166 replies to this topic

[Alexandros]

What about us casual players that want the flavor of real battletech feeling? Why the game has to always shift to the minorities like "Gulag" and "champion" / "competitive people" that are not the majority?

You destroyed Gauss riffle by adding the charge , you gave the PPC splash only to clans, the same people held a campaign against the LRMS and now its a shame to play that weapon without being discriminated. Now you want to take away the fun we have from the PPCS (Since you all cry about reverting it). You keep destroying the very core of the playerbase ,the CASUALS.


Mechwarrior was about bringing different ideas to the table and surprise your enemies. Not ending up copying eachother's maximum effective builds that are already pre DECIDED by the minority.

You push a small company to do constant tuning according to your fetishes and not letting them develop SOMETHING NEW.

Edited by Alexandros, 19 March 2021 - 03:59 PM.

[John Bronco]

It's almost like if there wasn't such a massive chasm between good weapons and bad weapons that we'd all be free to try something new with our mechs and builds.

Or is there a proposal to allow that? Oh, yes? It's called gulag? Ok, cool.

[FupDup]

Gauss charge was PGI's idea, not Gulag's. And it's a good mechanic because it makes the weapon truly different from other ballistics instead of just being a super AC/15.

I dunno what your issue with Clans having PPC splash is. Are you asking for IS PPCs to have their direct damage reduced and splash added, or just splash added to their existing damage? Either way I don't see any urgent need for this, and I definitely don't know why you're blaming Gulag for that.

Ultimately I have several complaints about the Gulag's ideas (making several weapons compete for the same role instead of giving them different roles) but I just don't see how it's "anti-casual." Most of the changes are fine from a casual soup queue perspective.

Edited by FupDup, 19 March 2021 - 04:04 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

I'm going to be honest with you.

Neither do I. I simply agree with them.

I ain't part of the 20+ people working in it, and I'm pretty sure it's mostly the high-end people than the low-end people when they said they have low-skill people in the panel as well. There's always a difference in philosophy, and though their changes is nice, there's still min-maxing BS there that they would rather keep.

But I have seen the work and effort they have put in, made me believe in them more than PGI right now.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 11 April 2021 - 09:17 PM.

[Gas Guzzler]

Alexandros, on 19 March 2021 - 03:56 PM, said:

What about us casual players that want the flavor of real battletech feeling? Why the game has to always shift to the minorities like "Gulag" and "champion" / "competitive people" that are not the majority?

You destroyed Gauss riffle by adding the charge , you gave the PPC splash only to clans, the same people held a campaign against the LRMS and now its a shame to play that weapon without being discriminated. Now you want to take away the fun we have from the PPCS (Since you all cry about reverting it). You keep destroying the very core of the playerbase ,the CASUALS.


Mechwarrior was about bringing different ideas to the table and surprise your enemies. Not ending up copying eachother's maximum effective builds that are already pre DECIDED by the minority.

You push a small company to do constant tuning according to your fetishes and not letting them develop SOMETHING NEW.

I play casually and I play what's fun.

You can play casually too, no one is stopping you. The "gulag"s changers aren't about comp players only, its about balanced weapons and a reason to take more weapons.

FupDup, on 19 March 2021 - 04:01 PM, said:

Ultimately I have several complaints about the Gulag's ideas (making several weapons compete for the same role instead of giving them different roles) but I just don't see how it's "anti-casual." Most of the changes are fine from a casual soup queue perspective.

I mean there are only so many different roles a weapon can take. If the role is "useless", is that a good reason to make the weapon useless too?

[Alexandros]

FupDup, on 19 March 2021 - 04:01 PM, said:

Gauss charge was PGI's idea, not Gulag's. And it's a good mechanic because it makes the weapon truly different from other ballistics instead of just being a super AC/15.

I dunno what your issue with Clans having PPC splash is. Are you asking for IS PPCs to have their direct damage reduced and splash added, or just splash added to their existing damage? Either way I don't see any urgent need for this, and I definitely don't know why you're blaming Gulag for that.

Ultimately I have several complaints about the Gulag's ideas (making several weapons compete for the same role instead of giving them different roles) but I just don't see how it's "anti-casual." Most of the changes are fine from a casual soup queue perspective.

My point is that major changes happen when the "elite" community starts whining. Affecting the rest of us. And yes By Lore PPC does splash damage. (all of them)

[FupDup]

Gas Guzzler, on 19 March 2021 - 04:06 PM, said:

I mean there are only so many different roles a weapon can take. If the role is "useless", is that a good reason to make the weapon useless too?

It's not all or nothing. There are other ways to do it.

For example, with the HMG debate we could ramp up its DPS to 1.75-2.0 so that it absolutely mauls people up close, instead of making it the same range as the regular MG so your choice is mostly dependent on your hardpoint quantity (few hardpoints = HMG, many hardpoints = MG).

Edited by FupDup, 19 March 2021 - 04:15 PM.

[MisterSomaru]

Alexandros, on 19 March 2021 - 04:09 PM, said:

My point is that major changes happen when the "elite" community starts whining. Affecting the rest of us. And yes By Lore PPC does splash damage. (all of them)

please point out the exact book that ppcs do splash damage in, and what year it was released. And in which game every PPC does splash damage. I'll wait.

[FupDup]

MisterSomaru, on 19 March 2021 - 04:17 PM, said:

please point out the exact book that ppcs do splash damage in, and what year it was released. And in which game every PPC does splash damage. I'll wait.

The only example I can think of is the SNPPC is HBS-Battlemech working like a shotgun. That's about it. PPCs have always been fully pinpoint otherwise.

[Gas Guzzler]

FupDup, on 19 March 2021 - 04:13 PM, said:

It's not all or nothing. There are other ways to do it.

For example, with the HMG debate we could ramp up its DPS to 1.75-2.0 so that it absolutely mauls people up close, instead of making it the same range as the regular MG so your choice is mostly dependent on your hardpoint quantity (few hardpoints = HMG, many hardpoints = MG).

That's fair, I wouldn't mind trying that instead.

[Meep Meep]

Alexandros, on 19 March 2021 - 03:56 PM, said:

the same people held a campaign against the LRMS and now its a shame to play that weapon without being discriminated.

I don't understand. Lrm are in the best place they have been since launch and no one tells me to not use them. Who is discriminating against lurmsters?

[Laser Kiwi]

Alexandros, on 19 March 2021 - 04:09 PM, said:

My point is that major changes happen when the "elite" community starts whining. Affecting the rest of us. And yes By Lore PPC does splash damage. (all of them)

Yeah i just went back through every iteration of the rule books since the 80's cause i felt you were plain ol' incorrect and i can't find a single version containing a splash damage for ppcs, what lore is this you are referring too? I mean if you've got it great, wouldn't be the first time i played a game wrong for 30 years.

In fact splash damage was added by mwo because clan er ppcs do 15 points of damage, but 15 in one spot is far too dangerous for head shot snipers (or even the ct) at the time so they transfered 5 points to splash to help the IS weapons compete, an actual balance move.

imagine the direstar if all 15 points from 11 ppcs went to one area instead of just 10

Edited by Laser Kiwi, 19 March 2021 - 04:47 PM.

[MyriadDigits]

Alexandros, on 19 March 2021 - 03:56 PM, said:

What about us casual players that want the flavor of real battletech feeling? Why the game has to always shift to the minorities like "Gulag" and "champion" / "competitive people" that are not the majority?

Oh boy.

Alexandros, on 19 March 2021 - 03:56 PM, said:

You destroyed Gauss riffle by adding the charge,

Not the fault of Gulag, or even the general competitive playerbase. That was PGI.

Alexandros, on 19 March 2021 - 03:56 PM, said:

you gave the PPC splash only to clans,

Also PGI.

Alexandros, on 19 March 2021 - 03:56 PM, said:

the same people held a campaign against the LRMS and now its a shame to play that weapon without being discriminated.

Its not just Gulag/Competitive players that hate LRMs. Plenty of casuals out rage out plenty because they got lurmed into oblivion before they even got to shoot anything.

Alexandros, on 19 March 2021 - 03:56 PM, said:

Now you want to take away the fun we have from the PPCS (Since you all cry about reverting it). You keep destroying the very core of the playerbase ,the CASUALS.

Once again its not just Gulag/Competitive players that are against this change. Plenty of casuals don't like waiting 3 centuries to fire their magnet guns, or don't like how punishing it is to miss a target that's pushing up.

Alexandros, on 19 March 2021 - 03:56 PM, said:

Mechwarrior was about bringing different ideas to the table and surprise your enemies. Not ending up copying eachother's maximum effective builds that are already pre DECIDED by the minority.

The competitive community doesn't decide what works and what doesn't, they just know how to play the game and know how to read the numbers to figure out what is and isn't good. Believe it or not, the Gulag and competitive players hate having only 4 maximum effective builds standing on a peak practically miles above everything else. Its incredibly boring. They want the variety as much as you do, but you're letting some crazy prejudice against "the evil comp minority" blind you from seeing this.

When comp players tell you your build is bad, its rarely that they hate the very idea of the build, its just that fundamentally within the current state of balance its a bad build. The whole intention of the Gulag is to close the gap between good and bad so "that build is fundamentally awful" becomes "hey if you shave some armor here and move some ammo there you can get another heatsink".

Alexandros, on 19 March 2021 - 03:56 PM, said:

You push a small company to do constant tuning according to your fetishes and not letting them develop SOMETHING NEW.

PGI has never listened to the community, minority or otherwise. If they go through with the Gulag Public Test Server it will be the first time that they've listened to any part of the community.

[Temporary Axis]

Alexandros, on 19 March 2021 - 03:56 PM, said:

What about us casual players that want the flavor of real battletech feeling? Why the game has to always shift to the minorities like "Gulag" and "champion" / "competitive people" that are not the majority?

You destroyed Gauss riffle by adding the charge , you gave the PPC splash only to clans, the same people held a campaign against the LRMS and now its a shame to play that weapon without being discriminated. Now you want to take away the fun we have from the PPCS (Since you all cry about reverting it). You keep destroying the very core of the playerbase ,the CASUALS.


Mechwarrior was about bringing different ideas to the table and surprise your enemies. Not ending up copying eachother's maximum effective builds that are already pre DECIDED by the minority.

You push a small company to do constant tuning according to your fetishes and not letting them develop SOMETHING NEW.

It's almost like all your anger and frustration is targeted at comp players instead of the party responsible for all the changes you have illustrated...

I invite you to just wait for the PTS. See how you feel about weapons systems after trying the gulag values.

If you don't like them, then you can genuinely complain.

And for the record, the gulag is made up of a mix of players of all skill levels with the singular goal of making weapons systems fun (and useful) again to all.

[Wildstreak]

1 - I do disagree with some things this 'Gulag' suggests and can live with disagreeing with them.

2 - I do not know who makes it up but the trend in these I have seen done in other games is to have participants of mixed skill, not all Pros or excluding them.

3 - PGI is kinda late to doing anything like this, then to be fair some games never do this at all.

[Alexandros]

MisterSomaru, on 19 March 2021 - 04:17 PM, said:

please point out the exact book that ppcs do splash damage in, and what year it was released. And in which game every PPC does splash damage. I'll wait.

It damages the electronics on the area the "shell" falls and disintegrates thats why it has the safety of the 90 meters on the classic ppc (so it doesnt explode on close quarters impact) - I assumed this kind of "area effect" counts as "damage".

[XX Sulla XX]

From what I have seen the bad changes have come from people at PGI not comp players or the gulag.

[Vlad Ward]

This is bait.

[jjm1]

Yeah, what is the "real BattleTech feeling".

Make your suggestions, but don't just rubbish all this collaborative work they have done.

[My Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ]

Alexandros, on 19 March 2021 - 05:46 PM, said:

It damages the electronics on the area the "shell" falls and disintegrates thats why it has the safety of the 90 meters on the classic ppc (so it doesnt explode on close quarters impact) - I assumed this kind of "area effect" counts as "damage".

If that was the case then why do both snubs and ERPPCs lack a minimum range? Don't state something as fact then turn around to say "oh well I just assumed" to try cover your ***.