Hello folks... I've had a chance to check things in the latest PTS iteration, but before I get to that, I see that I've got a lot to have to deal with first, and that I'll have to be as brief as possible right now. I sense this post is going to take me about 3 hours to type up anyway, but here I go...
The6thMessenger, on 11 February 2019 - 07:33 PM, said:
If there's hardly mechanical changes, I don't see the point of trying it out. Spread and thereby damage efficiency to LRMs is easily tweaked anyways.
It's more at the zone of give or take the limits on the Baseline versus how much you can change it with Skill Tree Nodes, which ain't really that much. And there are changes in the Mechanics as to how they operate on the LRM PTS v2.1 versus how they operate on the Live Server. They include things such as Heat, Sensor Range affecting Lock Time, and then also Spread based on if you have LOS or not when launching, which frankly should factor in a Pilot's personal Target Decay status.
The6thMessenger, on 11 February 2019 - 07:33 PM, said:
I still stand by the Range-Dependent Lock-Speed to be integrated as DF Bonus than IDF penalty.
There is something to be said about keeping the Team all within a short-enough Range of each other to prevent someone being trapped out in the cold. The behavior on LRM PTS v2.1 looks to be the right behavior for what should be put into the Live Server. Too many hang back when they could be getting the protection they need, as well as being able to protect their Teammates, and we should be more able to cause reward to sticking with the Team with the changes present in this specific LRM PTS v2.1 release.
Gartenlaube, on 11 February 2019 - 09:22 PM, said:
Wait, you put lrms back to normal for indirect fire and buff LOS fire? Most OP **** I have ever heard for a lock on weapon in a game. Welcome to LRMWARRIOR ONLINE!
Not even close to being OverPowered, in any way/shape/form, it just so happens. Also, the PTS version is already Nerfed in at least a few ways that are NOT Spread, such as Heat + Ghost Heat & 'Sensor Range'-Linked Locking Time, but the implementation on LRM PTS v2.1 avoids giving the middle finger to people who are Medically Disabled, allowing them to remain in the fight with the rest of us. Heck, fixes need to be made to not devalue a Pilot's personal Target Decay status on the battlefields. Plus, if you use things like TAG & NARC to Support them, you'll even find yourself racking in a bit more than you do now. The trick boils down to being willing to sacrifice a tiny few tons to the Support Equipment, instead of using them all on PPFLD Ballistic/Energy Weaponry that you normally bring. Forgetting things like AMS should absolutely NOT be rewarded, as it's a choice whether one brings AMS for defense or not.
TheHurp, on 11 February 2019 - 11:16 PM, said:
will there be a longer cooldown and more heat generated then?
Already present in LRM PTS v2.1, and all you need to do is compare that to the Live Server version of MWO in order to see the difference. Actually, this LRM PTS v2.1 allowed me to spot a bad Bug that's even present on Live Servers, which I'll have to point out later. Stay Tuned!!!
OZHomerOZ, on 11 February 2019 - 11:38 PM, said:
He bites he's lower lip and thinks:
Occums razor suggests that if people dont come to test maybe test not that important compared to others things
Like maybe match maker
Sorry for derail, thoughts, drinks, etc, etc
I'll take the discussion on this one... You're probably right on the MatchMaker needing fixing anyway. In particular, it may be time to just do a Hard PSR Reset on everyone, and have them all come back up to wherever they belong. PGI could also rescale how PSR is earned and lost in the same go, as well. Right now, getting Sub-100 Match Score on a loss is definitely NOT penalizing a Pilot's Skill Rating as hard as it really should be. Heck, PGI could use making the Current 'Tier 1 through 5' into being 'Tier 6 through 10' in order to create room above, and then create a New 'Tier 1 through 5' beyond that, to which then everyone who should be able to break into the Higher Tiers will do so while everyone else will have to learn how to work their way up properly, as in working as a Team, and not a bunch of cats that don't function together. That will also allow them to fix the MatchMaker again to allow an up-to-2-Tier-Difference in creating a Match, but be able to have it work properly the next time around.
Racerxintegra2k, on 12 February 2019 - 03:39 AM, said:
When they patched the IDF and LOS lrms by accident one patch, i absolutely hated the mechanic. it seems when i had LOS i still wanted to lob my missiles over terrain and couldn't was so annoying.A toggle would be best.
Agreed. The thought about an Angle Toggle is going into my future thoughts on LRM PTS v2.1 after I get this post finished off. Stay tuned in for my next posting.
MechTech Dragoon, on 12 February 2019 - 07:17 AM, said:
IDF lrms should not be as effective as they are on live without narc or tag support.
Lock on time increase wont change the fact that WHEN they start dropping on you, its just too much damage too fast that you cant do anything about.
Also the last round of PTS was pretty well dead. Goes allot better when you offer people cookies for participating.
With the changes to Heat + Ghost Heat & 'Sensor Range'-Linked Lock-On Time for IDF, the LRMs are going to be Nerfed, but at least it will happen in an acceptable manner. However, I've detected an awful Bug in the backend for Missile Spread that is affecting even the Live Server right now. I'll be raising hell about that shortly, in order to stop what I discovered is happening, so please Stay Tuned for further posting from me.
thievingmagpi, on 12 February 2019 - 08:02 AM, said:
no one drops in PTS because no one cares about minor incremental lrm changes. no one cares at all if spread is 3.6 or 3.8.
lrms are fundamentally bad for gameplay. it's not an issue of tweaking some numbers here and there the way it is for the rest of the mechanics. spending any amount of effort on this is a waste of time as long as the pgi belief is "lrms are a good thing". pts might be interesting if there was a demonstrable amount of care and vision with regards to the end result, or if well-received pts changes from past were actually adopted instead of continually binned.
It's not the LRMs themselves on the Baseline that are at fault, even though I'm going to go with allowing the Nerfs on Heat + Ghost Heat & 'Sensor Range'-Linked Lock-On Time for IDF. It's a combination of people needing to learn to use them properly without being mentally shoved on, as we know people are instantly resistant when something is forced in a harsh manner upon them, and also that there's a hidden Bug in the backend with Missile Spread that I'll be raising hell about shortly. In the meantime, please think about others such as the Medically Disabled who don't have a quote-unquote "fighting fit" body, and take a chill pill for now. We need a solution that
avoids shoving them out of the MWO game in any way, unless you're trying to kill MWO through loss from the Player Base size.
Nomad One, on 12 February 2019 - 08:18 AM, said:
The new spread values are much more rewarding for the risks and requirements for the two different firing modes.
Indirect taking roughly 4 seconds at 1000 meters to achieve a lock against a non-NARC/ TAG influenced target means you will rarely get the chance to fire at the LRMs maximum range, especially against ECM protected opponents. At 750 meters, which is the more common indirect fire backline position, it takes a bit over 3 seconds to acquire an indirect lock. At 500 meters, it's roughly the same 2 seconds as it is on live servers. Granted this was on a 'mech with +43% more sensor range through skill tree and an active probe.
Although the new indirect lock-time increase is still confusing, as players lack a "sensor range" statistic in the mech lab to determine how far they'll be able to see and calculate where they'll be getting the maximum lock time increase penalty.
The new benefits to direct fire gives standard LRMs tactical flexibility, while also allowing Artemis upgraded LRMs to really put the hurt on targets... provided the target stays in line of sight for the flight duration of the missiles.
The PTS LRMs are honestly in a rather good spot.
I would NOT say a good spot, but rather near a right spot. Artemis gets to finally start to act as it should, enabling the LRM user to be able to support their Team on the battlefields. However, I've detected a problem in regard to the Server Backend and how it handles Missile Spread, which I'll be getting after shortly. It's something that should not have ever been allowed to happen in the first place. More posts from me are yet to come.
Nightbird, on 12 February 2019 - 08:49 AM, said:
I did share that LRM cockpit blinding is what makes LRMs super annoying, but PGI just said that is the intended role/feature of LRMs.... so....nerf them all to hell I say!
C337Skymaster, on 13 February 2019 - 04:01 PM, said:
The same goes for Dakka. They already fixed flamers for exactly this issue, so I don't know why they can't fix LRMs and Dakka as well.
I'm afraid that
C337Skymaster has a real point here. Otherwise, since they lack any real shake properties against someone who has at least one or two 'Improved Gyros' Skill Nodes, LRMs lose one of the few things that can cause opponents to even think about flinching and using cover. And the Ballistic Weapons can indeed be quite blinding, particularly anything that isn't just a Standard AutoCannon in the Weapons Lineup, plus their shake pretty much
requires a minimum of 3 of those 'Improved Gyros' Skill Nodes be equipped to not have your ability to aim get blocked totally. If you want to complain about blinding and shaking issues, please start with the Ballistics first.
Grus, on 12 February 2019 - 12:57 PM, said:
So why does Clan missiles have a worse spread than IS again?
Reno Blade, on 12 February 2019 - 01:15 PM, said:
Clan missiles are 50% of size AND tonnage. you would still have an advantage if the spread was 200% over IS launchers (not considering streamfire), so its not as bad really
dwwolf, on 13 February 2019 - 01:51 AM, said:
Spread is a measure of the diameter of the impact circle.
Double the spread = 4x the area.
So no, they would be half of IS effectiveness.
Worse, they would be only 25% (
one quarter) of I.S. Effectiveness, and that may be much in-line with the BattleTech Lore for the Clans. The only reason that Clan LRMs in MWO have a higher Spread Value is because of their Stream-Fire Design, and how it interacts with the Game Engine. But if Clan LRM Spread was so extremely wide like that, it would sadly ruin gameplay in MWO for us normal freeborn humans, and it would do even worse as to shove the Medically Disabled folks totally out the door. BattleTech Lore allows for Pilots who are Medically Disabled, and MWO should be no different in the regard of being accessible/playable and fun to the Medically Disabled folks. I think we had better stick to keeping in mind a lot more than just those who are quote-unquote "fighting fit", unless we want to doom MWO to a shrinking Player Base causing its' end.
Cypherdrene, on 12 February 2019 - 01:49 PM, said:
I see a lot of complaints about LRM's and none of them are actually pointing out the problem... which is the players themselves.
An example: LRM Assaults who stay +600m behind everyone else just to get butt****** by a PIR 3 mins into the match.
thievingmagpi, on 12 February 2019 - 02:15 PM, said:
that's the problem with the weapon platform that allows this.
lock on weapons do not belong in FPS games.
Captain Caveman DE, on 12 February 2019 - 02:53 PM, said:
eh... no. you can't block stupidity, and that's the problem right here. a lurmer with at least half a brain would stay around his teammates, just so they can back him up in case a light wants to eat him.
but yeah.. your paint might get scratched there a few times, so our noobernova & co stay 600+ behind. and get eaten by lights.
and probably start a "lights broken"-thread right after it happened AGAIN, instead of working on their issues.
Guys, '
Captain Caveman DE' has hit it on the head here. In order to stop the hiding stupidity, you have to not be stupid yourselves, and be willing to communicate in the first place. It really bothers me how at 'Tier 1', so little communication traffic happens, when there should be a lot of it! Invite the LRM user to come along as fast as they can, and follow you at the same time as when you push in. You have to be willing to point out that you can NOT protect them if they keep hanging back so far. If they don't listen after that, then it's fair to use them as a Decoy, causing the Enemy Team to be split so you can chew them to little bits.
Oh... by the way,
thievingmagpi, Lock-On Weapons have a place in FPS-type games, albeit that it differs between games. Would you like me to get started with the list, which traces all the way back into 1992, and probably even to a lot further in the past? Choose carefully, for there are just so danged many, and I would be way too willingly glad to flood your mind with the info.
Captain Caveman DE, on 12 February 2019 - 03:04 PM, said:
so. finally got to install the lastest patch and tried.
not a SINGLE game to be had in euro-evenings. in fact, every queue said 0%, so I guess nobody else had a game, either.
tried for 30+ minutes btw. it is almost as if you (PGI) had an event going on on the mainservers...
if you were a cars-building-company, it would be like sayin' "here's our newest car folks, please test it" - and under the hand you're offering a bribe to anybody WHO DOES NOT.
-go figure from there-
anyways:
few things I've seen in the testing grounds:
-direct fire looks okay.
-still unsure if it doesn't go into atm-territory too far.
-indirect is still TOO okay.
-especially the "new and improved heat" on clanside is laughable. my noobernova 80 can still fire 3 FULL alphas without getting warm, can tap into the 4th with little to no overheat. and it can still (almost) COOL DOWN doing full group/chainfire.
TL;DR - more heat pls. and more ghostheat on top, yet. I enjoy my occasional lurmboating with a few beers or so, but it is still WAY too rewarding for absolutely no "work".
Here's a question for you... Is your loadout just Purely LRMs, or does it have a reasonable batch of Backup Weaponry? If it's only LRMs, try swapping Heat Sinks for adding some Backup Weaponry in trade. Then check what your Heat Management is
really like. I think you're going to find that Heat has been tuned properly. Ghost Heat might however need an increase for firing too many Missile Launchers at a time, as least from what I can tell.
More particularly, though, is that I've detected a Bug in the Backend with how it handles Missile Spread operations. I've got yet to fire off the appropriate posting in that regard, so I'm withholding details for now. Stay Tuned!
On your note about Direct Fire, it does delve a bit too far into the ATMs' territory. PGI should follow the thoughts of '
Reno Blade' on this count, and provide an Angle Toggle for controlling flight path. However, that Angle Toggle should retain the Spread Buff of the LOS Lock-On method when firing if the Pilot has that LOS requirement met at the moment of launch, or has their own personal Target Decay handling the shot.
Also again, IDF needs to be kept friendly to the Medically Disabled folks. If we get stupid and shove them out the door, then we lose a chunk of the Player Base that should never have been lost in the first place.
Lances107, on 13 February 2019 - 01:25 PM, said:
I had hoped to stay out of this, and I had hoped the devs had the good sense to do this correctly. Word has it your going to go live with current live server values for indirect, and keep increase damage for direct fire LRMS. The only result this will have is turn every match into LRM boats. I am already seeing polar allot more then I should, and this is probably because people are anticipating this change. I have strong objections for indirect fire damage being anything resembling effective.
These are some nerfs over the years
- Clan uacs loaded with ghost heat and limitations. Developer reason it wasnt fair for other pilots to constantly getting shook apart by clan uacs.
-Clan er medium lasers loaded with ghost heat and nerf. Developer reason they are too strong. Even though they require skill to aim and shoot on target.
- Clan omni mechs. Several of them have lower armor on certain torsos. My guess because you viewed the convergence too strong.
- Clan gauss and ppc loaded with ghost heat. Developer reason using a bunch of double talk, it boiled down to other players didnt like getting shot up at 800m away.
- Clan XL engine sabotaged on purpose. My guess because you felt we were too mobile.
My point how in the hell and all the logic in the universe can you say we are going to buff LRMS in direct fire, and leave indirect fire as effective choice as it is now on live, after you have done all the things I listed above in the name of balance. You put this live aint no one is going to see anything but missile boats. You kill quick play you kill the game. The whole point of this exercise was to limit drastically indirect fire LRMS/ATMS and instead your just going to make the whole system stronger.
Nomad One, on 14 February 2019 - 12:21 AM, said:
Because, had you bothered to read the notes on these changes or tested them out yourself, you would realize that LRM damage is not being increased, rather spread is being reduced for directly fired LRMs so as to improve their chances against existing direct fire weapon options in shot trading scenarios.
Indirect fire is keeping its live server spread value because LRMs as a whole on the PTS got ghost heat penalties increased and base heat costs increased, meaning LRM damage over time will go down slightly if your mech cannot fit an adequate amount of heatsinks to compensate. LRM burst potential is also being reduced on the PTS to be more like other weapon systems; capable of last minute alpha strike efforts.
On top of this, the PTS has a new lock-on mechanic being tested where the further you are away from a target that is not within direct view, the longer it will take for the LRM boat to acquire a lock for said missiles to track the target. This means that you have more time to break line of sight on enemy elements spotting for those mean old nasty LRM boats to completely deny them the ability to fire without seeking you out. Only homing missile using 'mechs that can directly see you get a quicker lock-on time, to compensate for the fact that you can come out of cover, shoot and often be moving back into cover by the time the first missiles are about to hit you.
The point was never to "drastically limit" indirect fire, rather to slightly reduce the effectiveness of passive uses of the weapon system while also providing avenues to utilize the weapon system more proactively.
has really hit it on the head here, and pretty damned accurately. LRMs on the PTS v2.1 are simply
not as good as on the Live Server for IDF users, and specifically because of all the underlying nerfs that have been made part of the particular Weapon System. Plus, the LRM Weapon System has to be kept friendly to the Medically Disabled folks in the Player Base in terms of Missile Spread. If it fails to be kept reasonably usable and capable for them, then we end up throwing out a section of the Player Base which we should
never have lost in the first place. As I have noted up above, BattleTech Lore allows for the Medically Disabled folks, and so should we here in MWO without question to the precedence that is already there. Otherwise we do ourselves the extreme dishonor of being toxic to those whose Real Life Body is not quote-unquote "fighting fit", and I simply can not condone that kind of behavior against them.
As for some of the other Nerfs that
Lances107 has brought up, here is my standpoints and/or knowledge on a few of those for their reference...
- ER Medium Lasers -- Their current Heat (6.3) is definitely too high for the Damage (6.5) being done. Why PGI fails to understand this, particularly in combination with other changes that they have made to MWO, is well more than puzzling at best to me. Having used it for a while, I can objectively say the generation of Heat should be no more than a '6.0' per shot now on these, given the lacking damage. Lances107, if you decide to start a movement to get this Issue fixed to better than it is now, you'll have my support given to you outright.
- Clan OmniMechs -- Yes, there has been some giant Nerfs in the past. However, you should pay attention to the Quirks on Mechs like the Executioner and Dire Wolf, which finally got some overdue and needed love. So have some other Mechs, for that matter, so check their Quirks too. Things are really not as bad as they used to be knocked down to.
- Clan Gauss & ER PPC Combos -- I'm not trying to be incendiary here, but it was far beyond worse than just being shot at 800+ Meters. The real problem was those who got insanely skilled with them, and then ruthlessly and rudely abused the weapon at Exploit-like levels, which goes outside the limit of sportsmanlike gameplay. You could literally never see where it was coming from, generally speaking, and would die while unable to fight back. It caused literally everyone else to not ever be able to shoot back at the sniper using them, while that sniper could keep hitting with up to 60 PPFLD Damage at extreme distances. While I don't like having to drop a nerf on them, that nerf pretty much goes hand-in-hand with LRMs having later on lost 100 Meters off the previous Baseline Range which they used to have at 1000 Meters, which happened to match the older "MechWarrior 2" game. (And I sadly remember how PPCs and Gauss used to have these bonkers 1.5+ KiloMeter Ranges in that older game!)
- Clan XL & I.S. LFE Engines -- PGI should not be leaving Heat on a Mech that was contained in a Destroyed Component, period. The fact that they have left that Heat in the Mech shows that they utterly failed to code the penalty properly for when a Side Torso is lost. A percentage of the Heat on your Mech at the time should definitely disappear with the loss of a Side Torso, but only once per Match (you lose the other Side Torso, then you're dead anyway), relative to the Heat Sinks that have been lost. Further, they have definitely turned up the cooling penalty now to an overly extreme level, and that should not have been done either. About the only thing one can do now is to make sure to have needed Extra Heat Sinks on the Mech, and avoid letting your Heat Level be constantly upward of 60% of maximum. Lances107, this Issue regarding Clan XL & I.S. LFE Engines is one which you will find me supporting any effort by you to get this problem fixed, so feel free to get the petition started!
...and now that I've finished with that, I'm also going to point out that I have detected a Serious Bug with how the game's backend operates in regard to Missile Spread in general. That problem needs to be fixed
before ANY single version of the LRM PTS, or even a mix thereof, can be given a real indication of being honestly worthy to put into the Live Servers for normal gameplay. Stay tuned, for there will be more posts from me to follow on the MWO Forums, and likely in several key areas of these boards.
...and now as I unfortunately predicted, even though I was trying to hurry, it really is 3 hours later. So many people that I've had to quote, and then reply to, that I've run out of time for any further posting beyond this right now. Everyone, take note of my heavy efforts to make sure that changes proposed through the LRM PTS all get done right. Yes, they really need changes to encourage getting LOS for Direct Fire, and some underlying nerfs to prevent Abuse-Like Exploiting by the small Upper Echelon of the Player Base, but these changes have to come
without causing harm toward those who are Medically Disabled, or it causes far more harm than any good that came of it. Remember, your body might be fine now, but who knows what could happen in your future. Don't pre-determine yours through bad choices in your past. Now, please pardon me while I deal with some Real Life Issues, and then come back later to post my personal-but-objective experience on how the LRM PTS v2.1 seems to function to me. As it is, I definitely thank
Chris Lowrey this time around for doing the Current LRM PTS v2.1 as right as he knowingly could, because it allowed me to even find the Missle Spread Backend Bug through normal PTS Client usage, give or take the Missing PTS Patch Download that he made me have to go track down on my own for everyone!
~Mr. D. V. "
definitely going to have a lot of posting to do later, but that's temporarily on hold" Devnull
3
