615 replies to this topic

[The pessimistic optimist]

LRH1313, on 20 February 2021 - 01:04 PM, said:

I have been in the game for a few years, but would not be considered a "good" or even "average" player. I really enjoy the BT universe and like what MWO offers as a big stompy robot game. I am excited to see some more life being added to the game.

From a non power user perspective:

IS PPC:
I like PPC's and all the suggestions to IS PPC's, I think would be helpful. I don't understand how an energy weapon can suddenly go from 0 dmg to 10 dmg because it traveled an extra inch... a curve of damage increasing or just feedback damage decreasing as distance increases would make more sense.

LPPC's: reduce heat, weight, reload or increase range...
Snub: could increase range a little, but mostly reducing heat and/or recharge would be helpful.
IS PPC: damage/feedback curve at close range and reduce heat a little.
ER PPC: good as is.

IS Gauss:
Please move the charge up before firing the gauss it to after the shot is taken. Add the cool down to the charge time and make them the same thing. This way it is still justifiable to have the weapon explode upon crit. Also, with an extra long charge cycle/CD, a missed shot will be more painful for the operator while making snapshots viable.

Also, generally increasing the max range of Gauss (3X as stated earlier) makes a whole lot of sense.

LGauss: Drop a ton or two, increase dmg to 10, increase range.
Gauss: Good as is.
HGauss: Reduce slots by 1 and make it only peaceable in ST.

Overall, I like SirSmokes modifications of the Gulag proposal the best. MWO is a fantastic game which is equally fun and frustrating. It is a good de-stressor after a long day at work and seeing some work done on it is hopeful. Please don't discredit input from non-top tier players. MWO is our game too.

P.S.
Any new period and lore accurate weapons would be very welcome!

Why are you using a new account to post? Want to hide your identity?

Edited by SirSmokes, 20 February 2021 - 01:16 PM.

[w0qj]

Suggestion for Artillery Strike "smoke":

Please program the "smoke" marker to be a "hot" texture, so that players using Thermal_Vision & Night_Vision can see the smoke.
This can be done, as demonstrated in the Caustic Valley's "hot" smoke columns, clearly visible with Thermal_Vision & Night_Vision.

Currently the artillery strike "smoke" is almost invisible in above two modes.

[Y E O N N E]

LRH1313, on 20 February 2021 - 01:04 PM, said:

Overall, I like SirSmokes modifications of the Gulag proposal the best.

Those are mine, not SirSmokes. SirSmokes was quoting my post.

Edited by Miss Greene, 20 February 2021 - 01:21 PM.

[The pessimistic optimist]

Miss Greene, on 20 February 2021 - 01:20 PM, said:

Those are mine, not SirSmokes.

HMMMMMMMMM

[LRH1313]

sorry, as you can tell, I am new at this.

I have played for a while and with the Dev's wanting community involvement I thought it would be appropriate to add my 2c.

I apologize for any slights I may have delivered and improper quoting.

My opinions however, are my own.

[The pessimistic optimist]

LRH1313, on 20 February 2021 - 01:34 PM, said:

sorry, as you can tell, I am new at this.

I have played for a while and with the Dev's wanting community involvement I thought it would be appropriate to add my 2c.

I apologize for any slights I may have delivered and improper quoting.

My opinions however, are my own.

Confused "I have been in the game for a few years" any ways

w0qj, on 20 February 2021 - 01:18 PM, said:

Suggestion for Artillery Strike "smoke":

Please program the "smoke" marker to be a "hot" texture, so that players using Thermal_Vision & Night_Vision can see the smoke.
This can be done, as demonstrated in the Caustic Valley's "hot" smoke columns, clearly visible with Thermal_Vision & Night_Vision.

Currently the artillery strike "smoke" is almost invisible in above two modes.

Yea please fix that

Edited by SirSmokes, 20 February 2021 - 01:38 PM.

[LRH1313]

I played a while ago, but have done nothing with the forum or other involvement. I have just gotten back into the game this year.

What I don't understand is how my playtime impacts whether I have a valid right to add input. I understand that my forum account states that it was created in mid 2020. I don't know if I would consider that a "new account" or not....

If you want to continue this discussion privately I will be more than happy to, but I think it may be detracting from the main point of this forum.

[The pessimistic optimist]

LRH1313, on 20 February 2021 - 01:43 PM, said:

I played a while ago, but have done nothing with the forum or other involvement. I have just gotten back into the game this year.

What I don't understand is how my playtime impacts whether I have a valid right to add input. I understand that my forum account states that it was created in mid 2020. I don't know if I would consider that a "new account" or not....

If you want to continue this discussion privately I will be more than happy to, but I think it may be detracting from the main point of this forum.

Why the new account?

Jack Shayu Walker, on 20 February 2021 - 10:13 AM, said:

Definitely not in favor of this. The agility boost is a big part of what makes MASC so fun to use.

Please don't unfun MASC

Edited by SirSmokes, 20 February 2021 - 01:58 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

SirSmokes, on 20 February 2021 - 01:56 PM, said:

Why the new account?

Accounts show the day you started posting as the day they were created, regardless of when they were actually created.

My own account shows April as its inception date, but I know for a fact that I created this account on Valentine's Day, 2014.

[The pessimistic optimist]

Miss Greene, on 20 February 2021 - 02:06 PM, said:

Accounts show the day you started posting as the day they were created, regardless of when they were actually created.

My own account shows April as its inception date, but I know for a fact that I created this account on Valentine's Day, 2014.

So he just had his first post but the first post was on? Member Since 25 Jun 2020 It Feb 20 2021
What happen to his old account?

4ces, on 20 February 2021 - 08:20 AM, said:

LRM Locking

Indirect LOS

• Currently it is like a lottery or in a casino. Lots of blinking rectangles, and it feels like pure luck to get a lock-on.
  
• Once you get a lock and you fire, you instantly lose the lock and your missiles get lost or hit your team members. It feels like it is designed to annoy the pilot.
  
• There should be a more rational way for locking, like you have to follow the movement of the enemy mech/rectangle with the crosshair until the lock gets more and more grip and finally locks on. Sometimes it works that way, and it is o.k. that it takes it is time, to get the lock.
  
• You can vary lock-on time, based on distance, or if Artemis is involved, or sensitivity/accuracy of the crosshair movement. But there should be a more rational, predictable way to work, then right now.
  
• A more rational locking behaviour is independent from all other balancing, buffing or nerfing of the weapon.
  
• LRM should be completely removed or treated fairly. It should'nt annoy the pilot. Laser or ballistic weapons dont do either. Balance the annoyment factor of the weapon.

Direct LOS

• Locking is supposed to work better with direct LOS, but it does'nt feel like that.
  
• A laser or ballistic weapon can be fired instantly on sight, but for LRM you still need a lock for effective usage.
  
• Right now, it takes too much time to get a lock on direct LOS to motivate a pilot to move out of cover. This is a main reason why to stay in cover. LRM is not competitive in direct LOS.

Think over hauling how people get locks and improving LOS shooting is the way to go

Edited by SirSmokes, 20 February 2021 - 02:20 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

Miss Greene, on 20 February 2021 - 12:43 PM, said:

Don't think weight/slots should be touched, it just upsets a lot of things like stock builds. There are other equipment available in BattleTech to achieve the slot changes and offset weight, don't need to do it to what's in-game now.

Except LB20X. Unless PGI is willing to allow critsplitting, LB20X should have -1 slot, so that The KGC-005 could work.

xAndy199, on 20 February 2021 - 07:07 AM, said:

I don't mind you bringing the stats up, I'm not trying to monopolize the truth here, If you want to invoke Tiers to give your opinions more weight, I can tell you as someone who keeps dipping between Tier 3 and 4 (I go down with Lights and Heavies and then come back up with Mediums and Assaults), matchmaking at Tier 4 seems to put me into games where more people use voice comms than in Tier 3. The callouts and team coordination seem to be much better in Tier 4, so much so that it made me doubt whether Tier 1 is supposed to be for the best players or Tier 5.

Hey, you're the one who brought tiers here. I personally like that environment, but you can get almost the same attitude in Oceanic, NA is chaotic. I can't even remember if we Nascared in Oceanic.

xAndy199, on 20 February 2021 - 07:07 AM, said:

I'm trying to argue that that Grid Iron build can do better with a Light Engine, a UAC/10 or Gauss, and extra MRMs, not that you cannot *make* that build in the *absolute* sense.

And you're not really doing that. Different builds try to do different things. Do you want midranged firesuppression, or pinpoint heavy damage? An HGR with a Grid Iron has heavy cooldown quirks accompanying it, so yeah it's a good mix.

xAndy199, on 20 February 2021 - 07:07 AM, said:

Since I'm already making an appeal to team play, the reason why I think the pinpoint damage of the AC/20 doesn't give it an advantage over the LB20X is because you're not (regularly) going to outright kill an Assault by yourself in the first leg of the match anyway, and your teammates won't unfailingly focus down the same component you were focusing.

They might not even get an angle for that. So a few minutes into the fight, the enemy mech will have all of its torso armor heavily damaged and then the pinpoint damage isn't as valuable as what the LB20X can do: "where did all my side torso weapons go?"

But if you make their CT or any important component cherry red, they will be less likely to show up in the front, because they can no longer share armor.

xAndy199, on 20 February 2021 - 07:07 AM, said:

The way I see it, there aren't game-breaking problems for the balance pass to solve, it's more about making underappreciated or overly-niched weapons more usable in general play, which is why I root so hard for /20 to be rebalanced versus /10 and PPCs rebalanced versus Lasers

You're right, the main problem is PGI. If they are back on their usual schtick of baby-steps balancing, I see no future where we're out of a hole, just another one.

xAndy199, on 20 February 2021 - 07:07 AM, said:

I think we could agree to disagree on my point and let the devs review what everyone else had posted and decide based on that.
My opinion and point is that with each of those builds you linked (maybe except the Yen Lo Wang, because of the extreme hardpoint limitation), going from /20 to /10 (or from HGauss to Gauss) and investing more in other weapons will get you a better alpha and more damage over 5 seconds - a practical limitation before you get too much attention and start facetanking, which is what you can tune your heat output for.

And your opinion is wrong, because that depends on your playstyle. You'll hear the PPFLD term in the forums, stands for Pinpoint Front-Loaded Damage, because the Meta is Maximum-Damage-Minimum-Return-Fire.

The AC20 rig presents a slightly safer way of engagement because of frontloaded damage, you can dispense all of it, then use the inbetween to hide or shield. Unlike UAC10 which is starey and sustained.

This presents a question, do you want sustained fire that yields more damage, but risks more incoming damage? Or do you frontload all your damage to play it safe.

Just as you mean to say that it's optimal to not use the heavy weapons than "Not possible", what I have been pointing out is that your position is rigid and isn't understanding the nuances of how to play the game, and the weapons' niche.

It's pointless trying to compare 1:1 with weapons, you have to account where and how they are used best and to accentuate their advantages. And the AC20, just adheres to what is meta more.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 20 February 2021 - 03:19 PM.

[Sawk]

Hmm i want to see small scale nukes, were you have to use 2 mechs, only get 2 shots, and 1 med lazer,. a launch assault mech, and a scout targeting mech. and a really KOOL mushroom blast.

SAWK

[FupDup]

Sawk, on 20 February 2021 - 03:18 PM, said:

Hmm i want to see small scale nukes, were you have to use 2 mechs, only get 2 shots, and 1 med lazer,. a launch assault mech, and a scout targeting mech. and a really KOOL mushroom blast.

SAWK

[The6thMessenger]

FupDup, on 20 February 2021 - 03:57 PM, said:

God I wish we have Arrow-IVs for the Urbie. Seems like better way to allow artillery strikes than free consumables.

[A21B]

ok this post isnt make my mech stronger cause thats what i want, the rac 2's are way op. there is no "sacrifice to running 3 rac 2's on a medium mech. i would suggest making them 4 crit spaces instead of 3 and have the ammo at 2 crit spaces. you could still do it but you might want to conserve the ammo that you have instead of firing till they jamb. i think that would be fair.

you could also make lrm ammo 2 crit spaces for the same reason nobody likes the guy that sits in the back with 3000 rounds of lrm ammo.

on these two suggestions the stock load outs would still be viable on just about every mech.


it might force people to use single heat sinks and maybe have some heat issues.

[FupDup]

The6thMessenger, on 20 February 2021 - 04:50 PM, said:

God I wish we have Arrow-IVs for the Urbie. Seems like better way to allow artillery strikes than free consumables.

Can't crit-split though (15 slots).

Other options that can fit without splitting include Mech Mortars, Sniper Artillery Cannon, and Thumper Cannon.

[Type ZERO]

The6thMessenger, on 19 February 2021 - 04:43 AM, said:

I agree, RACs and AC2s should only be blinding with firing near the head.

This, so much this....

[Ostsr]

Lets be clear. We just want a bit a tweak in exist weapons. (exp. gauss charge)
But for real. We want new weapons. Arrow, binar, xpulse etc.
Guys you can make it.
It's not a mlg game.
Why not?
And about hsl, ghost heat and stuff. Just remeber how classic wow servers got blizz stocks up in year ago. How much hype it gets. Just give some vanila and Non-Apocryphal items to people. That can work. And if not. You can mignate impact of it in some time. Guys you got ptr servers for this.

Edited by Ostsr, 20 February 2021 - 06:59 PM.

[Botaine]

I think a vote for the most underpowered weapons would be helpful in sorting through which weapons are the worst. You can also look at useage statistics. This assumes that bad weapons are used less.

Light gauss and regular gauss need a damage buff. They don't do much damage and are outclassed by the AC10, UAC10 and RAC5 which work at similar ranges for a similar tonnage. I never use light machine gun, lb2xac, lb5xac, light ppc and snub nose ppc, rocket launchers, flamers, srm2, ssrm2, lrm5, and any of the medium range missiles because they all feel weak. they need a damage per second per ton boost in some form or other (cooldown tonnage or just damage improvements). I think all lasers are great, with the exception of ER Large and Laser AMS is a little too hot, considering you need at least 2 or 3 of them to be worth a darn. Also tag and light tag should reduce lock time, reduce missile spread and allow lock onto stealthed mechs. There isn't much benefit to them now.

This may be off topic, but while we are talking about balance, I don't understand why three different engines can be the same in every way but their speed. For example std engine 160, 165 and 170 are all 7 tons, 6 slots, 6 heat sinks, but have varying speeds. Why would you ever take the slow ones? There is no benefit to make up for the lost speed on the std 160 and 165. Just eliminate the bad engines that you should never take.

Edited by Lehv, 20 February 2021 - 09:17 PM.

[LGBTQIAplus Ally]

I feel like there isn't a good reason to take SSRM2 or 4s.
LBX 5 feels pretty useless, as well as clan AC 5, 10 and 20.
Buff lrms velocity, nerf ams, make lrms get their own locks.
Flamers don't seem particularly useful.
All the IS Small lasers probably need love.
Clan lasers don't feel great lately, but I remember when they were great, so they're probably ok.
RAC5s probably need some love.
Snub nose/Light PPCs need some love.

In general I think all weapons should be severely nerfed (1/2 damage) and all armor buffed (doubled or tripled.). I love shooting things and I hate dying.