid shooting)
Is done relatively easy
Preservs playstyles
Stable improvement for the future!

Maybe this looks like a troll post, but I'm serious. Think about it.

Edit:
May even put the damage globaly down to 1/3 - HP to 300%. That would open up even more

Edited by FromHell2k, 29 June 2018 - 12:30 AM.

[justcallme A S H]

GweNTLeR, on 28 June 2018 - 11:41 PM, said:

Its actually 56 damage in 5s for 4xAC2.
And since gauss CD is actually a 5+0.75(and 0.75 is not affected by CD quirks/nodes), it loses even more in DPS.
The formula: n*d*(1+fix(T/CD))= 4*2*(1+fix(5/0.72))

Where does the 0.75s come from? Surely not counting charge mechanic...

[A Headless Chicken]

FromHell2k, on 29 June 2018 - 12:20 AM, said:

Hey there,
I just had the ultimate idea how to solve the problem once and forever!
Cut all damage in half / double the amount of HP on each mech.

Benefits:
Fights would be more tactical (not just stupid shooting)
Is done relatively easy
Preservs playstyles
Stable improvement for the future!

Maybe this looks like a troll post, but I'm serious. Think about it.

Edit:
May even put the damage globaly down to 1/3 - HP to 300%. That would open up even more

More time for more people to make more of the same mistakes only to die and complain that a 94 or 47 or 31.67 alpha is too OP.

Next, please.

[FromHell2k]

A Headless Chicken, on 29 June 2018 - 12:48 AM, said:

More time for more people to make more of the same mistakes only to die and complain that a 94 or 47 or 31.67 alpha is too OP.

Next, please.

Well, I'm not sure. I still believe that people, which complain about too high alphas, are just too "handicapped" to twist the mech to spread the damage, instead they like to get it in one spot. If it would take 3-4 "high alpha shots", this flaw in playstyle would be too obvious to complain about.

[A Headless Chicken]

FromHell2k, on 29 June 2018 - 12:57 AM, said:

Well, I'm not sure. I still believe that people, which complain about too high alphas, are just too "handicapped" to twist the mech to spread the damage, instead they like to get it in one spot. If it would take 3-4 "high alpha shots", this flaw in playstyle would be too obvious to complain about.

Okay, then what about lights which now deal 10 damage alphas against 480 armor assaults?

[FromHell2k]

A Headless Chicken, on 29 June 2018 - 12:58 AM, said:

Okay, then what about lights which now deal 10 damage alphas against 480 armor assaults?

Well, by now most lights got 1, maybe 2 chances to avoid that AC/20. Then they have more chances to make it count
Beside that, a light mech shouldn't try on an assault alone, should it? If it does, there would then just be the need to exploit weak spots, not just "pew pew runby".

I'm just sick of all this "nerf pls". Always the same. So my solution would be blunt, but practical.

Edited by FromHell2k, 29 June 2018 - 01:08 AM.