518 replies to this topic

[Reno Blade]

I give PGI a 7/10 and the Community a 2/10 so far for the PRE-PTS comments/posts.
I think there are not enough explanations on both sides, but much more emotional on the community side.
So here are my explanations that target both sides.


Let's take a look step by step of the good&bad of PGI vs Community opinions/goals.

1. PGI stating to reduce alpha of average Clan vs average IS
-> Error: The numbers provided are for few builds above average and the community is feeling misunderstood by this
-> Suggestion: PGI should have stated that overall the Laser damage of all Clan lasers are too high (for any build), and reduces the other choices power (ballistics/missiles).
-> Reasoning: Lasers are the only Clan weapons that have higher dmg than the IS counterparts while also having lower tons/slots.
The only exceptions are the Small and Med Lasers (same size/tons) as these only have more range.
The original concept of Clans being Range vs Heat, Size/Tonnage vs cd/duration should be used for balancing lasers similar to ballistics/missiles.


2. Community demanding to test the provided balancing package instead
-> Error: The suggested changes are keeping the power of lasers in most cases, or even increasing it. This contradicts the goal of reducing large Laser Alpha.
-> Suggestion: Re-think the values for damage and suggest something with less alpha potential that PGI can use for PTS (considering #1).
-> Reasoning: If the power of Lasers are not reduced, the overall situation will not change (boring gameplay where everyone brings lasers as the easiest/best build)


how about the suggested PTS1 changes for Clan Lasers?

3. PTS1 changes reducing most Clan Laser dmg with few buffs to compensate and increasing ERLL/LPL GH limit to 3.
-> Error: The overall dmg reduction could be justified (see #1 above), but the Alpha dmg seem to be increased for the stated goal builds (due to the higher number of larges 3x ERLL/LPL now on top of Mediums) while the heat without GH penalties are higher for all builds
-> Suggestion: The GH limit increase should only be given if the Larges and Meds are combined for GH.
The overall laser heat needs a little heat reduction to be below 1.0 heat/dmg (see #1 reasoning), or the best weapon would be the cERPPC (as it's also nearly same heat and dmg, but also PPFLD).
-> Reasoning: If the GH limit is increased for part of the Combo, the Combo will be also stronger. While you require 4 or 6 tons more and also generate more heat, the ALPHA damage (the main goal here) is not reduced.
With lower base heat, but linked GH limit, the smaller mechs (e.g. 6x Medium laser builds) would have better heat performance, even with lower base damage.
At the same time, the outliers and boats would have to spread the damage or get heat penalties (also reduced with lower base heat).


4. PTS1 only targeting Clan Laser (and Gauss) but the Community is suffering (also) from dual HGauss or mass AC and LRM boats
-> Error: The PTS1 only targets the most prominent build currently with the Clans being stronger on these weapons and the Community does not see these as the biggest ALPHA / DPS issue currently.
-> Suggestion: PGI should lay out the overall goal for the next balance phases that include other weapons such as HGauss.
(e.g. current top laser alpha average of 60-80dmg is too high, so PTS1... then dual HGauss feels too high so higher heat or whatever...etc.)
The Community should provide well thought arguments that consider the directions of the phases.
e.g. some weapon balance suggestions that does not only give buffs, but the overall balance between weapons, build combos and factions.
-> Reasoning: If the community knows the direction of the next nerf/buff phase, each phase is better to understand.
The risk is that the more PGI states their goals to "nerf" this or that, the more people cry and get the pitchforks against any adjustment because nerfing feels negative.
Only if the overal picture is known (e.g. which weapon combos are considered too strong), the phases for "iterative balancing", or even a full "balance pass" can be discussed/planned.


and in short
my Personal view so far for the stated PTS1 changes (will need to be tested on PTS):
- DMG reduction is OK, if the following is considered:
- Heat should be reduced (e.g. ~1 heat less than dmg) to be only a bit higher than IS lasers (balances out DHS size advantage)
- Beam duration can stay (balances out range)
- Cooldowns are OK (balances out tonnage)
- Pulse Lasers should be 1/2 dmg/heat/beam and 1/3 of CD, so they are more than just shorter beams, but true DPS weapons
- GH limit increase prefered only with Large+Med linked -> for BOTH FACTIONS
- Gauss Shake is OK -> the HGauss shake make the weapon feel strong and it reduces the synergy with other weapons in a small window without increasing GH combination complexity
- Overall all weapons (for BOTH FACTIONS) should be less efficient in boating, but better with lower numbers (e.g. lower base heat, but higher GH penalties)

[Callsigntal0n]

Okay ill bite and say the energy weapons would be okay less dmg less heat faster shooting. But **** gauss recoil?!?! CLANS ONLY HAVE ONE ******* GAUSS RIFLE IS HAS 3 TYPES!!!! If you dont want clans mechs to be viable just remove them from the game.

[Tarl Cabot]

Callsigntal0n, on 07 July 2018 - 08:02 AM, said:

Okay ill bite and say the energy weapons would be okay less dmg less heat faster shooting. But **** gauss recoil?!?! CLANS ONLY HAVE ONE ******* GAUSS RIFLE IS HAS 3 TYPES!!!! If you dont want clans mechs to be viable just remove them from the game.

IMHO, all ballistics should have recoil of varying degrees, regardless of tech.

Why dont more players equip GR on their IS mechs? It is fraking heavy and the only complimentary weapons for it would be PPCs and ERLL/LL. And most of the PPC are heavier and/or take up more space then Clan components. And said mech would then be slower due to having to take either LFE or STD, and due to 14slots each for Endo/Ferro, usually can not use those components for the weight savings. And the LightGauss damage is too light.

With that said, the Clan Energy PTS settings for the ERML and ERSL is heavy handed.

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 07 July 2018 - 08:27 AM.

[Kaeb Odellas]

ITT people who have never shipped a video game think they are experts at making video games.

[tee5]

PGI claiming that majority liked the idea of Recoil for Clan Gauss, I higly doubt this. (Do I really need to read 38 pages of this thread to proof it?)


We have "problems" with 2 or 3 clan mechs that theoretical have a very high alpha, but in reality not many play because they are hot as f****.


Better nerf ALL Clan-Lasers, so that all the light/medium builds or bracket builds that don't BOAT them are effected as well.

It's the same story as with the Kodiak. We have a problem with 4 Clan Ultra AC 10 on the Kodiak. Solution: Make all AC -10 worse.

[Tarl Cabot]

Kaeb Odellas, on 07 July 2018 - 08:26 AM, said:

ITT people who have never shipped a video game think they are experts at making video games.

Dont be mean to PGI like that...

[ShooteyMcShooterson]

I wonder how much the mere discussion of this disastrous plan will kill the active player population?

And to the point others have made... If you don't want players playing Clan, then remove them from the game, and give us Clan players our money back.

I've been playing for almost 2 years, and I've never not known Clan to be attacked and nerfed endlessly by PGI. These days, Clan mechs have been nerfed so hard they play very inconsistently. Sometimes you do ok, but most times you get slaughtered by better performing IS builds. I honestly don't even bother in FP anymore on the Clan side, it's been months since I have been part of a Clan FP drop that won. Months.

Clan missiles are worse than IS missiles, Clan ballistics are worse than IS. Clan PPC are worse than IS PPC. Clan armor is worse than IS. IS battlemechs have crazy build flexibility, particularly with buffed single heat sinks now, Clan omninechs have none.

The only clear advantages that Clan has left in this game are the laser vomit and machine gun builds... And you've been desperately trying to figure out a way to kill the supremacy of the laser vomit builds too.

Seriously, either quit ******* with Clan, or remove them from the game and give us our money back. Sick of this incompetent ********.

[Violator]

PGI's way of thinking:

"Ok guys since the meta is alpha strike derping, clan mechs have the advantage. We don't give a crap about forcing a meta change (too lazy) so we're just going to nerf the crap out of clan lazors. There, you're balanced now, don't bother us any more because we're eating icecream."


I can think of a dozen omimechs that are going to go from bad to completely obsolete after this.

You're going to break the rule that says Clan weapons are superior. Not marginally better. SUPERIOR. Why not break another one.Remove restrictions from Omnimechs Allow us to change engines and remove derpjets and we might be able to use heavier weapons and compensate. That way we won't have to abandon them completely.

Edited by Violator, 07 July 2018 - 08:39 AM.

[PraetorGix]

admiralbenbow123, on 06 July 2018 - 09:59 PM, said:

PGI gives an opportunity to make a LOT of interesting and fun builds on every single clan mech. However, people put the same build on a couple of different mech chassis and start crying about all clan mechs becoming useless, pointless, obsolete etc. as soon as that build gets nerfed.

What? Just, WHAT? A lot of interesting builds? What on earth are you consuming before posting this kind of things? The Deathstrike is built that way because lasers are the only good thing left for Clans, whoever wants to min-max and be effective must take this build. How would they not be mad about nerfs if PGI constantly keeps taking performance away from us? (but never before charging players for those very mechs that later will cause the taking away)
I have a Deathstrike and I didn't ever use the boogeyman build that makes Inouye wake up at night crying for mom, but guess what? I'm still mad at these absurd changes, because I also have a LOT of other clan mechs that will suffer from this. I do not play comp, I do not min max, and I'm still getting shafted by this horrendous balance attempt.
They try (poorly) to address a problem with 2 mechs and in the process they kill a lot of other mechs that were never problematic. They charge you money for something that creates an issue, then they "solve" that issue by nerfing what you paid for and everything else you have as well, no matter if you are a min-maxer or a casual, and no matter what your concept of "interesting builds" is. So please, tell me how in hell would not everyone be angry at them for this?

[Vlad Striker]

There is one simple way to make balance without born another disbalance ond so on infinitely. Solution is to make soft cap of 40 damage. It means when mech makes more than 40 dmg in single volley it will be overheating progressive. That's all. No needs of ghost heat any more and huge quirks of armor.

[PobbestGob]

Vlad Striker, on 07 July 2018 - 08:46 AM, said:

There is one simple way to make balance without born another disbalance ond so on infinitely. Solution is to make soft cap of 40 damage. It means when mech makes more than 40 dmg in single volley it will be overheating progressive. That's all. No needs of ghost heat any more and huge quirks of armor.

This ignores differences in weapon ranges, cooldowns, durations, spread, etc. Not all weapons are equal. Shouldn't cap all of them at the same damage value, just lower the heat capacity.

[Tier5 Kerensky]

I do like the direction where balance is going. I have lots of Clan mechs but I've always hated when I can't do well with things like good sustained DPS, with weapons like a Stormcrow with a pile of med pulse and heat sinks, because the close range, and long time required to deal your good sustained DPS damage.

Though I'm not sure how the increase of Clan large laser limit to 3 from 2 is going with that.

I see the only real challenge is people not wanting to give up their high alpha builds.


Can you fix the portal. Right now if you don't have ordinary MWO installed with it, because you are using Steam, it doesn't allow you to install PTS either. Or unless it's the same for everyone? Can someone confirm they can already install the PTS?

[Cy Mitchell]

Teer Kerensky, on 07 July 2018 - 08:53 AM, said:

Can you fix the portal. Right now if you don't have ordinary MWO installed with it, because you are using Steam, it doesn't allow you to install PTS either. Or unless it's the same for everyone? Can someone confirm they can already install the PTS?

The PTS is not available for download yet.

[Reno Blade]

Vlad Striker, on 07 July 2018 - 08:46 AM, said:

There is one simple way to make balance without born another disbalance ond so on infinitely. Solution is to make soft cap of 40 damage. It means when mech makes more than 40 dmg in single volley it will be overheating progressive. That's all. No needs of ghost heat any more and huge quirks of armor.

This was the idea of Energy Draw.
Replacing Ghost Heat and having a soft cap with energy regenerating quite fast.

Kill2Blit, on 07 July 2018 - 08:49 AM, said:

This ignores differences in weapon ranges, cooldowns, durations, spread, etc. Not all weapons are equal. Shouldn't cap all of them at the same damage value, just lower the heat capacity.

And this was the reason why people complained that Energy Draw got "too complex", as PGI changed the multipliers for different weapons to adjust for spread/beam.

-> and people then got the pitforks and forced PGI to stop the idea before it was good.
Community failed to use the easy solution... now we need a dmg nerf

[PobbestGob]

Teer Kerensky, on 07 July 2018 - 08:53 AM, said:

I see the only real challenge is people not wanting to give up their high alpha builds.

People don't want to give up one of the last remaining reasons to play clan mechs

[PobbestGob]

Reno Blade, on 07 July 2018 - 09:19 AM, said:

And this was the reason why people complained that Energy Draw got "too complex", as PGI changed the multipliers for different weapons to adjust for spread/beam.

-> and people then got the pitforks and forced PGI to stop the idea before it was good.
Community failed to use the easy solution... now we need a dmg nerf

there are already enough ways to balance properly without new convoluted mechanics that have never existed before. We have heat gen/dissipation/capacity, cooldown, range, spread, agility, quirks. These tools are enough to balance the game without nonsensical things like ghost heat and energy draw.

[HiProfile]

I have a question:

[Dee Eight]

I'm not gonna bother with the PTS. Why waste my time testing something PGI is going to ignore the results of testing of to do whatever they damn well want anyway, and just expect i'll keep buying mechpacks....

[Grus]

What if I told you, the alpha dosnt matter....

Hear me out... since I see the "clan 94 alpha" thrown around I'll use that.

So let's say 2 Potatoes are starring each other. Clan potato shoots a 94 alpha (wyd is this mech and build anyway?) At the same time the IS deeps his 74 alpha. The IS will be able to blow it's hot load all over the clan mech before said claner can respond...

Translaton... in that "trade" the IS did 148.. as the claner did 94...

See where I'm going with this?

[Hayek Lahiri]

TK Romero, on 06 July 2018 - 05:58 PM, said:

Thanks Navid for jogging my memory, I had almost forgotten that it was from the negative feedback that it didn't go live. But that's why this PTS can be just as effective. If the majority ends up disliking the proposed changes after trying it out in a live environment, we can do it all over again just like the energy draw system.

My fingers are crossed, but I'm not holding my breath. Really just hoping for something positive to come out of this.

Didn't work for the Skill Tree PTS even though we all screamed about how it needed more tuning.

Edited by Platinum Top, 07 July 2018 - 10:34 AM.