119 replies to this topic

[Grus]

Kinski Orlawisch, on 27 July 2018 - 05:58 PM, said:

Can you remove the IS Mechs from the PTS?

yeah no..

[Kinski Orlawisch]

K ..lets farm Clanmechs..Testing ...nothing? Just farming Clanmechs using IS Mechs?

[Radkres]

Well I see a lot of Ballistic builds on a laser test. o.O
Guess the bottom feeders just can't read.

[Mikayshen]

It doesn't matter what weapons anyone brings.
4v4 doesn't work as a viable means of getting good data, the games are over too fast and the mindset is 'run straight at them and kill them to get the 10 matches to get my warhorn'

[Radkres]

So true What can I get quick and without too much time or skill seems to be the matrix the game is heading for.

[James Argent]

Radkres, on 27 July 2018 - 06:52 PM, said:

Well I see a lot of Ballistic builds on a laser test. o.O
Guess the bottom feeders just can't read.

They have to be compared to something other than what they've changed, or else it's useless to even try to test.

[Sniper09121986]

Radkres, on 27 July 2018 - 07:30 PM, said:

So true What can I get quick and without too much time or skill seems to be the matrix the game is heading for.

Seems to contradict the zealous drive to increase TTK. Or maybe that increase is for IS mechs only, that would explain it.

[tee5]

I redeemed the event challenge on the PTS. I could bet, I did it the same last time too.

Now I have 2 Cicada Warhorns on the PTS, but only 1 Cicada Warhorn on the real account.

Did I make something wrong should I have redeemed it on the main account?
Should I write the support?

[Buenaventura]

Average Sloth, on 27 July 2018 - 03:29 PM, said:

Has been quoted all over the place: You can copy your regular game files over first and then run the repair tool or have the option to "try tog get the files from regular installation first" thingy.
@PGI: Why not make this the default? It seems to work for a lot of ppl, so it should not pose a risk anymore.

Except the tool doesn't detect the mwo steam version *and* doesn't ask for where to look - would be too easy.

Kinski Orlawisch, on 27 July 2018 - 05:58 PM, said:

Can you remove the IS Mechs from the PTS?

No.

tee5, on 28 July 2018 - 03:28 AM, said:

I redeemed the event challenge on the PTS. I could bet, I did it the same last time too.

Now I have 2 Cicada Warhorns on the PTS, but only 1 Cicada Warhorn on the real account.

Did I make something wrong should I have redeemed it on the main account?
Should I write the support?

No, it is said in the announcement, that the Cicada warhorns (and ) for the live account will be inserted on August 7th.

[Marius Evander]

Everyone is testing the correct weapons on the PTS, Dakka, coz dakka is what everyone will be using when these laser nerfs go through.

[AnHell86]

Why is the cGauss recoil still in place? The cLazor durations are high enough face-time already. Now you have to wait for your lazors to do full damage AND THEN fire the cGauss.

Nerfing the cLazors just becuase of a few high performers is not the way, PGI... Just, do a better job of balancing the game instead of these global nerfs that are getting so tiresome.

Some people have advised you to limit the heat cap of clam mechs. Or to buff underperformers (preferable). If only a handful of mechs are overperforming, then nerf THEM instead. Just look at what you did to the KDK.

[MISBEHAVING 2112]

So many Anni's in PTS. It's not about winning. It's a place to test the changes. Does bringing an Anni add value to PTS.

Just misbehaving

[Lord David Murphy]

Take the No More Cash pledge today!

Let's hold Russ to the letter of his word...

Bullock said. "The biggest difference is if you're going to be a AAA game that is going to have free-to-play business elements within it, it does certainly insinuate your initial release is a complete and finished product. It's not an Early Access product. It's not an open beta. It's full featured, but just happens to have microtransaction business model aspects within it.

MWO has taken your money and will keep taking it until you all stand to together and demand the quality you pay for. Nerfed Mech's days after you pay for them, totally inconsistent FPS on many maps, horrid hit reg and far more. We all know the balance issues. We've been beta testing now for over five years.

NO more Money, say it with me!

Hold Russ to his word. PGI are acting in bad faith. And It's time to show them what supply and demand truly means. Vote with your cash, this is the only way forward.

Or in truth MWO is Dead and everyone knows it. Don't shoot the messenger.

[Metal_Onslaught]

Can't help but feel that people are getting way too emotional lately.

Here are my personal impressions of the PTS:

TL DR: laser vomit is still viable, a little less heat and a little more duraion in most cases don't make much of a difference.

So instead of increased mech's agility of all weight classes, we get longer beam duration. Supposedly this would improve the chances of not melting away immediately.

C-ERML feels better compared to the previous iteration. Personally I wasn't troubled by shorter optimal range. Most Clan Mechs already have energy range quirks, so the effective range is still around 400 meters.

The laser vomit builds, like the one used on a Hellbringer, are still effective. Now that the C-ERML's damage isn't as crippled as it was at first, the duration and range nerfs are manageable. The same applies to HLL. The beam duration might feel unbearably long, but personally I think it's a reasonable trade for high pinpoint damage. I've also tried using an Ebon Jaguar with 3xC-ERLL and 4xC-ERML with moderate success. The beam duration of C-ERLL was somewhat problematic, but still manageable with proper positioning. 3xC-ERLL also worked okay on the ShadowCat at mid to long ranges. Basically, increased ghost heat cap on C-ERLL would allow for more laser vomit builds that compensate for range and damage nerfs, so heavy and assault mechs are affected the least.

Other laser weapons still feel weak and situational. Heavy Small and Medium lasers are still too hot to be used on light or medium mechs, since they don't have enough tonnage to mount additional heatsinks, and their effective range is still too short to be used on bigger mechs, so there are only a few chassis than can use them with moderate success. I believe HSL and HML either should be left untouched, or better yet, given a range and/or a duraion buff.

I didn't test other weapons yet, and I'm not sure if I'm actually going to. The 4x4 match format is inadequate to test the effects of proposed changes.

Edited by FuriousRussian, 28 July 2018 - 08:55 AM.

[A Headless Chicken]

>Still 4v4
>Still populated with people who couldn't care less about using Clan Lasers

I mean, I get that you like to say that you have the player numbers and are well-poised to make balance decisions, but given the testing of new values under a scenario that is nowhere close to actual gameplay, I highly doubt you can call data gleaned from this PTS 'useful'.

[Cypherdrene]

meh, PGI will say it was a success and push it anyway. so screwed

[denAirwalkerrr]

PTS stream highlights

Build showcase
MCII-DS 2xGauss+LPL+5xMPL
MAD-IIC 3xLPL+6xMPL

High alphas aren't adressed on this PTS, lower alphas mechs from COU to SCR get heavily nerfed since they can't blawl because clan SPLs and SRMs are useless and laservomit is only half viable playstyle on them is not possible anymore with how **** ERMLs and HLLs are and MPLs/LPLs are too heavy for them in terms of tonnage.

Edited by denAirwalkerrr, 28 July 2018 - 09:30 AM.

[KingJoo]

Seems to me that to get proper results we would need to use all weapons and all mechs... if everyone just used clan lasers, how would PGI see how they compare vs other clan weapons. Also, if we only used clan mechs in pts, how would the data show how the clan weapon chages compare vs IS mechs and their biffs (pretty sure it said there were quirk buffs there).

Essentially, and correct me if wrong, it would seem we should play as normal, updating and experimenting builds to maximize the changes made for PTS or they would never see how these changes would truly effect game play. I have been changing it up every match(ie. 1 match in a current meta DS, next match in a 6lpl DS, then build equivalent gauss/vom IS builds and play them out, next match in a mcii-b dakka, then a anni with the same 2uac5 2uac10, and so on so there and be true VS performance data.

Some factors (like 4v4) might skew that data a bit but i doubt there would be enough population in PTS (there for more than the free prize anyway) to fill 12v12, and we dont want these changes in the live servers until things are refined and represent an accurate balance or fix... how else could these changes be tested before going live (PTS servers was a community request) so the community should maximize what we have here and maybe start forming groups to make the most of 4v4, play with ALL builds and mechs so true weapon and faction diffences can be shown and metriced.

[ShooteyMcShooterson]

I tried playing in 3 matches yesterday. Each was trolled by MG lights and LRM boats manipulating the fact it's 4v4 and mostly heavies and assaults as people load up on weapons to try them out at their limits.

Sorry no interest in that bull***.

[KingJoo]

ShooteyMcShooterson, on 28 July 2018 - 11:19 AM, said:

I tried playing in 3 matches yesterday. Each was trolled by MG lights and LRM boats manipulating the fact it's 4v4 and mostly heavies and assaults as people load up on weapons to try them out at their limits.

Sorry no interest in that bull***.

I have had more trouble with one mech running right to the dom cap circle and ending the match before the other 7 have a chance to do anything... 2 out of 5 matches so far were 0 damage games