400 replies to this topic

[dario03]

ccrider, on 20 March 2021 - 01:10 PM, said:

I've read your documents, I read the forums; I'm the minority. Most players dont; testing a third of the changes is going to result in negative feedback. We all play certain modes the most; I play FP, you guys are comp but most players are solo casualty players who log in, shoot robots and never look at forums or anything else. Testing and hoping they realize they need to judge with an open mind is a nice thought but it's not going to happen. I'm willing to test with an open mind even though I don't use most weapons because it's not worth it to me to use things I don't enjoy in the 3 hours a week I play. I am fairly certain I will be in the minority. I seriously believe that testing all variables together gives you the best chance to implement your changes; a partial test will be judged by most players as the only change and lower TTK will be a deal breaker for a lot of players.

I understand that, I have on multiple occasions suggested it myself. Even suggested just throwing everything on the live server just for the publicity of it and to show the game is massively changing. Could do frequent small patches to fix any issues. However thats not how PGI wants to do it, they want to change the weapons, see how that goes, then change something else, see how that goes, etc, etc. Both approaches have their ups and downs and would most likely result in having to go back to change things over time.
PGI knows this is only a partial test so hopefully they look at criticisms with that in mind.

[Zigmund Freud]

MyriadDigits, on 20 March 2021 - 03:14 PM, said:

I nuked a Hellfire last night with arty. Just instant death, on a heavy mech. The player in question didn't even get to fire a shot.

Strikes at least need a nerf, because that's honestly pretty messed up.

Honestly, I don't even get why they are here at all. Sure they were MC sink before, so maybe somehow increased the profits or whatever. But now it's just no brain weapon that has no counters and is extremely frustrating to deal with, especially for slow or unlucky.

[dario03]

Zigmund Freud, on 20 March 2021 - 03:32 PM, said:

Honestly, I don't even get why they are here at all. Sure they were MC sink before, so maybe somehow increased the profits or whatever. But now it's just no brain weapon that has no counters and is extremely frustrating to deal with, especially for slow or unlucky.

They are here to break up grouped mechs and hit camping spots. Thing is, they do not need to be as powerful to accomplish that.

[ccrider]

dario03, on 20 March 2021 - 03:19 PM, said:

I understand that, I have on multiple occasions suggested it myself. Even suggested just throwing everything on the live server just for the publicity of it and to show the game is massively changing. Could do frequent small patches to fix any issues. However thats not how PGI wants to do it, they want to change the weapons, see how that goes, then change something else, see how that goes, etc, etc. Both approaches have their ups and downs and would most likely result in having to go back to change things over time.
PGI knows this is only a partial test so hopefully they look at criticisms with that in mind.

My personal suggestion would be to put all changes on the live server and make it a 2 week test event, but obviously Minot judging you guys because, ultimately, PGI makes these decisions. I just think that partial tests are inefficient when it comes to garnering honest feedback. Anyhoo, good luck; hopefully at least c-spl get better so I can go back and run my Red line without gimping myself.

Zigmund Freud, on 20 March 2021 - 03:32 PM, said:

Honestly, I don't even get why they are here at all. Sure they were MC sink before, so maybe somehow increased the profits or whatever. But now it's just no brain weapon that has no counters and is extremely frustrating to deal with, especially for slow or unlucky.

Half their damage and restrict each mech to 1 arty or air strike and they become ok. They are too powerful and prevalent at the moment.

Edited by ccrider, 20 March 2021 - 03:39 PM.

[Mal Bolge]

dario03, on 20 March 2021 - 03:36 PM, said:

They are here to break up grouped mechs and hit camping spots. Thing is, they do not need to be as powerful to accomplish that.

They have never done that, so that's just a poor excuse for keeping them. They are free damage and players like to keep their free damage, it's as simple as that.

[Lousyten]

Mal Nilsum, on 20 March 2021 - 03:49 PM, said:

They have never done that,

Never? Really?

[Vorpal Puppy]

I will start by saying I agree wholeheartedly with anything that nerfs or removes the free magic damage of airstrikes and artys. If I cant shoot the plane down, or go destroy the artillery battery, it's magic and has no place in this game.

Most of these changes when taken individually look good, however, when taken as a whole, I think there are simply too many benefits given to the "poke from power position aka alpha strike and hide" play style. I will be glad to check it out, but I fear this takes the meta on a hard turn back to poke-warrior.

[dario03]

Mal Nilsum, on 20 March 2021 - 03:49 PM, said:

They have never done that, so that's just a poor excuse for keeping them. They are free damage and players like to keep their free damage, it's as simple as that.

They have done that. They are also free damage dealers but they definitely hurt grouped up mechs and camping spots. Like I said though, less damage would still allow them to do that, and it would lessen their free damage.

[FupDup]

dario03, on 20 March 2021 - 03:36 PM, said:

They are here to break up grouped mechs and hit camping spots. Thing is, they do not need to be as powerful to accomplish that.

No, they are not here for that. They are here as a C-Bill sink, just like Cool Shot and UAV. That is the one and only reason that any of them exist.

[Wid1046]

I fully agree with removing or at least significantly nerfing arty and airstrikes. If they are kept, they definitely should not count towards total damage dealt or match score.

I'd also be okay with only lights being able to equip them. Maybe select mediums like the cicada could also be quirked to allow them to be equiped.

Edited by Wid1046, 20 March 2021 - 04:53 PM.

[FupDup]

Wid1046, on 20 March 2021 - 04:42 PM, said:

I fully agree with removing or at least significantly nerfing arty and airstrikes. If they are kept, they definitely should not count towards total damage dealt or match score.

I'd also be okay with only lights being able to equip them. Maybe select mediums like the cicada could also be quirked to allow them to be equiped.

One advantage of the old module system is that we could give different mechs different module capacities and module types, so we'd be able to do that. A downfall of the new skill maze is that everybody can take everything.

[dario03]

FupDup, on 20 March 2021 - 04:40 PM, said:

No, they are not here for that. They are here as a C-Bill sink, just like Cool Shot and UAV. That is the one and only reason that any of them exist.

Guy I quoted covered the cost sink aspect. But the reason people would buy them is to deal damage by dropping them on groups and campers.

[Navid A1]

what do people think about this:

Artillery strike:
- Damage per shell reduce from 15 to 7
- Duration from 3 to 5
- Total number of shells from 10 to 16

Air:
- Damage per bomb from 15 to 10
- One more bomb at the end. From 6 to 7

[dario03]

I like the arty numbers because it allows the weapon to be more area denial but less damage.
Air I'm not sure about. Better than it is now, but might still be to high of damage per shell. I would like to have more coverage in its area of effect (same size aoe) but with less damage. So more consistent aoe but less damage overall.

Edited by dario03, 20 March 2021 - 05:26 PM.

[PocketYoda]

IS ACs would be far better if they had a damage increase..

• AC2 5dmg
  
• AC5 8dmg
  
• AC10 12dmg
  
• AC20 20dmg

Some table top players run home brew with those damages to make the ACs viable..

[Y E O N N E]

Uh, AC/2 and AC/5 would be OP as heck at 5 and 8 damage, each.

[Bud Crue]

Navid A1, on 20 March 2021 - 05:15 PM, said:

what do people think about this:

Artillery strike:
- Damage per shell reduce from 15 to 7
- Duration from 3 to 5
- Total number of shells from 10 to 16

Air:
- Damage per bomb from 15 to 10
- One more bomb at the end. From 6 to 7

Whatever. This would just be saving me from myself. On the one hand, I think, "take two strikes, it's free damage". but on the other, I can't help but recognize that about half the time, no matter where I put a strike, my team runs into it. So, by all means, reduce their effectiveness. Save me from myself! 526 team damage is my record btw.

[Kynesis]

So.... it's just cranking up the damage on everything?
Wasn't the point of jams to make people less likely to just face-tank through the opposition & play slightly more tactically?

These changes will simply make better players even more dominant.

[Navid A1]

Kynesis, on 20 March 2021 - 11:32 PM, said:

So.... it's just cranking up the damage on everything?
Wasn't the point of jams to make people less likely to just face-tank through the opposition & play slightly more tactically?

These changes will simply make better players even more dominant.

Pretty sure you're going to cook yourself in no time if you try to do that.
There are a lot of things attached to that no jam mechanic.

[MyriadDigits]

Samial, on 20 March 2021 - 06:32 PM, said:

IS ACs would be far better if they had a damage increase..

• AC2 5dmg
  
• AC5 8dmg
  
• AC10 12dmg
  
• AC20 20dmg

Some table top players run home brew with those damages to make the ACs viable..

You realize those home brew values are used because TT ACs all have identical fire rates, right? Your suggestion is so completely tone deaf to actual values in MWO right now its not even funny. To put it into perspective if you translated current MWO stats to TT, an AC2 would do 11 damage, an AC5 would do 12, and an AC10 would do 17.

If you still can't figure out why nobody else thinks this is a good idea, go ask your tabletop group how they feel about AC2 doing 25 damage, AC5 doing 20 damage, AC10 doing 20 damage, and AC20 still doing just 20 damage. Because frankly, that's exactly what you just suggested.