0
1. Clan ERSML should be left as-is on the live servers for damage, heat, range, and cooldown time.
- light mechs need to have viable weapon options beyond just boating machine gun spam to ensure reasonable variety of play styles and successful drops.
- nerfing Clan ERSML is not the right means to provide such options for light mechs, but if it must be nerf'd I would suggest increasing the cooldown time would be the appropriate place to start.
2. Clan ERML should left as-is on the live servers for damage, heat, and range, but increase (nerf) the cooldown time slightly.
- reducing the damage as proposed would be a significant damage nerf for a weapon that the Clans are well-known for its effectiveness.
- it should retain its effectiveness but increasing the cooldown would reduce its DPS to more reasonable levels when boated, particularly when considering how easy a weapon this is to boat given its tonnage and versatility.
- I tested with an EBJ-C mixed laservom build (2xCLPL and 5xERML) and found the CLPL's performed well as expected but the Clan ERMED's felt almost like Clan ERSML with greater range and longer cooldown, which is not what the Clan ERMED is supposed to be or feel like.
3. Clan ERLL should be left as-is on the live servers for damage and heat, but range should be reduced slightly (not seriously), duration should be increased slightly (not seriously), and the cooldown should be increased slightly (longer cooldown).
- HEAT SCALE TRIGGER should be left as-is on the live servers. This is the most damaging change proposed in this PTS and should NOT be implemented into the production code.
- I tested an EBJ-C with 5 x CERLL in a 3/2 firing pattern and 2 x CERML as backup weapons and had no difficulty tearing through the opposing team both at range and up close as the match neared its end.
4. Clan MPL should be left as-is on the live servers for damage and heat, but cooldown, should increqsed slightly and range decreased slightly to nerf its threat level somewhat.
- Using this weapon and particularly boating it (as I tested with a EBJ-C 8xCMPL build) should come with greater range risks and it should require patience and caution to play it well.
- I would actually increase its damage back to 8, but slightly decrease its range and slightly increase its cooldown, if it were up to me.
5. Clan LPL should be left as-is on the live servers for damage, but heat should be increased slightly (not seriously), duration should be increased slightly (not seriously), and the cooldown should be increased slightly (longer cooldown). Range should be increased slightly to 900m.
- HEAT SCALE TRIGGER should be left as-is on the live servers. This is the most damaging change proposed in this PTS and should NOT be implemented into the production code.
- I tested a skilled WHK-C with 5 x CLPL in a 3/2 firing pattern and tore through mechs without any heat conerns at all. Furthermore, I tested a full 5xCLPL alpha and this barely broke the 80% heat level. This SHOULD shut the mech down for a lengthy period of time and do significant damage to the CT, but it did nothing at all. Add a cool shot to this and a skilled WHK-C with 5 x CLPL could double-alpha and walk away clean, dry, and cold.
- I also ran a skilled DWF-PRIME with 6 x CLPL in a 3/3 firing pattern with basically the same results, though I did not test an alpha strike of all 6 (in reality I should not have to... it should destroy the mech or very nearly destroy it). Regardless, firing in pairs of 3 this was a success beyond expectations, which again reinforces that the proposed Heat Scale Trigger should NOT be implemented into the production code.
6. Clan HML should have its damage reduced to 9, heat reduced to 7, and duration left as-is on the live servers.
-admittedly I did not do a lot of testing here, and mostly it was with a 5x CHML ACH-C. But it was still an unexpectedly successful build in that it caused enough damage at long enough ranges to both damage and distract the opponents to the point where my teammates cleaned them up before I closed range.
7. Clan HLL should have its damage reduced to 16, its range reduced slightly, and its cooldown increased slightly.
- I have never supported an energy weapon that does more than 15 points of damage and I am still reluctant to do so. However, if this must be done then at least have it come with both risks and penalties to make its use (particularly when boated in laser vomit builds) require caution.
- reducing the damage slightly, increasing the cooldown slightly, and decreasing its range slightly would achieve this goal.
8. Not in this PTS, but I feel the Clan SPL should be restored to its former state.
I know this is a lot of information to read and interpret, and I apologize if I have been too verbose with my feedback.
If there is one thing I would like to stress here it is that the Heat Scale Trigger for Clan ERLL and LPL should remain as-is in the production environment.
Finally, we need to remember what the end goal is. If the end goal is to balance IS and Clan technology (specifically weaponry), then we should not be BUFFING Clan ERLL and CLPL as these are already effective weapons, perhaps too effective with their current design statistics.
We also need to remember that Clan technology is SUPPOSED TO BE superior to Inner Sphere technology. While I have no problem closing the gaps in balance somewhat between the technology bases, the Clans SHOULD have an advantage at Range and Damage, but with penalties of higher Heat, longer Durations, and lower Heat Scale Triggers, which would reward Clan pilots who position themselves well tactically and penalize them when they do not (which is what the Clans are supposed be, after all).
Additionally, we do not have to follow Lore but we can be true to the Lore without being statistically bound to it. The reality is that MWO is a real-time shooter and Battletech Lore is a turn-based tactical combat game. They are not the same, thus the rules and design statistics guiding them should not be the same either. This does not mean the Lore should be ignored, it can be respected and followed but still allow for closing the gap (somewhat) between the IS and Clan technology bases.
As for the future direction of MWO, I would prefer fewer minor changes to weaponry and more resources be put into:
1. New Maps and Game Modes for both Quick Play and Faction Play.
- this would provide the most benefit to player experience compared to any other changes or Mechs being added to the game.
2. I would roll-back the Engine Desync changes introduced with the Civil War and Skill Tree update from 2017.
- the reality is that a mech with a bigger engine has more power for agility and speed than the same mech (or a mech of equal tonnage) with a smaller less powerful engine.
- this actually follows science, mathematics, and physics. The idea that all 70-ton mechs have the same agility regardless of engine power is a mathematically flawed concept.
- I know people will scream foul because of the Kodiak and other Assaults with BESM, but the reality is that is what Assaults are for, that is why they built them.
3. I would nerf LRMs.
- admittedly I do not run mechs with LRMs very often due to their lack of effectiveness inherent in spread-damage weapons.
- however, I have been noticing lately that incoming LRMs are doing wondrous turns around corners when I am actually in cover. I have no problem with LRMs arcing over low-height cover, but such missiles should not be able to cleanly turn corners and hit when I am clearly in cover.
4. Machine Guns critical chances should NOT stack.
- machine gun boating lights have the ability in the current production environment to tear through the FRONT CT's of Heavies and Assaults in under 3 seconds, primarily due to both the boated capacity of MG's, but also due to (1) Heavies and Assaults cannot torso twist or turn as fast as MG-boating Lights can move so they cannot spread the incoming damage effectively, and (2) once the armor is gone the MG-boating lights' DPS is so high that the critical hit CT death occurs immediately.
- this SHOULD NEVER happen.
- rolling back the Engine Desync would help with the agility of Heavies and Assaults somewhat, but the reality is that MG-boats have the agility, DPS, and stacked critical chances to dominate on the battlefield, and this should not be the case. Machine guns are supposed to be a distraction, harassing weapon, not a 3-second kill weapon.
5. Maps and Drop Sizes (8v8 vs. 12v12).
- while this is a contentious issue within the community, my own opinion is that both 12v12 and 8v8 should co-exist, but the drop size should be based on WHAT MAP is being played.
- the smaller maps (Mining, Canyon, HPG, Viridian, and old Frozen City if we had it), would be 8v8.
- the larger maps (Alpine, Polar, Therma, Oasis, Crimson, Forest) would be 12v12.
- inherently the smaller maps have more mech congestion (just look at Mining, Canyon, HPG during a 12v12 match) when they should not be so congested, while the larger maps tend to manage just fine with 12v12.
- I would encourage the developers to gather metadata for match time on the maps. While I have no such data myself, my suspicion is that 12v12 matches on the smaller maps are ending significantly faster than other the larger maps. This is not just a function of closing range for combat, but also simply a matter of map area vs. total number of mechs, there are only so many places mechs can go on small maps and be effective.
- alternatively I suppose redesigning all of the maps to have proper size for 12v12 would work, but I rather see resources making NEW maps and game MODES rather than retro-designing current maps.
6. Faction Play.
- I still think this game mode, if it were permitted to evolve and grow through changes and updates, has the most potential to make MWO more enjoyable for everyone.
- if there were a method in-game (not through discord, teamspeak, or website forums or just being lucky enough to drop with a group once in a while) for players not in organized Units already and for new players to create, join, or be invited into Units through the game GUI itself, this could make remarkable improvements to the Faction Play game mode. The LFG queue does not really satisfy this need, but it could be enhanced to do so with GUI code changes.
- additionally, new Faction Play game modes and maps would add more game play variety, just as doing so in Quick Play would, which would in turn improve the player experience significantly.
- updating or adding Faction Play game modes might also provide opportunities to make changes to the drop deck sizes for FP matches to not be just 4v4 Scouting and 12v12 in full FP drops (maybe 8v8 as an example, just brainstorming here).
Thanks for reading.
Firewired
[still trying to figure out why there is a Watermelon locked in a vice in the NAIS engineering lab on New Avalon]
Edited by Firewired, 13 July 2018 - 08:50 PM.
