605 replies to this topic

[Quicksilver Aberration]

The6thMessenger, on 10 August 2018 - 03:38 PM, said:

Why does it matter, are you having fun as a noob?

Being a new player can AND SHOULD be enjoyable.

The6thMessenger, on 10 August 2018 - 03:38 PM, said:

All i did is asked them to change their focus from something exclusive to the low-tier, to the mid-tier where it kind of encompasses both low tier and high tier.

They haven't always just balanced by potato, there have been instances where they tried to balance both, and in end was still dumb.

The6thMessenger, on 10 August 2018 - 03:38 PM, said:

Don't get me wrong, I don't like balancing by potato, but that's what PGI wanted, don't make this my problem.

Sure, again PGI.

Again, PGI.

How they do it is not my concern or responsibility.

Except it IS your concern and responsibilty as a player (and thus consumer/customer/whatever) given that it can have detrimental effects on a game....that's kinda the reason to try and stop PGI from balancing by potato. Asking them to somewhat raise their expectation doesn't change this nor does it honestly lessen the impact. If it wasn't your concern then WHY ARE YOU EVEN HERE?

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 10 August 2018 - 03:53 PM.

[Chados]

Chris Lowrey, on 10 August 2018 - 02:40 PM, said:

The problem is those things, while nice, don't actively contribute to combat or winning games (unless your looking exclusively at LRM's and ATM's.) And in the Missile weapon's case, it actively gets in the way of self acquired locks for things like LRM's and ATM's for Heavies and Assaults. Which means that unless you have a dedicated support 'Mech to spot for you, your LRM weapon tonnage effectively sits like a useless brick in your build, which simply is not fun to play. Especially in solo queue where you can't control the team mates you get. So it becomes a fairly niche role application unless we change it to what other games do and make physical LOS dependent on sensor detection. But even then, those mechanics are often very divisive in the games that do utilize them and doesn't really fit into a game defined by walking robots the size of 2-3 story buildings.

Chris, this doesn’t compute at *all* with your single-minded and blindered insistence on nerfing Artemis and reducing the lock cone while buffing ECM. You’re trying to nerf Streak SRM monster mechs like the Stormcrow. We get that. The SSRM problem has been one on every light player’s mind and I know you run a lot of Urbanmechs so I’m sure that’s a major concern for you. But in the process you’re going to destroy the game for anyone running LRMs that aren’t boating 80 tubes and hiding half a klick from the front line! You’ll make it impossible to operate a LRM skirmisher with 30-40 tubes in SRM max range. Can’t you see that?

You’re going to make self-acquired locks on moving targets under 750m nearly impossible to gain and maintain in the face of the ECM blanket covering the field, which is the very problem we had before the 90m ECM nerf, don’t you remember? I know that was before you joined PGI but you were a player before then and you know that active probes don’t cancel ECM outside 180m, and by boosting ECM range again *and* forcing LRM carriers to keep their noses to the target constantly to hold a lock, you’re making it harder to get locks and forcing them to rely on dedicated spotter builds-the very thing you claim to be working against. And you’re making it impossible to missile-bend as well. How much time in game as a player did you have actually running non-boating LRM carriers like the C1 or C4 Catapult? Not all Cats run the 6xLRM5 outfit. Surely you’re aware of that.

I’m begging you, man, for the love of Kerensky, reconsider what you’re *doing.* You’re going to sideline Catapults even more than they already have been since Paul insisted on nerfing their ear armor in 2016. All the Cats but the A1 can’t run more than 40 tubes, they don’t have the hardpoints or the criticals. You’re going to make LRM launchers on mechs running secondary LRMs the very dead weight you claim you’re trying to avoid, because they’re not going to be able to get or hold locks inside the optimal ranges of their primary weapons. You’re going to obsolete AMS as well. Can’t you see that?

Edited by Chados, 10 August 2018 - 04:04 PM.

[Gluten]

I'm really concerned they called the K2 too tanky.

If anything it needs a buff to arm armour. Those arm mounts get blown off really fast. If I see a Catapult those are the first things I aim for. They're huge, easy to hit, and they pop really quick. There goes a substantial % of their firepower.

[Chados]

That’s a fact. I have more time in the Jester than any other mech and since they took away the ear armor its side torsos explode if you look at them funny. They’re as bad as the Stalker used to be.

Edited by Chados, 10 August 2018 - 04:05 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

SilentScreamer, on 10 August 2018 - 03:28 PM, said:

"Sluggish" heavies/assaults helps keep "squishy" lights/mediums alive.

They nerfed the agility on the Lights and Mediums, too.

[Kin3ticX]

Chados, on 10 August 2018 - 03:55 PM, said:

I’m begging you, man, for the love of Kerensky, reconsider what you’re *doing.* You’re going to sideline Catapults even more than they already have been since Paul insisted on nerfing their ear armor in 2016. All the Cats but the A1 can’t run more than 40 tubes, they don’t have the hardpoints or the criticals. You’re going to make LRM launchers on mechs running secondary LRMs the very dead weight you claim you’re trying to avoid, because they’re not going to be able to get or hold locks inside the optimal ranges of their primary weapons. You’re going to obsolete AMS as well. Can’t you see that?

There really isn't anything to be done for bracket builds with token LRM launchers. The whole swiss army knife vs specialization effect is wide at work in this game. Buffing means buffing the boats, not the special snowflake builds and forcing people to chainfire just insures people keep complaining the game balance sucks.

Anyways, mix builds try to do everything but never do any one thing well. If you go against a specialist, they will outgun you either from afar or up close assuming they hug their specialization.


Side note. I never got the whole thing where people try to run stock Raven 3Ls or equivalents and drive a light mech with handicapped firepower. Being in a light mech that has to run from all other light mechs or anything else not only can't pull its weight but lets enemy lights go unchecked.

I mean sure, you can Narc up the enemy team if theres no ECM but thats assuming you have any LRMs on your team in solo queue.

In a game with mechs dripping with guns, unfortunately that means driving a mech that maybe helps other mechs do damage if the stars align.... isn't reliable enough.

Edited by Kin3ticX, 10 August 2018 - 04:36 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 10 August 2018 - 03:52 PM, said:

Being a new player can AND SHOULD be enjoyable.

So again, if new players are getting wrecked because of balance up-top, why balance up top?

What they are doing is balancing by potato, and all i ever suggested is balance in the middle.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 10 August 2018 - 03:52 PM, said:

Except it IS your concern and responsibilty as a player (and thus consumer/customer/whatever) given that it can have detrimental effects on a game....that's kinda the reason to try and stop PGI from balancing by potato. Asking them to somewhat raise their expectation doesn't change this nor does it honestly lessen the impact.

If it wasn't your concern then WHY ARE YOU EVEN HERE?

My concern is how it would be fun for me, balance is merely a requirement of it. How they do it is NOT my concern, as long as long as they do it.

Don't you dare dump their poor decisions on my doorstep. I only an alternative of focus for them to compromise, seeming that they barely budge. Why they do it, reason with PGI. Because again, it's not my ******* responsibility.

These questions:

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 10 August 2018 - 03:06 PM, said:

That doesn't make sense. How you do balance for lack of player skill or understanding of how the game works? How can you even derive what is and isn't balanced in the underhive? The most important factor in the lower end of play has nothing to do with balance, and everything to do with fun.

You address them to PGI, not me.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 10 August 2018 - 04:39 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

The6thMessenger, on 10 August 2018 - 04:35 PM, said:

How they do it is NOT my concern, as long as long as they do it.

Then how about stop suggesting compromises that accomplish neither balance or increasing fun?

[The6thMessenger]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 10 August 2018 - 04:38 PM, said:

Then how about stop suggesting compromises that accomplish neither balance or increasing fun?

Fun is subjective, balance depends on PGI. If they aren't willing to budge, nothing will happen. Compromising is easing to it, at least SOMETHING is achieved.

Hows about suggest something that has a remote chance sinking in their noggin?

Edited by The6thMessenger, 10 August 2018 - 04:42 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

The6thMessenger, on 10 August 2018 - 04:40 PM, said:

Fun is subjective

Yet there are commonalities between what makes games fun, that's quite the copout argument.

The6thMessenger, on 10 August 2018 - 04:40 PM, said:

Compromising is easing to it, at least SOMETHING is achieved.

Yeah, except this road has been traveled several times with PGI, and yet here we are.

[Damnedtroll]

Kin3ticX, on 10 August 2018 - 03:12 PM, said:

TTK is probably too high. Adding more TTK would just make players even more likely to B-line into a 1vs12 and get insta-gibbed anyways. (sort of like what happens to really bad players that get 4 respawns in Fraction Play) More TTK doesn't do any good if you just suicide yourself into a firing line over and over.

To me, the people wanting more TTK are the ones that read Sarna where it says mech duels are supposed last for hours which is cool and all but it doesn't help MWO one bit.

So what they wanna do with nerfing weapons and bring done high alpha if it's not to have higher TTK? it kinda baffle me ?

Yes getting cut in half by a Clan laser drill in an instant is sad sometimes but getting cut in half by an IS dual heavygauss have the same result... I don't see a big problem in balance, at least not big enough to get me playing mostly Clan mech.

If you play IS like you need to play it ( mid to short range) and Clan like you need to play it ( mid to long range) both are quite balanced ? I play mostly IS and I'm not crying about Clan OP.

[The6thMessenger]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 10 August 2018 - 04:53 PM, said:

Yet there are commonalities between what makes games fun, that's quite the copout argument.

Yet it's true.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 10 August 2018 - 04:53 PM, said:

Yeah, except this road has been traveled several times with PGI, and yet here we are.

Then blame PGI.

[HammerMaster]

Chris Lowrey, on 10 August 2018 - 02:54 PM, said:

While I wasn't on the team at the time, I remember as a player how much the laser lock-on PTS was received. And even in these cases, you still run into the issue where the Lights and Mediums are there to provide locks to "damage boost" the more heavily armed Heavies and Assaults.  (As they would inevitably benefit the most from the locks in the first place.) And not really do damage themselves.

I'm not against pushing for more info warfare or other avenues to provide more role based incentives to take lighter 'Mechs, but at the end of the day, they need to be seen as equally viable to contributing to a win in a Skirmish game mode match as their heavier counterparts so whatever we do provide them has to be able to directly contribute to that goal. At least when your looking across the wider tonnage range as a generality.  Which is a key point that anchors many of the changes we examine.

Chris Lowrey, on 10 August 2018 - 02:40 PM, said:

With that said though, that is just talking about everything in the widest general sense.  When it comes to individual 'Mechs, this is something I would love to push for more of.  On that front, I've finally received permission to try out a new baseline 'Mech quirk in a big way to push for one particular 'Mech to be much more focused on the "Objective Play" angle to still contribute to a match's win conditions.  It's very much more of a niche quirk, but we'll see how well it works at improving the overall role for that particular 'Mech come August patch.

Please please tell me you're talking about info warfare.
Raven
Crab
Cyclops
Atlas D-DC
Etc need to be getting electronic boosts/quirks rather than combat nerfs (remember when ddc had extra module but Jesus box ecm made it a combat darling not command one)

Edited by HammerMaster, 10 August 2018 - 05:34 PM.

[Kin3ticX]

Damnedtroll, on 10 August 2018 - 04:56 PM, said:

So what they wanna do with nerfing weapons and bring done high alpha if it's not to have higher TTK? it kinda baffle me ?

Yes getting cut in half by a Clan laser drill in an instant is sad sometimes but getting cut in half by an IS dual heavygauss have the same result... I don't see a big problem in balance, at least not big enough to get me playing mostly Clan mech.

If you play IS like you need to play it ( mid to short range) and Clan like you need to play it ( mid to long range) both are quite balanced ? I play mostly IS and I'm not crying about Clan OP.

A slight haircut to a couple clan lasers isnt about TTK its more about the spread between IS vom alpha and Clan vom alpha. Thats why I suggest changing HLL to 16 damage and ERML to 6.5 damage and not tapping into more restrictions.

The dual HGauss is strong to be sure but the drawbacks are also pretty big. Reduced range, back crits, slow, recoil etc etc.

Also, if we have Gauss + PPC back on the field then thats something for the laser vomit and the gauss vomit to contend with.

I am speaking always about the solo queue meta of course and not comp which has its own subtleties that the comp players know the best.

[Kin3ticX]

HammerMaster, on 10 August 2018 - 05:01 PM, said:

Please please tell me you're talking about info warfare.
Raven
Crab
Cyclops
Atlas D-DC
Etc getting electronic boosts/quirks rather than combat nerfs (remember when ddc had extra module but Jesus box ecm made it a combat darling not command one)

The command console runs into about the same problem as a Targeting Computer 8. You are better off with Weapons or Heatsinks because unless the big TC or Command console does outright damage, its just not worth it. The command console would literally have to give a free airstrike and even then it still might not be worth it even as a 3 ton bomb.

[HammerMaster]

Kin3ticX, on 10 August 2018 - 05:28 PM, said:

The command console runs into about the same problem as a Targeting Computer 8. You are better off with Weapons or Heatsinks because unless the big TC or Command console does outright damage, its just not worth it. The command console would literally have to give a free airstrike and even then it still might not be worth it even as a 3 ton bomb.

Airstrikes and other consumable crutch trash are an abortion / aberration and need to be crammed up the metas exhaust port.
TANGIBLE ELECTRONIC WARFARE benefits need to be doled out for those mechs and equipment.

Edited by HammerMaster, 10 August 2018 - 05:44 PM.

[Kin3ticX]

HammerMaster, on 10 August 2018 - 05:43 PM, said:

Airstrikes and other consumable crutch trash are an abortion / aberration and need to be crammed up the metas exhaust port.
TANGIBLE ELECTRONIC WARFARE benefits need to be doled out for those mechs and equipment.

Even if they added that stuff, doing damage would still Trump that equipment. Short of shoehorning some kind of binoc system that conceals targets entirely without a spotter, I don't see how that equipment would be worth the tonnage.

[R5D4]

Chris Lowrey, on 10 August 2018 - 02:40 PM, said:

The core gameplay in MWO is always going to revolve around 'Mech combat first. So as a generality, Lights and Mediums still have to be able to actively contribute to the fight and be able to stand toe to toe against heavier 'Mechs in direct combat situations in their own way. Otherwise we simply run into the problem where they do a neat little trick, but it doesn't actively contribute to your team actually winning the match. Which in turn feeds into a notion that if your team is in a skirmish match and each team is at 11, 11, the team with the heavier 'Mech is the instant favorite to win the match so why play lighter 'Mechs at all?

Bravo sir, I appreciate reading this from someone at PGI.
There is an oft touted belief in the MWO Forums that Light Mechs are only to serve as cannon fodder and cap grabbers that I have always strongly disagreed with. After all MWO is about combat; leaving an entire class of combat vehicles incapable of performing said role in a combat game does not make any sense to me and I'm glad to see it doesn't make sense to PGI either.

That said, I would like to ask what is your sense of the current state of balance around Streak SRMs and also Light Mechs? From my own perspective, SSRMs seem to be laughably useless against heavier chassis like Med to Assault Mechs (even when boated) and devastatingly punitive to light mechs (especially when boated). SSRM's also appear to me to be suffering from the same "it's easy just point and click" mentality/mechanic that is so loathed on LRMS BUT doesn't inspire the same rage against SSRMs because:

a) The players using them stick with and move up with the group
b ) Most people don't run lights and Streaks only matter to lights everyone else doesn't care.

Chris Lowrey, on 10 August 2018 - 02:40 PM, said:

if a full class of 'Mechs cannot be an active participant towards tangibly winning the match compared to heavier options, then it becomes an issue for us, because then you run into that age old problem of "no one likes to play support."

Well Chris, Isn't that effectively what happens to Light Mechs when they see there are multiple SSRM boats nearby? Don't they more or less get taken out of active participation since they cannot actively participate in combat against Streak Boats without being 1 (maybe 2) shot to death with no effective means of retaliating?

Btw I would argue ECM is not an effective counter when 90% of the light chassis available to play in game can't equip it and BAP neutralizes it anyway.

So again, I would ask where do you see streaks? Would you be willing to buff streaks to be more effective against Assault chassis with the current game mechanic in place (i.e. LRM like easy lock and shoot) or is this something you think could be looked into?

Oh and before anyone tells me to "Git Gud" note that I am asking about a Buff to this weapon class and check my Jar List rating (I'm not terrible )

[Jonathan8883]

Chris Lowrey, on 10 August 2018 - 03:50 PM, said:

I never understood that myself since even in TT, each turn is supposed to be a rough equivalent of a 10 second time period, and you can usually focus down a 'Mech in 4-5 turns depending on the 'Mechs involved with "Average" Pilots. Even less once Advanced / Clan tech or elite / Ace pilots start to get involved.

If your name is Kell, you have max BT morale and can make a called shot every turn, while having max+5 evasion pips.

I have not played tabletop, but from the books (and, yes, the cartoon), I had the idea that it takes a lot longer to dissipate 'Mech heat than we see in game. I can max out my heat at 100% and it's all gone after 10-15 seconds. In HBS BT, maxed out heat usually takes two or three rounds to go away unless I have a bunch of heat sinks or am standing in water. In the books, it seems like a mech that hits near max heat may take five to ten minutes to cool down if stationary, and potentially much longer if it's still moving full speed.

One thing to look at for the laserboat 94-alpha (I'm sorry, never seen it) type builds is whether or not there is a substantial performance difference for them (avg damage done, KDR, etc.) on hot maps vs cold maps.

I gave my opinion earlier, but I'll reiterate again that almost every heavy and assault mech needs a substantial mobility boost for accel/decel and turn rate. The Cat excavator I watched someone drive onto a trailer today can turn faster than an Annihilator, and it's not even built to deal with moving targets!

[Chris Lowrey]

R5D4, on 10 August 2018 - 06:25 PM, said:

That said, I would like to ask what is your sense of the current state of balance around Streak SRMs and also Light Mechs? From my own perspective, SSRMs seem to be laughably useless against heavier chassis like Med to Assault Mechs (even when boated) and devastatingly punitive to light mechs (especially when boated). SSRM's also appear to me to be suffering from the same "it's easy just point and click" mentality/mechanic that is so loathed on LRMS BUT doesn't inspire the same rage against SSRMs because:

a) The players using them stick with and move up with the group
b ) Most people don't run lights and Streaks only matter to lights everyone else doesn't care.

Well Chris, Isn't that effectively what happens to Light Mechs when they see there are multiple SSRM boats nearby? Don't they more or less get taken out of active participation since they cannot actively participate in combat against Streak Boats without being 1 (maybe 2) shot to death with no effective means of retaliating?

Btw I would argue ECM is not an effective counter when 90% of the light chassis available to play in game can't equip it and BAP neutralizes it anyway.

So again, I would ask where do you see streaks? Would you be willing to buff streaks to be more effective against Assault chassis with the current game mechanic in place (i.e. LRM like easy lock and shoot) or is this something you think could be looked into?

Oh and before anyone tells me to "Git Gud" note that I am asking about a Buff to this weapon class and check my Jar List rating (I'm not terrible )

No matter what we do, there will always be weapons that favor certain targets over others. No shooter out on the market doesn't run into situations where certain weapons / abilities are exponentially more effective against certain classes / hero's / titan's / etc. compared to others. The trick is to allow for options that allow for a dynamic give and take between the different factors. Our game is no different. While streaks will almost always be more effective vs. Lights then other targets due to their mechanics, on the flip side, lights themselves have their own options such as mass Machine guns that are much more effective against slower, more stationary heavy / assault 'Mechs then they are against faster lights.

Where I come in is always going to come down to how extreme is that divide? And how easy is it to achieve effective results in those extreme situations? In the case of SSRMs I would argue their current state is too easy to achieve results for their effectiveness against lighter targets. Which in addition to the many things we brought up about LRMs feed into the team's decision to close the Artemis "loophole" for streak launchers, as well as tightening the lock-on angle for both LRMs and Streaks in the upcoming August patch, which will directly affect SSRMs ease of use against lighter targets. Against high skill players, closing the Artemis loophole will at a minimum give you an extra second to react to a Streak boat, even when accounting for perfect aim on their end. While the tighter angles to hold and maintain locks will make it more difficult for them to acquire + maintain locks against you.

But make no mistake, they will still be a highly effective weapon against lighter targets provided the player can both acquire and maintain a lock under the more restrictive conditions. We will have to see how far these changes move the dial in this regard before considering if further steps are needed. But like everything else, we always have our eye on some of the more extreme counter options out there.