218 replies to this topic

[O h]

Don't touch our smol hammer 2c

[D V Devnull]

<*takes one good read of the Patch Notes, and does a 'facedesk' so hard that their desk snaps in half*>

Well, I see that's totally it for LRMs/ATMs in general, as they're basically being Nerfed To Oblivion. It's now a certainty that 'PTS v2.1' was COMPLETELY IGNORED, and that PGI's MWO Balance Team is using something from 'PTS v1.0 and/or v2.0' without consideration of many of the Issues which plagued their PTS Testing in the first place. Worse, this Upcoming Monthly Patch is going to ruin the game for the Medically Disabled, of which I'm slowly starting to become part of the ranks. They most certainly will NEVER put up with being given the middle finger, and they'll leave 'en masse' due to their unfortunate disability blocking them from handling any other weapons properly. The only people who will be able to use them now are going to be the "High-Skill, Top-Tier Pilots", and they'll be complaining that the weapon is OP when it has just been made only able to be used by them. You can mark my words now, AMS will totally kill Longer-Ranged Missile Damage, except for the LRM5/ATM3 Exploiters who will take advantage of this new situation. Missiles in general will become a "Noob Trap", and Non-Missile Weaponry can only be used by those without Medical Disabilities ruining their aim. MechWarrior-based games were NEVER supposed to become that of a "Trashy Twitch Shooter" where only brawling had any place. It certainly is NOT a "Thinking Man's Shooter" anymore!

I'll even bet that I won't be able to finish the Lucky Charms 2019 Event after this Upcoming Monthly Patch. While I might not be using Missiles that much personally right now, I can be sure that I won't have teams after which even come as close to working together as they even are now, albeit that it's highly lacking. With the sudden major decrease in Missile Usage that I can expect to see happen, and a massive exodus of players from the game to add to it, a whole lot of battle options are going to go completely out the window. It will simply not even be possible anymore to get Missile-Based Suppression to allow & enable Brawlers to move in, which will flatly enable Long-Range Snipers to outright basically control the battlefields without mercy. That is totally game-trashing in terms of Balance, almost as if PGI's MWO Balance Team was trying to remove ALL Balance from the game. Oh well, I guess when they have their numbers in a few months, they'll find they have finally screwed up MWO far too badly to keep it running anymore, and MWO will finally die.

Just for somebody to have something to Quote & Discuss with me on here... Any bets on a Hard PSR Reset for the Entire Community, as well as a Complete PSR Adjustment Rework, also being very much in order after this Upcoming Monthly Patch makes a bad mess of things?

<*walks off, feeling like they've seen a good friend get murdered right in front of their eyes, and disappears into the shadows*>

~Mr. D. V. "has finally seen the MWO Balance Team finish ruining the game" Devnull

[Vlad Striker]

Excellent news! My Warhawk and Catapult will shine with new colors! And revival classic maps... It's incredible. Thank you!

[dwwolf]

Sigmar Sich, on 16 March 2019 - 07:26 PM, said:

It certainly will be an interesting patch, looking forward to it. Overall, i like what i read. Good job on the patch notes, whoever does them - all explained in detail, with videos. Quality stuff.

Questions:

1) Does TAG still remove ECM cover from the target? Or there's no purpose now to have TAG on a LRM mech? Is it strictly for the support role now?

2) How does the dumb-fire without a lock-on counts now - direct or indirect? If i shoot missiles into the crosshair, will they take a short path, or a long one?

Concerns:

1) Seems like you further increased the value of ECM mechs. I don't think the game required this.
Alright, what's done is done, then allow more mechs to carry an ECM. You already have precedents of ECM hardpoints on mechs that never had it in the lore - COM-2D, AS7-D-DC.. So give the ECM hardpoint to more mechs. Preferably to unpopular ones, like some Dragon model/s, or Victor, Wolverine, or whatever your metrics shows as least used.

2) Not quite sure about different missile health for different launchers. It's kinda stupid - they all use the same ammunition. But okay, this is the world of giant walking robots warmachines, so abandon all logic, ye who enter here.
But does this mean the return of stun-lock chain LRM5 ? And does this mean mechs with more LRM hardpoints will be better off boating smaller launchers, getting much tougher to kill projectiles? If you tried to nerf massive salvos, i think you kinda failed, players will find a way around.

P.S. Many people seem to think this as a lurm buff. Game certainly doesn't need that. But i have an impression it is a nerf, not buff. Like velocity buffs - does this mean i'll be lurmed faster? But if indirect angle is higher - then overall travel time may not increase. And if it is a direct fire - just shoot the bugger, he's in the open.
But maybe i'm wrong, and it is a buff. Then it is bad news. But i will try before i cry.

People forget that locking targets will take longer for indirect fire and there is only a finite time till that lock is lost.

And I still want to know how an Artemis IV equipped LRM behaves when it fires indirectly on a NARC'd target.

[The6thMessenger]

Navid A1, on 16 March 2019 - 11:14 PM, said:

You are giving the TBR-D a streak HSL +1 quirk.

So... if by some unholy reason I want to torture myself in a timber wolf whit a quad streak build I'd generate 3 less heat ?!?!?
Are you even serious?
That THREE extra ghost heat was what holding this chassis back and was worth creating a quirk for?
Is this a joke?

Who even runs a Timber?
Who is concerned about 3 extra heat?

What outcome are you expecting to see?

Why is it so hard to take these quirks seriously.

snap out of it Chris!

Cheer up. Now you, a 75 tonner, could better devote your weight in hunting those 35 tonners and below.

Especially them locusts, cause they could one-shot everyone on their rear.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 17 March 2019 - 02:27 AM.

[Alpha Vega]

[color=#00FFFF]The 2019 Winter Holiday Giveaway for the Corsair Hero 'Mech will be released to players who had completed the 2019 Winter Holiday Giveaway. Check your illegibility here![/color]

Where and what the hell

[Bishop Six]

I dont see the problem.

We always fight against Clanners under Lurm rain and after the patch we still fight under the Lurm rain. War. War never changes.

Edited by Bishop Six, 17 March 2019 - 03:13 AM.

[Cyrilis]

Still no fix to the heatspike issue when loosing a side torso?

has been reported earier (twice)

[Lith Dael]

Matt, the "Clan LRM 10 LOS Spread" has a typo, I'm sure. It should be 4.05, not 5.05.

Also, you said we should "check our illegibility"...? ;-)

Cheers!

Edited by Lith Dael, 17 March 2019 - 03:31 AM.

[SneekiBreeki]

As i already said, Chris stop sabotaging your employer and driving more players away from the game FFS, stop buffing the most canerous weapon in the entire game already. :U

Also to the guys that are wondering how lock on times will behave in indirect fire on a tagged/narced target, there's a video for on the patchnotes. AKA: LRMs will retain all the benefits of direct fire on out of LoS narced/tagged mechs which means that this is a net buff to coordinated CLAG/NARC decks.

Edited by SneekiBreeki, 17 March 2019 - 03:47 AM.

[Killjoy786]

Cyrilis, on 17 March 2019 - 03:24 AM, said:

Still no fix to the heatspike issue when loosing a side torso?

has been reported earier (twice)

I'm gonna assume this is sarcasm? Right? Or did you honestly never see or hear or been told about a heat patch that happened a while back that when you lose a side torso you lose heatsinks that would of been in your Side Torso on Light or XL engines, in which makes you lose your total heat cap, which in turn would drop your total heat cap to below what heat level you currently have built (AKA, I havea heat cap of 55, currently have built up 45 heat, lose ST which includes some engine heatsinks and any heatsinks in the actual ST, this drops my heat cap to lets say 40, now I'm overheating and either shutting down or causing internal structure damage), This is how it is suppose to have worked from the very beginning regarding XL and Light engines and losing a Side torso and have only "recently" been put in, can't remember how many patches back

But I'm gonna assume your being sarcastic unless you tell me otherwise, and if you are being serious, then sorry I thought it was sarcastic

Edited by Killjoy786, 17 March 2019 - 04:22 AM.

[Xeno Phalcon]

KursedVixen, on 16 March 2019 - 11:36 PM, said:

so will this effect streaks in any way?

Because the lock on system doesn't differentiate between one lock on weapon and another anything the effects how LRMs lock on also effects ATM and streaks - so yes streaks will lock on faster on their own with line of sight but wont get a lock on speed boost from narc/tag anymore either. Still going to be worth mounting a tag to counter ECM and call in the absurd amount of LRMs that will be available to pour down onto your target.

[Churzy]

The health changes depending on launcher size feel counter-intuitive. Don't get me wrong, I understand and support the intent of the change, but it still doesn't make much sense for missiles to have different health values when they are basically the exact same missiles (same ammo, same damage, etc).

I think the modifications in relative AMS efficiency work when considering individual launchers side by side, but it could get messy in mixed fire situations, where the AMS may be wasting time targetting missiles from the 5's rather than destroying more of the equally damaging ones from the 20's (therefore preventing more damage in the process).

[Gen Lee]

Koniving, on 16 March 2019 - 07:22 PM, said:

Of the current scale...The Warhammer (IS) is 75 tons and 15.5 meters tall.

The Dragon is 13.5 meters tall.

The Warhammer IIC is just barely 14 meters tall.


See the issue?

Take a Warhammer IIC and a Wolfhound and put them next to each other...
The Warhammer IIC...is barely half a window taller.

One of those two is 35 tons, the other is 80....

The Whammy IIC should get buffs in the form of agility and mobility before anyone even thinks about increasing its size, period. The "buff" they are giving it WRT armor and offense are more of a slap in the face considering they are increasing its geometry instead of increasing agility and mobility. Once they do something about agility and mobility, then we can talk about geometry. Besides, it's not that they made the Whammy IIC tiny...they made the mediums and lights too big, but by now you should know that's never going to be scaled back.

[Cyrilis]

Killjoy786, on 17 March 2019 - 04:19 AM, said:

I'm gonna assume this is sarcasm? Right? Or did you honestly never see or hear or been told about a heat patch that happened a while back that when you lose a side torso you lose heatsinks that would of been in your Side Torso on Light or XL engines, in which makes you lose your total heat cap, which in turn would drop your total heat cap to below what heat level you currently have built (AKA, I havea heat cap of 55, currently have built up 45 heat, lose ST which includes some engine heatsinks and any heatsinks in the actual ST, this drops my heat cap to lets say 40, now I'm overheating and either shutting down or causing internal structure damage), This is how it is suppose to have worked from the very beginning regarding XL and Light engines and losing a Side torso and have only "recently" been put in, can't remember how many patches back

But I'm gonna assume your being sarcastic unless you tell me otherwise, and if you are being serious, then sorry I thought it was sarcastic

No, this is no sarcasm.. yes I heard about the heatscale revamp, yes, I read your comments on my previous mentions of the issue.
I still have the opinion that a heatspike is not desirable and that there are much more conveniet ways to deal with it....

nuff said.

[Shadowomega1]

Cyrilis, on 17 March 2019 - 03:24 AM, said:

Still no fix to the heatspike issue when loosing a side torso?

has been reported earier (twice)

No need to fix what they intended to do, at least from their point of view. As it is their attempt at bringing balance between clan XL/IS LFE with the IS XL and Standard engine.

Oh, and Heat Spikes also occur in the table top when engines are crit. +5 Heat per turn per crit taken. So +10 heat per turn on cXL and LFE on side torso destruction on those. So this is definitely their interpretation of that system.

Edited by Shadowomega1, 17 March 2019 - 08:32 AM.

[Dee Eight]

Navid A1, on 16 March 2019 - 11:14 PM, said:

You are giving the TBR-D a streak HSL +1 quirk.

So... if by some unholy reason I want to torture myself in a timber wolf whit a quad streak build I'd generate 3 less heat ?!?!?
Are you even serious?
That THREE extra ghost heat was what holding this chassis back and was worth creating a quirk for?
Is this a joke?

Who even runs a Timber?
Who is concerned about 3 extra heat?

What outcome are you expecting to see?

Why is it so hard to take these quirks seriously.

snap out of it Chris!

HSL quirks are used to reward lorelovers who run stock builds or at least in the case of omni mechs, will likely mean stock omni pods as they'll probably assign it as a set of 8 quirk (although it would be nicer if it was a quirk tied to the TBR-S center torso).

I've noticed that the people complaining the most about the LRM changes actually play the game the least.

[Shadowomega1]

Hey Dee at least a couple lore builds are better then what most of the community comes up with for certain mechs. IE Nova Cat Prime.

[Chris Lowrey]

GweNTLeR, on 16 March 2019 - 10:19 PM, said:

@PGI what will be the health values for big missile volleys? Saying "The previous universal value will be set as a baseline and applied to LRM 5 launchers" does not clarify anything at all. The reduction better be good to compensate for all the ams quirks nerf.

We left this information out for two reasons:

1: The health values are not an exposed value in the UI.
2: Even if we did publish them, it does not give an accurate account of how effective they are in the match. Which can lead to false expectations on how it "should" perform over how it actually performs.

We said that LRM 5's revolve around the current baseline because this is something that can be tested and expressed through people's current understanding of their effectiveness and ability to science. I can save people the trouble of looking through the game files and say that at the farthest end, LRM 20's now have 30% less health then LRM 5 volleys.

The thing is that this does not guarantee 30% more missiles get shot down. AMS is a system that is both random, as well as hyper dependent on positioning. A missile volley traveling the full length of AMS' effective diameter can have more then a 100% increase in effectiveness compared to shooting something at the center of the AMS radius. Likewise, despite identical health pools, stream fire LRMs and ATM's on the Clan side is much more venerable to AMS fire then the clustered volleys of the IS launchers. Along with a number of other x factors including skill tree enhancements, volley speed, etc.

Basically, there is no "one" answer we can give while having it remain accurate due to the number of X factors involved with AMS as a system. All we can say is that we have used LRM 5 as a base, and have done an extensive tuning pass across the entirety of the missile lineup in order to make it feel much more impactful. Especially against larger launcher sizes and non-LRM missile systems. Feel free to give it a try when it goes live and judge for yourselves, but from the PTS user's experience on just the LRM systems alone, they found it very noticeable.

[Tarl Cabot]

And still no bandwidth to bring the isXL to survive the loss of the ST in the current environment? /winks

• isXL 40% Engine loss heat capacity / x% loss heat dissipation / 25% movement
  
• cXL 25-30% Engine loss heat capacity/ x% loss heat dissipation / 20% movement
  
• LFE 15-20% Engine loss heat capacity/ x% loss heat dissipation / 15% movement