280 replies to this topic

[SFC174]

Felbombling, on 26 July 2018 - 05:11 PM, said:

To sum up... I don't agree with Felbombling, so he must... 1. Play like a moomah. 2. Never played or faced a dual Heavy Gauss Rifle build. 3. Play like a tool and take those negative experiences to formulate an opinion. ===================== Well, thank you for your estimation of my abilities. Is it ok if I say that my opinion is generated by my own experiences playing Mechs like the Hunchback 4P or the Hellbringer? I find them to be overpowered and simple to play. Perhaps I'm running into a bunch of moomahs, though, so my opinion must be skewed.

I think its more like "Felbombling's opinion doesn't seem to be rooted in any reality I've seen, so I checked his historical stats on Jarl's and then his current stats. Said stats and the general worsening trend indicated a player whose grasp of the game is perhaps not as good as he thinks it is and is probably running into the buzzsaw of Tier1 as he inevitably scales the PSR levels despite middling to below average play. I feel sorry that he's been victimized by the PSR system, but that doesn't validate his opinions...."

[Nomad One]

What you seem to forget, developers, is that clans do not HAVE standard small, medium and large lasers that they can use. So now all of their lasers are not only considerably hot, but also have much longer durations and long cooldowns while doing barely any extra damage.

They downright lose in DPS against inner sphere. In ever scenario. They already lose in pin point application, but now a clan mech simply won't put out enough damage before an IS mech just burns through its armor with considerably more precise weaponry.

Let the c-MPL keep its 7 points of damage. Or even increase it to 7.25-7.5 damage. THEN the considerable difference in burn duration between IS and Clan versions might make some sense.

[justcallme A S H]

ZortPointNarf, on 27 July 2018 - 12:10 PM, said:

Now add .2-.3 for the ping peasants? Not all players experience the game the same, not everyone sits on the servers. I used to play at a best ping to EU at 193ms, believe me, I know the difference now that I have a 40ms to the EU server. Different game, feels completely different. Getting deleted by high alphas at ping is not fun for most of the world. How big that player base is I do not know, but its not just merica players playing this.

I play with 250-270ms ping day in, day out.

Never had an issue being 'deleted' by big alphas because having a higher or lower ping is not a factor in that. Bad positioning, map awareness, those are the issues.

[RestosIII]

[mod]Please remember to keep conversations on-topic, and please be respectful to other posters. Violations of the Code of Conduct will be dealt with appropriately.[/mod]

[Mikayshen]

Not gonna lie, if I can use a shark .gif in my sig that might make me jump ship and join Clan Diamond Shark.

[HI I Have Crippling Depression]

If these changes happen a demand a refund. A full refund all 1000+ dollars.

[Super Male Vitality]

PGI, what in the absolute heck.

These armor value changes for the IS mechs are unacceptable.
Take a look for yourself, folks:

[Current]

[Proposed Changes]

[Kurbeks]

Super Male Vitality, on 27 July 2018 - 08:31 PM, said:

PGI, what in the absolute heck.

These armor value changes for the IS mechs are unacceptable.
Take a look for yourself, folks:

[Current]

[Proposed Changes]

Don't see any changes to Fafnir

[Felbombling]

SFC174, on 27 July 2018 - 01:27 PM, said:

I think its more like "Felbombling's opinion doesn't seem to be rooted in any reality I've seen, so I checked his historical stats on Jarl's and then his current stats. Said stats and the general worsening trend indicated a player whose grasp of the game is perhaps not as good as he thinks it is and is probably running into the buzzsaw of Tier1 as he inevitably scales the PSR levels despite middling to below average play. I feel sorry that he's been victimized by the PSR system, but that doesn't validate his opinions...."

LOL

I dare say I've been called out as a sh!t player by a superior player... or have I?

Just for the sake of argument, SFC, let's take a deeper dive, filtered by Seasons 1 to 24.

Games Played
5027 SFC174
879 Felbombling

W/L Ratio
1.05 SFC174
1.07 Felbombling

Survive Rate
35% SFC174
33% Felbombling

K/D Ratio
1.20 SFC174
0.94 Felbombling

Average Score
263 SFC174
240 Felbombling

Adjusted Score
282.8 SFC174
222.4 Felbombling

Now, I don't know you at all, so I'm not going to assume anything negative about your stats. I do have some thoughts on the reality of my stats as I see them, however.

I have been working on my Mechs to get them to a point where they all have 91 skill points, or, back in the day before the skill update, fully fleshed out and Mastered. Once they are fleshed out I shelve them, since I always have another Mech to work on. Happily, I only have two Mechs to finish up, a Hunchback Grid Iron and the Loyalty Atlas we all got years ago.

I would hazard a guess and say that roughly 98% of my matches have been PuG matches, played solo. The other 2% I spent with the very gracious and friendly players of the Smoke Adders in groups of three to upwards of seven. Let's call it twenty games or less with the benefit of allies on comms with whom I could coordinate attacks and get reliable support in a pinch.

You are 100% correct in your assumption that levelling up Mechs in the tier 1 environment has been challenging. I do not deny this at all and your pointing out of my -16% trend in this area is of legitimate concern.

I guess my question for you at this point would be this... if you've got almost six times the number of matches under your belt than I have, and I'd have to assume that the vast majority of them have been played while in fully fleshed out Mechs... why wouldn't your stats be better than mine?

Just a thought, my friend... you can go to the Jarl's List and publicly shame me if that is how you want to run things, but sometimes the numbers don't tell the full story.

[A Headless Chicken]

We get it, you're both great players so maybe you want to have your two cents on the topic by applying for Chris' position? I actually think you both can do a better job.

This started off as sarcasm but somewhere along the line, but I'm starting to buy into it.

1.6 second CERLLs anyone?

[Marius Evander]

jarls list doesn't account for teamplay, leading charges, testing out new builds trying to expand the meta, leading pushes, organising spuds, if mechs are leveled or unleveled, until you can tick off before dropping if you want a game to count towards jarls list stats it means nothing, a LRM was top of jarls list at one point. If you wanna compare epeen do it in Solaris 1v1.

[Buenaventura]

Super Male Vitality, on 27 July 2018 - 08:31 PM, said:

PGI, what in the absolute heck.

These armor value changes for the IS mechs are unacceptable.
Take a look for yourself, folks:

[Current]

[Proposed Changes]

No obvious changes for the Fafnir, but the others get their armor/structure bonus halved.

@PGI: The inherent problem is that when creating the mech designs nobody ever thought about how hard it is to hit a certain section of a mech (or where these sections start or end) - just roll a pair of D6 and you'll figure it out. You'll either need bandaids like these armor/structure buffs or have a hit on any part of a mech roll on the corresponding hit table. (Yes, there are tables for partial cover, too).
And for more balance a system like the CV/BV in TT would be needed, since it takes into account the offensive and defensive values of mechs. Tonnage is not and will never be a good indicator for balancing mech forces - weight classes as used in QP is even worse at that.

[Toxicresidue]

justcallme A S H, on 27 July 2018 - 02:30 PM, said:

I play with 250-270ms ping day in, day out.

Never had an issue being 'deleted' by big alphas because having a higher or lower ping is not a factor in that. Bad positioning, map awareness, those are the issues.

bs pinging that high you don't take damage

[ZortPointNarf]

So after playing it a bit, the changes are not that bad, I was concerned about the long burn time on the cERLL. It will require you to possibly change your play style, and ensuring you keep at range to get the most from it. I was able to land 75%+ of a 3 cERLL Super Nova per strike, not all pin-point, but it needn't be. I don't personally think it was a crime-lord in the high alpha mob, but this would reduce its high alpha pin-point substantially. So all and all a pass from me.
The cERML felt very similar, personally I would have all non-pulse mediums cool-down at the same rate, with the heavies punishing you with their heat and not the day long cool-down.
Can't speak as to the armour changes on the IS mechs, but daymn, dual gauss hurts.

[Der BierVampiR]

Is there a way how i can overtake the keybindings of my live client to the pts client? I really don't want to adjust the keybindings of the pts manually.
Towards the balance changes of the PTS: What i already like is the possibility of having 3xCL Large Laser without Ghost Heating.

[SFC174]

Felbombling, on 27 July 2018 - 09:22 PM, said:

Just a thought, my friend... you can go to the Jarl's List and publicly shame me if that is how you want to run things, but sometimes the numbers don't tell the full story.

The numbers tell you plenty. Your mistake is thinking that calling you out suggests anything about _my_ skills.

Regardless, you made statements about balance and lasers that were so far out of touch with reality (Clan laser mechs are point and click win bots? Cmon) you needed to be called out. You can chalk it up to inexperience, you can chalk it up to solo que only (I'm 99% solo as well), whatever. But you're not the guy I want PGI listening to on balance. I don't agree with everything Tarogato et al proposed, but I do respect the community balance doc team and I think PGI should be listening to them because what they've proposed is a far better solution that what PGI has suggested and/or tested so far on the PTS.

Feel free to argue that PGI shouldn't be listening to me because of my stats, I might even agree with you (even though my trend is positive and improving) - I've frequently called myself "joe average" in these very forums. But I'm the one suggesting we listen to a well rounded group of experienced _good_ players with lots of community feedback while you're the one calling Clan laser mechs "point and click win bots"......

[Teenage Mutant Ninja Urbie]

having actually tested this stuff (again..), I'll state the following:

it's still bad. less bad, but still bad. so.. scratch it. entirely pls.
every single change in there is bad for the game itself, IMHO.
I've written the why and how at least 2 times, tired of it.

thing is:
can we have the PTS with the community-changes now?
is it so hard for you to do that?
or is it more an ego-thing?
are you that scared that people might actually like it and play -your- game some more with those settings?
what's to lose? I just don't get it.

cheers.

Edited by Teenage Mutant Ninja Urbie, 28 July 2018 - 07:29 AM.

[Felbombling]

You're in the 95th percentile and trending up, SFC. Bravo. I could only assume that you took that as licence to rough me up on the forums and essentially marginalize me in an effort to nullify my opinion. It came across as a b!tch move and didn't reflect well on you.

Beyond that, you're correct in assuming that you are not a person I want PGI listening to on balance. While I respect the community balance doc and the people who put it together, I noticed a lot of buffs to weapons compared to nerfs. I don't think that is the direction the game needs to go. We're not Call of Duty here, and the TTK shouldn't trend in that direction.

I've been around since Closed Beta, and in that time PGI have made countless mistakes when it comes to game balance. I think some core game mechanics need to change if the game has any hope of becoming balanced, whereas that community document dealt with weapon tuning exclusively, to my recollection. That isn't enough to fix the problems this game has. The solution would require major modifications to how the Mech Lab works, how targeting works, how pin-point weapon damage focus works, how heat works... etc. I could go on, but the point is that playing with weapon values alone isn't going to fix what we, the players, will circumvent in the Mech Lab upon release.

On a final note, I said that Energy Mechs are point and click win-bots, not Clan laser Mechs in particular. I stand by that comment based on personal experience, while acknowledging that other builds and meta styles have proven as effective.

[frumpylumps]

I am really disgusted by all the people pretending like no changes are needed and pretending like PGI is doing wrong by trying to fix the enormous alpha disparity. How do so many of you not understand that it isn't fair if you have the biggest alpha, highest range, AND highest DPS?

It is sad to see PGI rolling back necessary alpha changes because these babies can't handle losing any shred of their advantage that is not only visibly true from a common sense perspective but statistically as well. And now looking at the IS mechs that have competitive perks to deal with the imbalance as if they are the problem.

A slight increase in weapon duration isn't going to make a difference and is a poor solution considering the differing levels of latency in the game and the fact that a large percentage of players must play their matches on overseas connections.

PGI needs to stop listening to their players so much and follow their instincts. Now the game is more no-skill and sucks more than it did because people were asking to buff LRMs and PGI made the mistake of listening.

Edited by frumpylumps, 28 July 2018 - 08:49 AM.

[A Headless Chicken]

frumpylumps, on 28 July 2018 - 08:07 AM, said:

I am really disgusted by all the people pretending like no changes are needed and pretending like PGI is doing wrong by trying to fix the enormous alpha disparity.

It is sad to see PGI rolling back necessary alpha changes because these pathetic babies can't handle losing any shred of their advantage that is not only visibly true from a common sense perspective but statistically as well. And now looking at the IS mechs that have competitive perks to deal with the imbalance as if they are the problem.

A slight increase in weapon duration isn't going to make a difference and is a poor solution considering the differing levels of latency in the game and the fact that a large percentage of players must play their matches on overseas connections.

PGI needs to stop listening to their players so much and follow their instincts. Now the game is more no-skill and sucks more than it did because people were asking to buff LRMs and PGI made the mistake of listening.

So denAirwalkerr figured out a way in this PTS to fire a 74 point alpha 3 times without overheating or using the (now useless) CERML or CERLL which sprays damage like a hole-riddled fire hose. This defeats the purpose of the PTS and I think we need to patch this by removing all Clan Lasers wholesale and buffing LRM spread and heat. Might as well remove all Clan Ballistics as well.

Can I get hired as a Balance Master now, seeing that I have proven my idiocy, which just so happens to be in line with PGI's "instincts"?

Edited by A Headless Chicken, 28 July 2018 - 08:42 AM.