437 replies to this topic

[Lynx OGrady]

5 by 5, loud and clear, clearing comms for feedback

[K1tf0x]

Love the fact many people sarcastically thanked chris, and he didnt get it, my ribs hurt im laughing so hard, Clear Comms

[TheFallOfTheReaper]

Clear Comms for Laughter, Clear Comms

[Vice Admiral Gender Studies]

10-4 Good buddy, clearing comms for the comencement of laughing, clear comms

[TheFallOfTheReaper]

PS: Clear Comms

Edited by ShadowHimself McEvedy, 13 October 2018 - 11:50 PM.

[Wolverine blood]

Remove clantech from the game and stop madness rebalance.

[TheFallOfTheReaper]

Nonconstructive ^^^^^^ Clear Comms

[Dee Eight]

Reposter, on 13 October 2018 - 02:37 PM, said:

What does having Double Heatsinks do now? Is it better to use standard Heatsinks now, I do not quite understand the heat sink changes?

Well actually after a certain #, if your mech had the tonnage to spare, it was already better to use single heat sinks than doubles. 25 total DHS, currently yields a total heat dissipation without skill nodes of 4.25/sec. Well 33 SHS provides 4.29/sec of dissipation. And this is a result of PGI already monkeying the values for capacity and dissipation to make singles better than they should be, while making doubles worse than they should be. The total heat capacity for 25 doubles on a mech with a 250 or higher rated engine is 72.5 currently and for 33 singles it would be 72.9.

In the TRO3085 there was a 95 ton clan assault called the Hellstar with 4 ERPPCs and a total of 30 double heat sinks. Now that was in a game where the double and single heat sink values directly compared to one another. So 30 doubles provided the equivalent of 60 singles for dissipation, and there was no increasing heat capacity because the heat generation system worked differently. Now in this game, we have this heat capacity nonsense which probably never should have been implemented in the first place since it setup the abuse of high alpha strikes that were impossible in battletech. I cannot recall the name of it, but there was an IS assault mech with 40 single heat sinks, because while 20 doubles weighed less, they occupied space which was not available in the mech because of the inferior size of the inner sphere double heat sinks.

[Kanil]

Dee Eight, on 14 October 2018 - 12:55 AM, said:

Well actually after a certain #, if your mech had the tonnage to spare, it was already better to use single heat sinks than doubles. 25 total DHS, currently yields a total heat dissipation without skill nodes of 4.25/sec. Well 33 SHS provides 4.29/sec of dissipation.

... and after the patch, the SHS will now be at 4.62, and the DHS will be at 5.5.

The ~6 builds that currently use SHS will probably be switching to DHS now.

Edited by Kanil, 14 October 2018 - 01:19 AM.

[eminus]

the moment I read the armor quirk nerfs with a side dish of ATM buffs...

[Dee Eight]

K1tf0x, on 13 October 2018 - 11:43 PM, said:

Love the fact many people sarcastically thanked chris, and he didnt get it, my ribs hurt im laughing so hard, Clear Comms

Its because it wasn't written in official canadian sarcastica font.

[Koniving]

I'm of the try it before we knock it party.

Many of us older players have been asking for locked thresholds for years. It was one of the biggest balancing screwups from the get go, when in a game series where the PC games have ranged from 30 to 60 heat until shutdown, for MWO to have been allowing up to 119 heat before shutting down at one point for the IS and up to 131 heat before shutting down for the Clans was absolutely bonkers.

In the past, the worst balanced Mechwarrior game, MW4, allowed 60. My favorite, MW3, allowed 30 (until you installed Pirate's Moon then it was 40).

Unless Chris has miss-worded it, sounds like we're getting a finite 50. Or at least it did in the PTS results post.
Seems instead, we'll still have growing thresholds (capacity as he stated).

So if I were to pack 20 double heatsinks I'd get 30 + 20 (first 10) + (10*0.5) = 55 threshold.
If I pack 25 double heatsinks I'd get 30 + 20 + (15*0.5) = 57.5 threshold (before skill tree).

Meh...
Close enough. Of course, skill tree can bolster that. But definitely not to the extremes of 2013.

[Lynx OGrady]

Dee Eight, on 14 October 2018 - 01:38 AM, said:

Its because it wasn't written in official canadian sarcastica font.

Clear comms for the Canadian Sarcastica font please? clear comms

[Sjorpha]

This is a massive buff to clan dps because they can run so much more heatsinks. This was shown and given as feedback in both PTS sessions and was one of the major issues with these changes.

So that was ignored and instead what does this big clan dps buff come with? IS armor nerfs!! That shows such disconnect I don't even know what to think.

You really need to Adress the imbalanced IS and clan dhs now because this makes that imbalance much larger. Is dhs has to dissipate enough that the cooling of the reasonable number your can take matches the typical amount boated on clan laser boats. So 18-20 is Dhs should match 24-26 cdhs or something like that.

Edited by Sjorpha, 14 October 2018 - 02:27 AM.

[BlueLynx]

A lot to process here, but I will say that I like the ECM changes and HSL quirk add-on.
The narrowing previous of the lock-on window was a bit too tough:
1) It hit the ATM-SSRM terribly hard. ECM lights -as of before the latest patch - are quite difficult to get. I also think that SSRM was already a relatively weak weapon due to damage distribution and its niche as a light-killer was OK.
2) Early LRM buffs (e.g. velocity) were OK, with the round of cooldown maybe a tad too much.

I would have preferred the old lock-on instead, as it encouraged active play with direct lock-ons with LRMs. Punishing direct-lock-ons instead of boats was not the right way to go. I would have gone with making the lock-on window for direct fire back to its own "wide" setting for everything except indirect LRM/ATM fire. But I guess that is hard to implement from a mechanics point of view, so I'll take the ECM improvement for direct-fire lock-ons.

Praise for hard thinking and verbose explanations on the balance issues. I know balance is a tough proposition in MWO. I think you are doing well and keeping hard on the job. Whatever you do, there will be some non-constructive negative feedback and some things we will not be agreeing with. Getting it 90% right and slowly adjusting the meta is fine by me. Thanks for the effort.

[dr3dnought]

BlueLynx, on 14 October 2018 - 03:21 AM, said:

A lot to process here, but I will say that I like the ECM changes and HSL quirk add-on.
The narrowing previous of the lock-on window was a bit too tough:
1) It hit the ATM-SSRM terribly hard. ECM lights -as of before the latest patch - are quite difficult to get. I also think that SSRM was already a relatively weak weapon due to damage distribution and its niche as a light-killer was OK.

ECM lights should be difficult to lock with streaks because once you do it's a no-aim one-shot kill.

I might consider SSRM's 'niche' as a light killer to be ok if there were anti-entire-weight-class weapons for the other weight classes. Even then it would be horrible balance but at least lights wouldn't be singled out.

Edited by dr3dnought, 14 October 2018 - 04:04 AM.

[HammerMaster]

ECM is too powerful for it's size/tonnage. Grants abilities outside it's scope. And had driven the meta by what mechs it can be mounted on. ANY change to bring it back in line with what it's specced by core ruleset is welcome.

[Michal R]

You can't mess more with MWO.
PGI: hold my beer.

[Commander James Raynor]

I just don't want the issue to get lost on so many posts: the CMPL nerf doesn't make sense. This change would make it the first weapon (outside the SRMs, which cost a lot more tonnage for the IS side) to have lower DPS on the clan side, besides having less DPH. That, paired with the higher IS quirks across the table makes the CMPL just a bad weapon to mount.

Besides that, you're removing yet one more brawling option.

Listen: JUST DON'T DO IT.

And another thing: these are pretty big changes on the energy weapons damage without compensating with CD or heat. These weapons are not so good right now that they need or can take a merf like that without going into the useless side. I get that you're trying to adress the alpha gameplay, but simply cutting the damage lowers the DPS and DPH too.

Again: DON'T DO IT.

[HammerMaster]

What was the reason for CMPL Nerf? I just don't see where these were abused?