4 replies to this topic

[Rydiak Randborir]

PTS 1.0 feedback for reference: https://mwomercs.com...55#entry6133055

Quote

C-ER Medium Laser:
• Damage increased to 6.25 (from 5.25)
• Duration increased to 1.38 (from 1.25)
• Cooldown increased to 4.25 (from 4)
• Range decreased to 370 (from 400)

Damage increase is fantastic. Cooldown increase is fine given the damage increase. Duration increase is perhaps slightly too high, especially with the lower damage compared to Live, resulting in much lowered Damage/Time. I would lower duration 0.03-0.08s, down to 1.30-1.35s. Range nerf seems completely pointless, as any nerf would diminish the cERML's range advantage compared to the isERML, which on Live is already only 40m. I do not think cERML needed any range decrease even with the 1.25 damage increase. It is also silly that cERML only has a 40m advantage in range over cMPL on PTS 1.1. Very poor change.

Quote

C-ER Large Laser
• Duration increased to 1.6 (from 1.35)

Triple cERLL were doing very well on PTS 1.0, so I have no problem with this. No changes recommended.

Quote

C- Medium Pulse Laser
• Duration increased to 1.17 (from 0.9)
• Damage increased to 6.5 (from 6.25)

cMPL felt underpowered on PTS 1.0, so I'm curious why PGI felt the need to NERF the cMPL's DPS from 1.60 (on PTS 1.0) to 1.56 (on PTS 1.1) and its Damage/Time from 6.94 damage (on PTS 1.0) to 5.56 (on PTS 1.1). If PGI wanted to nerf cMPL's Damage/Time a little bit in conjunction with the 0.25 damage increase, a simple .10s duration nerf (from 0.90s to 1.0s) would have done just that (6.50 Damage/Time) without also nerfing DPS from what it was on PTS 1.0. However, I do not think cMPL needed any duration increase even with the 0.25 damage increase.

In otherwords, cMPL feels incredibly underpowered on PTS 1.1 now with that duration change.

Quote

C-Large Pulse Laser
• Duration increased to 1.3 (from 1.09)

Triple cLPL were strong on PTS 1.0, but I did not feel they were strong enough to warrant such a high duration increase. Additionally, they feel a bit odd having a longer burn time than cERML on Live. I would decrease the duration of cLPL to 1.20s (from 1.30s) and reassess from there. Currently, the "quality" of the damage coming out of the cLPL (e.g. its Damage/Time) feels too poor.

Edit- After further testing I feel these weapons are a little too hot. I'd recommend a .4-.5 heat decrease, to 9.5-9.6 heat.

Quote

C- Heavy Medium Laser
• Damage returned to 10 (from 8)
• Duration increased to 1.6 (from 1.45)

C- Heavy Large Laser
• Damage returned to 18 (from 16)
• Duration increased to 1.75 (from 1.55)

Both of these weapons feel perfectly fine now. No changes recommended.

Edited by Rydiak, 30 July 2018 - 09:25 AM.

[Jack Shayu Walker]

cERSmall is still over-nerfed, and they did not iterate on it in this patch.

[Rydiak Randborir]

Jack Shayu Walker, on 29 July 2018 - 07:16 AM, said:

cERSmall is still over-nerfed, and they did not iterate on it in this patch.

I did not reference cERSL anywhere in my above post.

[Jack Shayu Walker]

Rydiak, on 29 July 2018 - 10:08 AM, said:

I did not reference cERSL anywhere in my above post.

I am aware.

[Rydiak Randborir]

Just to throw it out to PGI, I think cSPL could use a change in stats. Given that the goal of the recent PTSes have been to lower clan laser vomit alpha damage, I would go against the normal suggestion of raising cSPL damage a full point to 5 and instead recommend a 0.5 point increase to 4.5 damage. I would then adjust the heat, cooldown, and duration accordingly.

cSPL
Damage: 4.5 (from 4.0)
Heat: 2.4 (from 2.05)
Cooldown: 2.1 (from 1.9)
Duration: 0.7 (from 0.6)

This would give the weapon 1.88 Damage/Heat, 1.61 Damage/Second, and 6.43 Damage/Time. It would also fix the issue where cERSL was better for alpha damage compared to cSPL.