75 replies to this topic

[VonBruinwald]

Samial, on 02 February 2021 - 07:43 PM, said:

I know customers are upset at the moment but this road map is growing on me, new updates are always welcome imo.. Even salty people should see some changes there that might help, its better than nothing at all for three years or so to me.

New content would be most prized as well though.

I'll be honest, I'm optimistic but betting they'll fall short of what they intend.

If they try to take two steps forward and only manage one, at least it's something.

[Antares102]

Samial, on 02 February 2021 - 07:43 PM, said:

Even salty people should see some changes there that might help, its better than nothing at all for three years or so to me.

The entire roadmap is a list of promises. Promises are fictitious until they are realized.
Combined with the experience from the past with PGI (90 days and stuff) people tend to disbelieve PGIs promises.
You can call those people salty. I would call those people experienced.

If person A had been cheated by person B with person A's full knowledge time and time again
what would you call person A if he/she/it is still trusting person B?

And talking about the changes (promises?) PGI did implement.
Most of the community was left out from the discussion or their feedback was ignored.
(Long tom, desync, skill tree and stuff)

People are salty for a reason man.

[The pessimistic optimist]

Antares102, on 03 February 2021 - 08:12 AM, said:

The entire roadmap is a list of promises. Promises are fictitious until they are realized.
Combined with the experience from the past with PGI (90 days and stuff) people tend to disbelieve PGIs promises.
You can call those people salty. I would call those people experienced.

If person A had been cheated by person B with person A's full knowledge time and time again
what would you call person A if he/she/it is still trusting person B?

And talking about the changes (promises?) PGI did implement.
Most of the community was left out from the discussion or their feedback was ignored.
(Long tom, desync, skill tree and stuff)

People are salty for a reason man.

So show not tell

[FupDup]

VonBruinwald, on 02 February 2021 - 04:02 PM, said:

It's not going to make any of the existing builds particularly more deadly though and it's an essential stop-gap for the lack of crit-splitting. Your complaint is that it's going to upset the meta more than anything else.

You're getting warmer. I'm definitely not scared of existing Fafnirs and Annis becoming gods from this. I also don't expect 1x HGR mechs to be out of line either.

My fear is that it might allow more mobile/agile mechs to start viably using 2x HGR. Right now it can be crammed into 70-ton and even 65-ton mechs, but they make such large sacrifices (microscopic engines) to get there that very few people bother. If they could actually mount respectable engine sizes with the loadout, then they would be able to leverage the strengths of the loadout far more effectively than the Anni and Faffy (better agility to track targets, more speed to get in range quicker, smaller size to attract less attention while getting in range).

And this would thus remove a large amount of the counterplay that 2x HGR currently has (horrid mobility and fatness). These mechs still wouldn't be very fast when compared to normal builds, but they might be fast enough that it's no longer a giant Achilles' heel (I haven't done the maths yet).

We'd also start seeing the build used more often because there are people who currently don't bother playing the bigger assaults like the Anni and Faffy due to the lack of mobility, and if we saw enough dual HGR usage then a nerf might follow.

EDIT: Also remember that reducing it to 10 slots doesn't just open up LFE usage. It also opens up XL usage, which is where things might get hairy down the line if we get a 70+ ton mech with ballistic arms sans actuators (King Crab excluded for obvious reasons). The chances of us ever getting a new mech again are approximately 0.00000001%, but still.

VonBruinwald, on 02 February 2021 - 04:02 PM, said:

Because mediums and lights shouldn't be fun mechs.... IS mediums and lights get the shaft when it comes to ballistic options, opening up build possibilities is something than needs to be done, and I don't see LAC's coming any time soon.

Hunchback can do heavy Gauss at 64kph which is the speed an IS heavy typically goes. 64-81kph is a heavies speed in my books 64 with a STD, 81 with an XL.

If we really want HGR mediums to be a thing, we need a 55-tonner with at least 3-4 torso energy hardpoints and 1 torso ballistic. Somehow I missed the Bushwacker earlier when toying around in MechDB. The BSW-P2 comes very close with 2 energy in the CT. If there was just one more hardpoint it could do a respectable 3 ML + HGR while going at a modest 73.6 kph.

I want my 4E + 2B (all torso) custom hero Shadow Hawk already. I'm gonna have to scour Sarna to look for canon mechs with these specs...

HGR lights will straight-up never be a thing unless we got stuff like XL Gyro and XXL Engines (assuming 10-slot HGR mounted in the arm of a 35-tonner), and even then it's a stretch. Dunno why you mentioned lights here.

The lack of HGR-compatibility isn't really preventing lights and mediums from being fun. Changings to existing smaller ballistics like MGs and sub-20 ACs would have a wider reaching impact on this front because the barrier to entry (tonnage) is drastically lower regardless of which engines are used.

VonBruinwald, on 02 February 2021 - 04:02 PM, said:

The main problem is a lack of fully functioning crit-system, I mean look at engines, the IS XL requires 3 crits (1 ST) to take out because "lore" but the cXL requires 4(!) because of the refusal to implement a proper crit system to enable it. Meanwhile people complain the cXL is a terrible engine because not managing heat = death.

I actually don't miss the lack of "real" crits, especially with the suped-up crit seekers that MWO has. You think the Piranha's crazy now? The moment your CT armor is gone your STD engine is gonna go bye-bye in a real crit system (unless it had as much health as the entire center torso section).

The LFE has the same heat penalty. It doesn't make either of them bad engines, it just reduces quality of life without really changing the mechanical reasons why LFE/CXL are the go-to safe choices. Even a full crit system wouldn't change the engine meta, it would just make people die faster.

Edited by FupDup, 03 February 2021 - 05:46 PM.

[FupDup]

FupDup, on 03 February 2021 - 01:52 PM, said:

I'm gonna have to scour Sarna to look for canon mechs with these specs...

Found my first potential candidate! The Marshal, never heard of this thing before...The main variant comes stock with 4E + 2B + 1M hardpoints, with 2 of those energy and both ballistics being in the torsos. Just +1 hardpoint of inflation would bring it up to the threshold I'm looking for.

https://www.sarna.net/wiki/Marshal

Outside of HGR ambitions this might actually be a decent mech in general.


EDIT: Aaaaand that looks like the end of the candidates. So it's either hardpoint inflated Marshal or a custom hero for some other chassis.

Edited by FupDup, 03 February 2021 - 02:30 PM.

[General Solo]

VonBruinwald, on 02 February 2021 - 04:02 PM, said:

It's not going to make any of the existing builds particularly more deadly though and it's an essential stop-gap for the lack of crit-splitting. Your complaint is that it's going to upset the meta more than anything else.



Because mediums and lights shouldn't be fun mechs.... IS mediums and lights get the shaft when it comes to ballistic options, opening up build possibilities is something than needs to be done, and I don't see LAC's coming any time soon.


The main problem is a lack of fully functioning crit-system, I mean look at engines, the IS XL requires 3 crits (1 ST) to take out because "lore" but the cXL requires 4(!) because of the refusal to implement a proper crit system to enable it. Meanwhile people complain the cXL is a terrible engine because not managing heat = death.



Hunchback can do heavy Gauss at 64kph which is the speed an IS heavy typically goes.

64-81kph is a heavies speed in my books 64 with a STD, 81 with an XL.

I prefer the shadow Hawk with Heavy Gauss and Jump Jets for fun

[The pessimistic optimist]

VonBruinwald, on 02 February 2021 - 04:02 PM, said:

It's not going to make any of the existing builds particularly more deadly though and it's an essential stop-gap for the lack of crit-splitting. Your complaint is that it's going to upset the meta more than anything else.



Because mediums and lights shouldn't be fun mechs.... IS mediums and lights get the shaft when it comes to ballistic options, opening up build possibilities is something than needs to be done, and I don't see LAC's coming any time soon.


The main problem is a lack of fully functioning crit-system, I mean look at engines, the IS XL requires 3 crits (1 ST) to take out because "lore" but the cXL requires 4(!) because of the refusal to implement a proper crit system to enable it. Meanwhile people complain the cXL is a terrible engine because not managing heat = death.



Hunchback can do heavy Gauss at 64kph which is the speed an IS heavy typically goes.

64-81kph is a heavies speed in my books 64 with a STD, 81 with an XL.

I got two UAC10 crammed in to a Bushwacker you are right it pretty hard to make IS med with more then one AC. IS meds are best of using SRMs MRMs lasers PPCs or single large AC with lasers. And to a smaller extent IS LRMs are also little to heavy for IS meds.

Edited by SirSmokes, 04 February 2021 - 05:13 AM.

[VonBruinwald]

FupDup, on 03 February 2021 - 01:52 PM, said:

Also remember that reducing it to 10 slots doesn't just open up LFE usage. It also opens up XL usage, which is where things might get hairy down the line if we get a 70+ ton mech with ballistic arms sans actuators (King Crab excluded for obvious reasons).

Whoops, that's an oversight, so used to the ST only rule from TT. But that should be an easy fix.

Take the components="right_torso, left_torso" rule from IS-CASE and copy-paste it to the Heavy Gauss. Fixed.

FupDup, on 03 February 2021 - 01:52 PM, said:

My fear is that it might allow more mobile/agile mechs to start viably using 2x HGR. Right now it can be crammed into 70-ton and even 65-ton mechs, but they make such large sacrifices (microscopic engines) to get there that very few people bother. If they could actually mount respectable engine sizes with the loadout, then they would be able to leverage the strengths of the loadout far more effectively than the Anni and Faffy (better agility to track targets, more speed to get in range quicker, smaller size to attract less attention while getting in range).

And this would thus remove a large amount of the counterplay that 2x HGR currently has (horrid mobility and fatness). These mechs still wouldn't be very fast when compared to normal builds, but they might be fast enough that it's no longer a giant Achilles' heel (I haven't done the maths yet).

We'd also start seeing the build used more often because there are people who currently don't bother playing the bigger assaults like the Anni and Faffy due to the lack of mobility, and if we saw enough dual HGR usage then a nerf might follow.

I'd rather see a nerf to heavy gauss and have an increase in build variety than see the weapon reserved almost exclusively to a single class. And even in that case there's still the option of upping the quirks on the Fafnir so it retains its position as the premier DHG mech.

[General Solo]

I dunno the Heavy Gauss range is pretty short and not many mechs can carry it
I think better match making is better than weapon nerfs or buffs
imo

Edit Spelling

Edited by General Solo, 04 February 2021 - 05:56 PM.

[The pessimistic optimist]

General Solo, on 04 February 2021 - 06:41 AM, said:

I dunno the Heavy Gauss range is pretty short and not many mechs can carry it
I think better match making is better and weapon nerfs or buffs
imo

Well matchmaker is well hit or miss and you are at it mercy at all times and the player pool at that time and number of people looking for a match. Matchmaker is not magic good match making is important but it can't make good matches if there are not the player to match and then there the solo psr vs group psr

Edited by SirSmokes, 04 February 2021 - 06:49 AM.

[bilagaana]

In its present configuration, the game is unplayable for solo players of average skill. Unless or until the gross inequalities introduced by the combining of group and solo queues and the complete absence of a rational matchmaker are remedied, the consideration of cosmetic changes is pointless and will not halt the game's steady decline.

[FupDup]

VonBruinwald, on 04 February 2021 - 06:29 AM, said:

I'd rather see a nerf to heavy gauss and have an increase in build variety than see the weapon reserved almost exclusively to a single class. And even in that case there's still the option of upping the quirks on the Fafnir so it retains its position as the premier DHG mech.

HGR isn't reserved to one weight class, well single HGR isn't anyways (double HGR is and as I said I want it to stay that way). Heavies can already do single HGR pretty well and mediums can almost do it, we just need 3-4 torso laser hardpoints to combine with an HGR on a 55-ton mech and we're good to go.

If an HGR nerf did occur I'd want it to only be for dual-wielded ones (with the Faffy getting quirks to cancel that out).

[Wolfos31]

FupDup, on 04 February 2021 - 01:29 PM, said:

HGR isn't reserved to one weight class, well single HGR isn't anyways (double HGR is and as I said I want it to stay that way). Heavies can already do single HGR pretty well and mediums can almost do it, we just need 3-4 torso laser hardpoints to combine with an HGR on a 55-ton mech and we're good to go.

If an HGR nerf did occur I'd want it to only be for dual-wielded ones (with the Faffy getting quirks to cancel that out).

I have a friend that runs a single HGR Vulcan of all things (no backup weapons that I can remember) and he does surprisingly well in it. I think people just don't expect that much hurt out of a Vulcan.

[VonBruinwald]

FupDup, on 04 February 2021 - 01:29 PM, said:

If an HGR nerf did occur I'd want it to only be for dual-wielded ones (with the Faffy getting quirks to cancel that out).

I was thinking along the lines of increasing charge times, but reducing the charge limit to 1 actually makes more sense. Mediums won't be expected to dual wield under normal circumstances and given the lore of the recoil being enough to knock over the firing mech it makes sense that only certain mechs specifically designed/quirked for the purpose could handle firing two.

[FupDup]

VonBruinwald, on 04 February 2021 - 01:56 PM, said:

I was thinking along the lines of increasing charge times, but reducing the charge limit to 1 actually makes more sense. Mediums won't be expected to dual wield under normal circumstances and given the lore of the recoil being enough to knock over the firing mech it makes sense that only certain mechs specifically designed/quirked for the purpose could handle firing two.

I was thinking more along the lines of adding Ghost Heat to 2x HGR, giving it roughly equivalent heat of 2x ERPPCs or so (and Faffy getting +HSL quirk). I'd also add compensation mini-buffs like more ammo (125 damage per ton of ammo is pretty abysmal, 200 minimum should be standard for all ballistics) and lower explosion damage (all IS Gauss should get that). Perhaps a bit more health too.

Edited by FupDup, 04 February 2021 - 02:17 PM.

[R Valentine]

FupDup, on 04 February 2021 - 02:05 PM, said:

I was thinking more along the lines of adding Ghost Heat to 2x HGR, giving it roughly equivalent heat of 2x ERPPCs or so (and Faffy getting +HSL quirk). I'd also add compensation mini-buffs like more ammo (125 damage per ton of ammo is pretty abysmal, 200 minimum should be standard for all ballistics) and lower explosion damage (all IS Gauss should get that). Perhaps a bit more health too.

Oh please, HGR wouldn't even be usable at a ghost heat of 2. As it is, HGR is only useful when you can take a giant, slow mech and waddle it to within brawl range. Cool down is massive, ammo per ton is low, range is abysmal, and critical explosion chance is high. There's plenty of ways to punish an HGR mech as it is. The weapon doesn't need any modifications at all.

[FupDup]

Kiran Yagami, on 04 February 2021 - 02:28 PM, said:

Oh please, HGR wouldn't even be usable at a ghost heat of 2. As it is, HGR is only useful when you can take a giant, slow mech and waddle it to within brawl range. Cool down is massive, ammo per ton is low, range is abysmal, and critical explosion chance is high. There's plenty of ways to punish an HGR mech as it is. The weapon doesn't need any modifications at all.

If you weren't keeping up with the exchange between Bruinwald and I, I was proposing that stuff if the HGR was reduced to 10 slots so people could use it with LFE. I wasn't saying to do that stuff right now when the gun is 11 slots, bruh.

I did also give buffs to increase health and ammo and decrease self-explosion damage to reduce the fragility issue, so mechs with 1x HGR would be a lot better.

Edited by FupDup, 04 February 2021 - 02:39 PM.

[VonBruinwald]

Kiran Yagami, on 04 February 2021 - 02:28 PM, said:

Oh please, HGR wouldn't even be usable at a ghost heat of 2. As it is, HGR is only useful when you can take a giant, slow mech and waddle it to within brawl range. Cool down is massive, ammo per ton is low, range is abysmal, and critical explosion chance is high. There's plenty of ways to punish an HGR mech as it is. The weapon doesn't need any modifications at all.

Not sure if you followed the preceding posts. We were talking about ways to improve Heavy Gauss use. Current proposal is so:

• Reduce slots to 10 ¹
  
• Limit placement to ST's only ²
  
• Reduce charge limit/GH to 1 ³

¹ Substitue for lack of crit-splitting which severely limits what mechs are capable of using it (also applies to LBX-20), mechs will be able to take an LFE to increase speed or alternatively free up tonnage/space for mechs to equip Heavy Gauss.

² Lore restriction and prevents a hypothetical issue with dual heavies in arms, easy to implement by copying code from IS CASE

³ Currently debating... Fup suggest ghost heat, I suggest charge limit =1, my opinion is charge limit fits better with lore. In either case Fafnir (and other appropriate mechs) should be quirked to enable two.

With regards to ghost heat vs.charge, both can be circumvented with macros/timing but charge time can be used to enforce a longer delay between shots. Ghost heat isn't going to be much different and while HPPC + H.Gauss may see a rise it's going to require more skill to be effective. In either case this will have little to no impact on mediums which can barely run one as is. This will mostly impact heavies.

Edited by VonBruinwald, 04 February 2021 - 03:07 PM.

[General Solo]

SirSmokes, on 04 February 2021 - 06:43 AM, said:

Well matchmaker is well hit or miss and you are at it mercy at all times and the player pool at that time and number of people looking for a match. Matchmaker is not magic good match making is important but it can't make good matches if there are not the player to match and then there the solo psr vs group psr

And I don't think weapon nerfs or buffs is a good solution because it solves nothing
Same people will win, Same people will lose
Might as well save the resourses for somthing more productive

[FupDup]

General Solo, on 04 February 2021 - 05:58 PM, said:

And I don't think weapon nerfs or buffs is a good solution because it solves nothing
Same people will win, Same people will lose
Might as well save the resourses for somthing more productive

Balancing changes to guns or robots are not intended to change who wins or loses, they're intended to give you more tools at your disposal to win with.