I hope there will be a text transcript of the podcasts going up soon. I can't necessarily listen to that long of a video.
People have beaten the numbers to death so I don't want to address that in this post. What I wanted to give my input on is the overall goals that the patch supposedly hoped to achieve.
Re, each gauss having its own niche: I think this is a good thing! But this was the wrong way to do it. They should be like you think when you hear the names- light gauss light, small damage, fast projectile; gauss, middle of the road; heavy, large slug (doesn't travel far) but beeg damage. And they should all be viable at their range brackets. Light gauss was the outlier in that regard, being high dps but still not enough to justify the tonnage, and any future patch should address this discrepancy.
Re, each PPC having its own niche: This, too, is a good idea! But we need to keep in mind that aside from ERPPCs most of the PPCs aren't used on their own, but rather as auxiliary weapons. For example, 2 snub PPCs + 1 AC20 is a common MAD-3R build. The PPCs are there to supplement the AC20. Likewise the 4lb10 + 1 sppc Annihilator build runs the snub as an extra punch when it can spare heat. Any attempt to address the roles of these weapons should consider that not every weapon needs to be the star of its show. It's fine for lppcs to be backups or snubs to support lb20s. Just as long as everything feels strong, I'm happy.
Re, MASC: I have no idea why anyone would think MASC's only role should be straight-line speed. Were that line of thinking true, most MASC-capable mechs simply would not run it. No one would've bought the Spirit Bear under that philosophy after engine desync because it can only move because of its MASC. Likewise the stealth Flea is only better than the Pirate's Bane because of its MASC, and even then only because of MASC's boost to agility. These changes need to be reverted, and if anything the bigger MASCs need to be improved from their previous iterations unless/until agility is improved across the board.
Re, MRM health boosts: This implies that AMS is too strong which I find laughable. It's actually too weak, being a purely-defensive tonnage use that's entirely negated by enemy team composition. The similarly-defensive ECM is still useful against a team with 0 missiles due to its function against target identification. Instead of indirect nerfs to AMS it could use either a direct or indirect buff (I'm looking at laser AMS specifically, which is far too hot to justify being run at all).
Re, AC velocity buffs: Positive progress, but not far enough, and the wording made it sound like all ACs (including LBs and UACs) were getting the buff, confusing many in the community not familiar with how Matt words things. Consider an edit to the language used to describe changes in the future.
Re volume change: For the first time in my years playing I was able to start the game up in my bedroom and not hear the login sequence in the kitchen where I go to make tea after I start a program, so thank you.
Re proposed future map changes: I urge you to consider not just sight lines and spawns of some maps, but also their size. I played a polar game this week in which the teams went eight full minutes without seeing each other. I average five minutes of walking. I'd like the new level designer to consider making maps (grim, alpine, polar) smaller and to reduce the prevalence of central structures around which people "nascar" (grim, mining, canyon). I also request that the designer look at making the blizzard conditions of Frozen City less blinding as I find those visibility conditions just as bad as Hibernal's lighting issues.
Re, JayZ's input on trials: Thank you for listening to the community on this one thing, at least. It's unfortunate that the person least qualified to balance the game- someone who has admitted on forums that he hasn't played the game in a year as recently as this week- was allowed to tweak the builds before they were put live, but this is progress.
Most important to me out of all of this is that Russ has allowed Daeron more freedom to interact with the community than Tina ever had, and it's refreshing to have a CM openly willing to admit to PGI's mistakes. Thanks for that, and thanks for reading.
Edited to clarify my comments about MASC.
Edited by Tranderas, 17 March 2021 - 02:28 PM.
20
SirSmokes, on 17 March 2021 - 12:32 PM, said:
