Jump to content

Patch Notes - 1.4.179.0 - 21-Aug-2018


457 replies to this topic

#441 Brain Cancer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 3,851 posts

Posted 24 August 2018 - 11:03 AM

What I wonder about is how people consider damage = "success".

C'mon, folks. We all know that LRMs spread damage like mad, and even more so (until now) firing indirect since no Artemis without LOS. I mean, if you're regularly mowing down half the team with LRM fire, you're brutal.

I'm still waiting for people to actually start whining about their team NOT bringing AMS like noobs, which would mark the point of an actual lurmageddon. It never happened.

#442 Arkhangel

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary Rank 2
  • Mercenary Rank 2
  • 1,152 posts
  • LocationBritish Columbia

Posted 24 August 2018 - 02:04 PM

View PostBrain Cancer, on 24 August 2018 - 11:03 AM, said:

What I wonder about is how people consider damage = "success".

C'mon, folks. We all know that LRMs spread damage like mad, and even more so (until now) firing indirect since no Artemis without LOS. I mean, if you're regularly mowing down half the team with LRM fire, you're brutal.

I'm still waiting for people to actually start whining about their team NOT bringing AMS like noobs, which would mark the point of an actual lurmageddon. It never happened.

Yeah, honestly, what shows you're a successful pilot is doing LESS damage and still killing killing targets, because it shows you're efficient and precise which getting kills, for instance, headshotting Annihilators, which is actually pretty easy to do if you can aim at all, or STing Clan Omnis, as they're stuck with Clan XLs, and hardly ever have remotely the same armor on the STs as the CT.

#443 Bwah Ha Ha

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The Solitary
  • The Solitary
  • 158 posts

Posted 24 August 2018 - 04:27 PM

View PostEisenhorne, on 24 August 2018 - 05:31 AM, said:


consider that "LRM users" who claim to specialize in using LRM's are lower than "v pushing autocannon users" in terms of skill.
r

That's funny considering the team you were on last night utterly obliterated us in our attack in siege with lrms.

#444 Z Paradox

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 98 posts
  • Locationozz

Posted 24 August 2018 - 04:45 PM

this is a team game, I dont mind losing 6 tons for Narc + ammo on my Rvn-3l (and some armor when i use narc) so my team can win. and if we dont have Lrm-s, knowing enemy location is helping. you dont like QP game?... make unit and play with ppl that dont use Lrm... No problem that way.

and who give a f***, play what you want... this is just a game.

#445 Kroete

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 896 posts

Posted 24 August 2018 - 06:19 PM

View PostEisenhorne, on 24 August 2018 - 05:31 AM, said:

, it's too easy to use. I've had games where I sit still, barely move, and score 1,000 + damage with LRMs. It's disproportionate success for the effort it requires on my part.

They were not that bad before the first artemis/arc-nerf,
with only the speedbuff they would be ok.
All the other buffs and the following nerfs were not needed.

You could have done that before all the last buffs and nerfs too.

Dont understand why lrms become meta after a minor heatbuff for is lrms and
a small nerf for clan lrms (less heat but more time and ammo to kill).
This should have happen after the speedbuff ...


View PostArkhangel, on 24 August 2018 - 02:04 PM, said:

Yeah, honestly, what shows you're a successful pilot is doing LESS damage and still killing killing targets, because it shows you're efficient and precise which getting kills, for instance, headshotting Annihilators, which is actually pretty easy to do if you can aim at all, or STing Clan Omnis, as they're stuck with Clan XLs, and hardly ever have remotely the same armor on the STs as the CT.

Less damage but killing can be headshots or "vulturing",
the numbers dont show much.

Lrms get less kills then direct fire, but they get more kmdd.
Someone must have killed all the heavy damaged mechs?

We dont see kmdd in the stats as we dont see headshots ...

Edited by Kroete, 24 August 2018 - 06:20 PM.


#446 Sedmeister

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Kashira
  • Kashira
  • 66 posts
  • LocationKuzuu Prefecture, Benjamin Military District, Draconis Combine

Posted 24 August 2018 - 11:00 PM

View PostKroete, on 24 August 2018 - 02:52 AM, said:

Do you have a cure for a stroke and the problems i have after it?

I dont like the nerf for direct fire and that not much changed for indirect fire.
I dont want to be a skillless indirect massspammer,
but you and other posters cried enough thats the only option left.


I'm sorry to hear about the stroke @Kroete

I can't imagine what that must be like. Hey are you aware of the other Battletech game? Reasonably immersive. It's a turn based strategy game though not a FPS.

#447 Eisenhorne

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Liquid Metal
  • Liquid Metal
  • 2,111 posts
  • LocationUpstate NY

Posted 24 August 2018 - 11:24 PM

View PostBwah Ha Ha, on 24 August 2018 - 04:27 PM, said:

r

That's funny considering the team you were on last night utterly obliterated us in our attack in siege with lrms.


We don't claim to be "lerm specialists " like some... we did it for a laugh because its trivially easy to do.

#448 MarsThunder

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 212 posts
  • LocationRussia, Moscow

Posted 25 August 2018 - 02:41 AM

View PostNinjah, on 21 August 2018 - 01:35 AM, said:

PGI could've chosen a much more elegant way to do this but these changes were needed badly and I support them fully.
Lol. PGI made things bad first and then do "elegant fix".

#449 Aldodrem

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 98 posts

Posted 26 August 2018 - 09:12 AM

Quote

"Additionally, the Artemis upgrade was also applying these benefits to ATM's and Streak Systems without any further cost investment to the base launchers"

WTF obviously the increased weight & decreased tube count did not count towards that cost!?!
Also who the hell does a balance change at 200% (narc) of what the value was at, only smart PGI

P.S. If you wanted to make AirStrikes Meta again you didnt need to give a lame excuse of why you changed cooldown, because I don't know what laser has a firing duration of 3 seconds!?! So saying you change it so that all weapons get cooldown over a period of time like lasers is PURE BS (The maximum is 1.5 seconds on a Clan L. Heavy)

Edited by Aldodrem, 26 August 2018 - 09:49 AM.


#450 HammerMaster

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Benefactor
  • The Benefactor
  • 2,460 posts
  • LocationNew Hampshire, USA

Posted 27 August 2018 - 09:37 AM

View PostStory Time, on 23 August 2018 - 10:26 PM, said:


Don't bother, they're just gonna keep finding new ways to say "This isn't like the lore" and the only thing you need to tell them is what I said ad-nauseam.

The meme is dead and the cows have been milked dry, go home.

Don't bother.
He's just gonna say "get good"
I'm going fishing.

#451 Thorqemada

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,621 posts

Posted 27 August 2018 - 09:44 AM

Well - in the end Players Vote with their Wallet...

#452 IshanDeston

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 73 posts

Posted 27 August 2018 - 02:03 PM

View PostChris Lowrey, on 22 August 2018 - 10:02 AM, said:


Ok, so first up, apologies for the delay in getting a response to this. I want to spend the time to put together a definitive breakdown of everything that is going on to respond to this, so naturally, a lengthy forum post is called for. But this is something I currently do not have the time to commit to at the moment.

All I can say right now, is that this list is not 100% accurate to how the systems was functioning at the point when we began investigated the changes we made this patch. I will be sure to explain this in greater detail when I have the time to commit to it, but a response will have to wait another day or so while I clear some high priority tasks off of my plate.


I think its fair to say we are firmly in the "or so" territory. Any update when we can expect to get that post? I am growing a little tired of updating this post every so often, hoping that post materializes... and i still feel it needs an answer.

Edited by IshanDeston, 27 August 2018 - 02:04 PM.


#453 HammerMaster

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Benefactor
  • The Benefactor
  • 2,460 posts
  • LocationNew Hampshire, USA

Posted 27 August 2018 - 02:48 PM

View PostIshanDeston, on 27 August 2018 - 02:03 PM, said:


I think its fair to say we are firmly in the "or so" territory. Any update when we can expect to get that post? I am growing a little tired of updating this post every so often, hoping that post materializes... and i still feel it needs an answer.


Ya. It's been a week?
I can't be mad at guy considering the spaghetti mess he was saddled with.
While I'm not happy with the latest iteration of changes, my gut says he's truly trying.
Ok.
A little mad. Posted Image

Edited by HammerMaster, 27 August 2018 - 02:49 PM.


#454 Chados

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,947 posts
  • LocationSomewhere...over the Rainbow

Posted 27 August 2018 - 03:49 PM

I just don’t think Chris thought it through all the way. He wanted to nerf SSRMs and killed LRMs and ATMs as well.

If he wanted to kill SSRMs he didn’t have much choice, though. It’s all wrapped up in a lock mechanic that’s pretty one-dimensional because when it was created the only SSRM was the IS SSRM2, which then was so rarely used that it didn’t make a difference much. Now, with Clan SSRMs with 360m native range and lots of missile-heavy Clan mediums like the Pahket, it’s a problem because IS light mechs are getting SSRM-plastered in faction play, which is where the balancing effort is. You don’t see as many Clan streakboats in quickplay because there is too much chance of running into a Deathstrike on the OTHER side. So LRMs and ATMs had to be sacrificed to stop the c-SSRM plague in faction play, which is a mode that only a fraction of the player base plays, but that’s how they’re doing it.

Hang on a year or two and things will change up again. Sooner or later heat is getting nerfed in a bid to control the laser Hellbringer, but I suspect it is machine guns that will get buried across the board in the next nerf attack because of all the crying about the Piranha-1, and the only way to fix the PIR-1 without negative quirks-which would REALLY cause salt to flow-is to trash *every* light mech that has ballistic slots.

Chris isn’t to blame for the heart of this mess. All he has to work with is what he has in game as it is. Russ and Paul ultimately are where the buck stops, and more Russ than Paul as he’s at the top of the food chain. Russ simply is not willing to dedicate the resources to fix missile code *right*. And the hard business fact is that he can’t, not really, not given where his investments are at right now. PGI took a beating in the Harmony Gold lawsuit on legal costs (count on it, that was real,expensive and all the parties ended up footing their own bills), Solaris was a huge and expensive failure, and a proper fix for an old bug in the Artemis code is too expensive because it would take a partial rewrite of the base code to make Artemis work differently for SSRMs, ATMs, and LRMs. It is not profitable to invest a lot in fixing base MWO features at this late stage of the game for a feature that just isn’t going to boost profit up front. That it’s going to contribute to a decline of the player base doesn’t matter because there always will be a baseline of players who stick with it because MWO is the only game in town til MW5 drops and MW5 won’t scratch the 12-on-12 deathmatch itch that truth be told we all like, so the diehards will just keep coming back like a meth addict to the same street corner dealer.

ATMs have to get the nerf bat because they have Artemis from jump,and it isn’t optional, so it runs off the same code, and LRMs have to get the nerf bat because Artemis upgrades are coded the same for all homing missiles.

Remember, MWO is intended to be a minimally viable product.

#455 clan hope

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • The Hunter
  • The Hunter
  • 64 posts

Posted 27 August 2018 - 05:57 PM

all i read it crying about lrms.. lrms are for surprising and should be strong in all most all battles as should be snipers for inner or clans . i see ppl complain about it all the time but played right they set up openings for your med range and brawler.. not sure why i looked at the patch notes and commenting like up tactics .. if you are on voip and chatting to your team you will see .. but no you wants to do that have the time is bawl or med range pushes well it was that why before i stopped playing any ways have fun

Edited by clan hope, 28 August 2018 - 05:58 AM.


#456 Chris Lowrey

    Design Consultant

  • Developer
  • Developer
  • 318 posts

Posted 29 August 2018 - 01:44 PM

So finally had enough space in the schedule to get a post out regarding the Artemis questions brought up in this thread. Feel free to take that discussion here:

https://mwomercs.com...es-and-artemis/

#457 Tank

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Urban Commando
  • Urban Commando
  • 1,202 posts
  • LocationSelling baguettes in K-Town

Posted 29 August 2018 - 02:22 PM

I was ok with strong LURM's - all weapons should feel that they worth the weight of carrying them, but specialized counters to them also be really efficient.

I would rather buff AMS hard, like masking average AMS easily handle LRM30 volley and LAMS handling LRM20 but give it bigger heat use.

It really hinders gameplay when you feel your weapons shoot peanuts, your lasers made to write on peace of wood, your active defense systems controlled by pigeons and your advanced electronics blush in shame when they see Apollo mission computer. Posted Image

#458 Hiten Bongz

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blazing
  • The Blazing
  • 220 posts
  • LocationTexas

Posted 29 August 2018 - 05:44 PM

View PostTank, on 29 August 2018 - 02:22 PM, said:

I was ok with strong LURM's - all weapons should feel that they worth the weight of carrying them, but specialized counters to them also be really efficient.

I would rather buff AMS hard, like masking average AMS easily handle LRM30 volley and LAMS handling LRM20 but give it bigger heat use.

It really hinders gameplay when you feel your weapons shoot peanuts, your lasers made to write on peace of wood, your active defense systems controlled by pigeons and your advanced electronics blush in shame when they see Apollo mission computer. Posted Image


I completely agree and actually made a thread about exactly that: https://mwomercs.com...ck-on-missiles/

I just don't understand why they don't heavily buff AMS and let the player decide. There's already multiple counters for missiles...but all the tryhard min/maxers would rather not drop a single heatsink for it. Which somehow leads to blanket nerfs of all lock-ons, lol. I do understand that AMS is pretty weak as is so I understand why it's not super common right now, and that's why I asked for buffs.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users