702 replies to this topic

[byter75]

DAEDALOS513, on 06 April 2021 - 01:12 PM, said:

...

You just wanna rush into this and mass buff because it would take too long to fine tune 3, 4 weapons at a time?.. this, after you called pgi's past work 'bumbling?' That's the pot calling the kettle black in my book.

Life is always going to be a matter of advantages and disadvantages, cost benefit analysis and trade offs.

A 10% buff to a weapon system can have far reaching consequences on many mechs in the game and the meta in many different game modes, whilst a 10% agility buff or quirk buff to a particular underperforming variant might effectively do little to no effect how the game plays.

For right now though, the general gist I get from many people is that they are tired of the months of endless debate and little change, they are tired of PGI's old approach of every buff being balanced out by a nerf (like what we got in the March patch).

These changes are playing a bit with fire, though I think a lot of them are pushing the game in the right direction, it's great to finally shake off the cobwebs and to have a game balance done by some other people for a change.

I like the changes to arty and the many unique new playstyles offered with the changes to weapons like lgauss, lppc and smaller mrm launchers. The power creep for laser vomit is a little concerning and the missile changes generally seem sloppy rn but hopefully that is recognised and addressed in the future.

Edited by byter75, 06 April 2021 - 04:55 PM.

[Jack Shayu Walker]

katoult, on 06 April 2021 - 12:40 PM, said:

In Tier 1 matches currently the 3 minute mark is the decisive moment where one side starts getting killed off - and you rarely see matches longer than 7-8 minutes. The TTK tends to be half what it is in low tiers.

Matches regularly hitting a turning point at 3 minutes isn’t the same as matches regularly being over after 4 minutes. Also as has been mentioned, these weapon buffs will have the least impact on tier 1, as players in that bracket already tend to run the optimized setups these new buffs are balanced against.

For the record, I know what tier 1 is like. I was in tier 1 for a long time before they did the reset. I just haven’t bothered to play much given the current state of affairs. You can bet I’ll be back at it after this April Patch.

[Jack Shayu Walker]

DAEDALOS513, on 06 April 2021 - 01:12 PM, said:

I'm perfectly safe on my 'high horse'.. with 50,000+ matches into this game I'm very comfortable up here. Once you reach tier 1 you'll be lucky to be in matches that last 5 minutes.

Reminiscing with your rose coloured glasses does nobody any good.. there were different variables back then.. the games were 'funner' as you put it because there were far fewer strong mechs and weapons back then. So in relation.. those weapons you speak of were in effect stronger. There were no veagles that can boat everything and the kitchen sink, blood asps (with insane dps, mounts and ecm to boot), no faf's with their one shot kills, no vulcans with their broken hitboxes, etc.. so attributing the fun you had in the past based solely on weapons is flawed. Mechs were also smaller.. ie smaller hitboxes.

You just wanna rush into this and mass buff because it would take too long to fine tune 3, 4 weapons at a time?.. this, after you called pgi's past work 'bumbling?' That's the pot calling the kettle black in my book.

Ha. I don’t mean high horse because your in tier 1 dude. I mean high horse because your acting like a condescending ***** for next to no reason. I’ve been in tier 1 for most of the time that tiers have been a thing, so I don’t need your expertise. By the time PGI did a reset I was beginning to become too irritated with the state of this game to keep playing and get my tier back up. After this well thought out round of buffs I’ll be glad to join you in the tier 1 saddle partner

I honestly don’t get the complaints about the veagle. But maybe I just don’t play the mechs it’s good against, so I dunno. The Vulcan and Fafnir aren’t getting any more broken with this change either so I’m not sure why any of that matters. I guess we’ll see on 4/20.

[DAEDALOS513]

Jack Shayu Walker, on 06 April 2021 - 02:55 PM, said:

Ha. I don’t mean high horse because your in tier 1 dude. I mean high horse because your acting like a condescending ***** for next to no reason. I’ve been in tier 1 for most of the time that tiers have been a thing, so I don’t need your expertise. By the time PGI did a reset I was beginning to become too irritated with the state of this game to keep playing and get my tier back up. After this well thought out round of buffs I’ll be glad to join you in the tier 1 saddle partner

I honestly don’t get the complaints about the veagle. But maybe I just don’t play the mechs it’s good against, so I dunno. The Vulcan and Fafnir aren’t getting any more broken with this change either so I’m not sure why any of that matters. I guess we’ll see on 4/20.

If I'm coming off condescending then you're mistaking my words of experience and common sense for braggadocio. But honestly, it doesn't take 50,000 matches to know what effect buffing all these weapons will do to the game.. even if many don't want to see it.. they just want their cookies. Keep OP clan peeps, nom nom.. buff IS lasers across the board, nom nom.. uac2 buff, nom nom nom.. moar moar FEED ME SEYMOUR!

It's so easy to see what they doin.. the 'elite' got bored of their few op weapon systems that they abused over the years and wanted to add variety to their repertoire by buffing everything else.. no way would they ever consider nerfing their precious..

Edited by DAEDALOS513, 06 April 2021 - 04:10 PM.

[Eurystheus]

Could I get some clarification on the Light Gauss? I must be missing something. Here is what I see in the original post:
Light Gauss Rifle (IS):
Damage increased to 10 (from 8)
Ammo per ton decreased to 20 (from 25)
Cooldown increased to 3.5 (from 2.6)
Velocity increased to 2200 m/s (from 2000)
Range increased to 880m (from 750)
Max range increased to 2200m (from 1500)
Heat penalty is removed.

But when I look at the current Light Gauss, I see:

Damage 11
Cooldown 5.25
Range 810m
Max Range 1600m

Is the damage decreasing from 11 to 10?
Is the cooldown decreasing from 5.25 to 3.5?

Or am I missing something???

[Jack Shayu Walker]

DAEDALOS513, on 06 April 2021 - 04:09 PM, said:

If I'm coming off condescending then you're mistaking my words of experience and common sense for braggadocio. But honestly, it doesn't take 50,000 matches to know what effect buffing all these weapons will do to the game.. even if many don't want to see it.. they just want their cookies. Keep OP clan peeps, nom nom.. buff IS lasers across the board, nom nom.. uac2 buff, nom nom nom.. moar moar FEED ME SEYMOUR!

It's so easy to see what they doin.. the 'elite' got bored of their few op weapon systems that they abused over the years and wanted to add variety to their repertoire by buffing everything else.. no way would they ever consider nerfing their precious..

Oh my bad. Didn’t realize bragging about one’s “experience” and quite literally comparing people who disagree with you to children wasn’t condescending. It’s whatever man. Lets set aside the fact that I probably have comparable experience. Your talking down at me because you have more experience, and thats how you know better... but you’re decrying the Cauldron who made these changes, the leaders of whome have more experience than you or I for being out of touch elites?

Isn’t that a bit ironic?

Edited by Jack Shayu Walker, 06 April 2021 - 04:42 PM.

[Krasnopesky]

Eurystheus, on 06 April 2021 - 04:12 PM, said:

Could I get some clarification on the Light Gauss? I must be missing something. Here is what I see in the original post:
Light Gauss Rifle (IS):
Damage increased to 10 (from 8)
Ammo per ton decreased to 20 (from 25)
Cooldown increased to 3.5 (from 2.6)
Velocity increased to 2200 m/s (from 2000)
Range increased to 880m (from 750)
Max range increased to 2200m (from 1500)
Heat penalty is removed.

But when I look at the current Light Gauss, I see:

Damage 11
Cooldown 5.25
Range 810m
Max Range 1600m

Is the damage decreasing from 11 to 10?
Is the cooldown decreasing from 5.25 to 3.5?

Or am I missing something???

The comparisons between 'existing' weapons and the intended changes are actually the weapon values before the recent March patch. The March patch received a lot of negative feedback and as such a roll back of the values was announced before this announcement. The premarch values also remained the same for around 2 years so they are the values most people are familiar with.

[ShooterMcGavin80]

DAEDALOS513, on 06 April 2021 - 04:09 PM, said:

But honestly, it doesn't take 50,000 matches to know what effect buffing all these weapons will do to the game..

As a top end of Tier 1 player also with a shameful amount of games played (despite nearly always skilling up painful non-meta builds while solo dropping), color me also concerned about buffing pretty much everything.

[Albert C]

Krasnopesky, on 06 April 2021 - 05:22 AM, said:

ATM9 and LRM20 are the best comparison as they have the same weight and slots. I have outlined the three main advantages ATMs have below (I am aware that LRMs have other advantages, but this is what distinguishes the two weapon systems):

Spread
Currently ATM9 has a direct fire spread of 3.5 whereas LRM20 has 5.05. This difference is quite large and can mean that you simply connect with more missiles against very small Mechs and do a lot more focused damage on larger Mechs (you can see when shooting a Heavy or Assault with ATMs the CT typically absorbs a lot of missiles).

Firing Duration
ATM9s shoot all their missiles in 0.4 seconds. LRM20s shoot all their missiles in 0.95 seconds. Again, this is a huge difference that has a large impact on how these weapon systems are used. Far quicker fire duration means that ATMs have to expose less to shoot and can thus peak and/or 'poptart' a lot more effectively. It also means that AMS has less time to shoot down the missiles, as the missiles are more tightly clustered compared to LRM20s large stream (of course this is also impacted by other factors like missile health and missile count). This lowered firing duration also results in ATM9s actually shooting slightly quicker than LRM20s as their overall recycle time is lower (5.4 seconds vs 5.55).

Damage
ATM9s still do more damage at shorter ranges than LRMs. A very typical loadout for Medium and Heavy Mechs is 3x ATM9 (Hunchback, Huntsman, Vapor Eagle, Hellfire, Mad Dog, Summoner can all do it comfortably, many of them even more):

3x ATM9: 67.5 damage at short range
3x LRM20: 60 damage at all ranges

These three elements combine to make ATMs a distinct weapon system with obvious advantages over their LRM counterparts.

ATM vs LBX
If you're going to compare ATMs to a Cyclops with 4x LBX10 at least compare it to another 90 tonne Mech (I don't think these weapon systems are great to compare due to how very different they are). Lets go with the Supernova that does typically run 4x ATM12.

4x ATM12 is 20 slots, 28 tonnes and can use Clan XL engines. 4x LBX10 is 24 slots, 44 tonnes and in the Cyclop's case is forced to use a standard engine.

4x ATM12 will do 120 damage at short range in one volley. In 5 seconds it can basically shoot twice (with cooldown nodes), so that is 240 damage in 5 seconds.

4x LBX10 will be 40 damage in one shot. In 5 seconds it can shoot three times so it does 120 damage in a bit under 5 seconds. If you expand the timeframe so the LBX10 can shoot four times then it does 160 damage.

So we are looking at 240 damage from only having to fire twice with a lockon weapon vs 160 damage from needing to shoot 4 times in the best case scenario. Noting that the LBX weapon system is more difficult to equip due to greater slots and weight.

If you want to compare only 2x ATM12s to LBX (which again I think is not a great comparison) then compare it to 2x LBX10 (2x ATM12 are often ran on medium Mechs and 2x LB10 are often ran on mediums too). The results are basically the same.

Of course the differences between these weapons are great and the ATMs have counters that LBX do not, but those are elements that balance the different weapon systems.

So the ATM9 does have a spread advantage over lrm, good to know. But one of the reason I think ATM is much inferior than LRM at long range in reality is its low flight arc(you can adjust the arc upward only slightly by cursor) as I mentioned before. Even with the adjusted flight arc the ATM long range mode can only work consistently in maps like Polar Highland which most people dislikes. That along with inferior ammo and heat efficiency compared to lrm is one of the reason the ATM's long range mode only works on paper and I doubt the dmg increase can help shifting the playstyle.
Speaking of AMS, 40 dmg is only slightly lees fked than 28(or 1? dont exactly remember). It's still a fked value considering the weight you have invested into it. Also I noticed the COR7A wasn't tested, which is the most common ams boat nowadays with a 10% ams cover area quirk, and 3atm12s will deal less than 40 dmg so long as it's close, which severely limits atm's effectiveness even with the health buff. And thats not counting ams mounted on other mechs and laser ams will be a very viable option(especially for Clanner) for the next patch.
Speaking of 4LB10 vs 4ATM12, snv pilot needs to control its distance between 130+(due to mech size) and 245+ meters for 120 dmg potential. An experienced Cyclops pilot will either choose to push at that range or stay at med or long range to pump out its cold dps. In the first case the snv pilot might not have a chance to fire the second volley and definitely can't fire three times, while CP keeps pumping out shells at close proximity. In the latter case the snv has a dmg between 48 to 96 and does not have advantage over CP's cold dps. Snv isn't exactly good at poptarting as you have to sacrifice ammo, weight and space for heavy JJs and 4ATM 12 cant fire without penalty(ammo shortages and heat are bigger problems for atm than lbx). And that's basically the only clan assault suitable for carrying 4ATM12s(MCIiI 4 missile tubes do not point upward) Basically the ATM trades flexibility for situational max alpha dmg potential. And the proposed change is nerfing its dmg potential while not really increasing its flexibility enough to compensate for it(due to the reason I mentioned above). That's why I think the optimal range should increase. Unless you can change some of the basic game mechanics then the ATM will always serve as a highly situational weapon that trades consistency and flexibility(other fire modes suck as PGI won't properly implement ammo switching) for dmg.

Edited by Albert C, 06 April 2021 - 06:33 PM.

[Lurm God]

DAEDALOS513, on 06 April 2021 - 01:12 PM, said:

I'm perfectly safe on my 'high horse'.. with 50,000+ matches into this game I'm very comfortable up here. Once you reach tier 1 you'll be lucky to be in matches that last 5 minutes.

Reminiscing with your rose coloured glasses does nobody any good.. there were different variables back then.. the games were 'funner' as you put it because there were far fewer strong mechs and weapons back then. So in relation.. those weapons you speak of were in effect stronger. There were no veagles that can boat everything and the kitchen sink, blood asps (with insane dps, mounts and ecm to boot), no faf's with their one shot kills, no vulcans with their broken hitboxes, etc.. so attributing the fun you had in the past based solely on weapons is flawed. Mechs were also smaller.. ie smaller hitboxes.

You just wanna rush into this and mass buff because it would take too long to fine tune 3, 4 weapons at a time?.. this, after you called pgi's past work 'bumbling?' That's the pot calling the kettle black in my book.

Hi Daedalos,
You do realise clan PPC's in the current patch are more powerful than they were in the 2 previous years? This will be actively a nerf to clan PPCs and bringing other weapon types towards a more balanced state. Once the weapons are more balanced across the board then they can more effectively work on mobility and quirks. Just thought as someone interpreting the changes as I myself am not in the cauldron/gulag see them. Hell I would buff **** a lot harder if it was my choice. In saying all this I am only familiar in solaris, faction, comp and quickplay to about 50k games also so I may not have enough experience also

[ShooterMcGavin80]

Lurm God, on 06 April 2021 - 06:12 PM, said:

You do realise clan PPC's in the current patch are more powerful than they were in the 2 previous years?

That's debatable. Better for mid/long range static peaking for a long game, cERPPC's are not as versatile as they were pre-patch. With my 4xERPPC WHM-IIC pre-patch, I was actually relatively confident going in to close range and brawling vs. some enemies (though obviously weak versus dedicated brawlers). I also had some strange mixed builds with ERPPC's and SRM6A's which were pretty formidable brawlers. Post-patch, cERPPC's are better for mid/long range peaking in a static or drawn-out over time engagement, but they are not necessarily better than they were pre-patch in all contexts. Due to the lower dps, they're much less useful in short range engagements vs anything but an already weakened opponent. So IMHO, post-patch, the cERPPC has forced you into a more dedicated playstyle and cramped down on some interesting weapon synchronicities, and promoted boating rather than mixing.

Edited by ShooterMcGavin80, 06 April 2021 - 06:46 PM.

[Adette]

ShooterMcGavin80, on 06 April 2021 - 06:45 PM, said:

That's debatable. Better for mid/long range static peaking for a long game, cERPPC's are not as versatile as they were pre-patch. With my 4xERPPC WHM-IIC pre-patch, I was actually relatively confident going in to close range and brawling vs. some enemies (though obviously weak versus dedicated brawlers). I also had some strange mixed builds with ERPPC's and SRM6A's which were pretty formidable brawlers. Post-patch, cERPPC's are better for mid/long range peaking in a static or drawn-out over time engagement, but they are not necessarily better than they were pre-patch in all contexts. Due to the lower dps, they're much less useful in short range engagements vs anything but an already weakened opponent. So IMHO, post-patch, the cERPPC has forced you into a more dedicated playstyle and cramped down on some interesting weapon synchronicities, and promoted boating rather than mixing.

They also do 19.2 damage now due to PGI messing up the .XML ratio for splash damage.

[Krasnopesky]

ShooterMcGavin80, on 06 April 2021 - 06:45 PM, said:

That's debatable. Better for mid/long range static peaking for a long game, cERPPC's are not as versatile as they were pre-patch. With my 4xERPPC WHM-IIC pre-patch, I was actually relatively confident going in to close range and brawling vs. some enemies (though obviously weak versus dedicated brawlers). I also had some strange mixed builds with ERPPC's and SRM6A's which were pretty formidable brawlers. Post-patch, cERPPC's are better for mid/long range peaking in a static or drawn-out over time engagement, but they are not necessarily better than they were pre-patch in all contexts. Due to the lower dps, they're much less useful in short range engagements vs anything but an already weakened opponent. So IMHO, post-patch, the cERPPC has forced you into a more dedicated playstyle and cramped down on some interesting weapon synchronicities, and promoted boating rather than mixing.

I'm sorry, it really isn't debatable. Clan ERPPC are just flat out better than they ever have been.

In the current game they do 19.2 damage per shot (12 pinpoint plus 7.2 splash). This means they have better damage per heat, better sustained damage per second, better pinpoint damage, better splash damage, and better alpha (Firing 3 cERPPC). The only thing they don't have better is maximum DPS, but that has never mattered with cERPPC as you heatcap incredibly fast, well before max DPS even matters.

For example the 4 cERPPC Warhammer IIC you spoke about heatcaps before you can get your second 2+2 alpha out in the premarch patch, so it deals more damage for around 2 seconds in a push engagement. The entire rest of the time the current patch is better, even in the case of being pushed.

Pre-March Warhammer IIC (28 DHS): Shoots a 2+2 alpha for 60 damage, waits 5 seconds and shoots a second double cERPPC shot for 30 damage and then has to wait ~1 additional second to shoot the other double cERPPC shot (120 total damage). You are now heatcapped and the build with better sustained DPS wins out (current patch).

Current Warhammer IIC (28 DHS): Shoots a 2+2 alpha for 76.8 damage, waits 7 seconds and shoots another 2+2 alpha again, without even hitting max heatcap (153.6 total damage).

This means that in the one scenario you can find that the pre-March patch cERPPCs are better, they are only better for an entire 2 seconds. In literally all other scenarios and the times outside of 5-7 seconds into being pushed the current cERPPCs are better. This also presumes you are at 0 heat, which is not often the case (If you are higher than 0 heat it is even better for current patch cERPPCs).

Here are the two identical builds to compare:

Pre-March patch: https://thecauldron....9ef00a9_WHM-IIC
Current patch: https://mech.nav-alp...8aa5864_WHM-IIC

Here is the game code that shows the current attributes of Clan ERPPC:

Edited by Krasnopesky, 06 April 2021 - 08:18 PM.

[Voice of Kerensky]

I read the announcement of the upcoming patch. I read all the comments.
I have a discreet sense of optimism.
For a year now, I pumping all the mechs that are in the game (at least one from each chassis). Naturally, almost all the weapons in the game are installed on these mechs.
Thus, during this time, I managed to get acquainted with all the negative aspects of the weakest mechs and the weakest weapons.
On the one hand, I am very glad that the weapon, which gave me a lot of unpleasant hours in the game, will receive its portion of improvements.
On the other hand, I do not see any improvement in the mechs (especially the bad ones) that would allow the mechs to survive for a longer time. And this worries me.
I don't see any improvement (actually fixes from last year's bugs) in the spawning points.
I see no reduction in the size of the swollen mechs.
I do not see an increase in the maneuverability of bad mechs and their controllability.
I don't see a separation between solo and group queues.
But all this, although they are indirect fixes, but in fact they have a direct impact on the gameplay.
Analyzing all this, I come to the conclusion that after the introduction of the patch, the game on large assault mechs will become simply disgusting. The range of many weapons systems has been increased, the projectile flight speed has been increased, the damage of some systems has been increased, but the disgusting spawning points of Assault Mechs have remained the same (and I'm already starting to think that this will never be fixed), their monstrous dimensions remain the same, their terrible mobility remains the same. It is this combination of factors that prompts me to think that playing on assault mechs for an indefinite amount of time (months / years?) will be terrible.
I'm glad the weapon is getting upgraded. But I also do not forget about many other problems.
Thank you Cauldron, Mat and Daeron. Hopefully I will witness a real improvement the game.

[dario03]

Voice of Kerensky, on 07 April 2021 - 01:19 AM, said:

I read the announcement of the upcoming patch. I read all the comments.
I have a discreet sense of optimism.
For a year now, I pumping all the mechs that are in the game (at least one from each chassis). Naturally, almost all the weapons in the game are installed on these mechs.
Thus, during this time, I managed to get acquainted with all the negative aspects of the weakest mechs and the weakest weapons.
On the one hand, I am very glad that the weapon, which gave me a lot of unpleasant hours in the game, will receive its portion of improvements.
On the other hand, I do not see any improvement in the mechs (especially the bad ones) that would allow the mechs to survive for a longer time. And this worries me.
I don't see any improvement (actually fixes from last year's bugs) in the spawning points.
I see no reduction in the size of the swollen mechs.
I do not see an increase in the maneuverability of bad mechs and their controllability.
I don't see a separation between solo and group queues.
But all this, although they are indirect fixes, but in fact they have a direct impact on the gameplay.
Analyzing all this, I come to the conclusion that after the introduction of the patch, the game on large assault mechs will become simply disgusting. The range of many weapons systems has been increased, the projectile flight speed has been increased, the damage of some systems has been increased, but the disgusting spawning points of Assault Mechs have remained the same (and I'm already starting to think that this will never be fixed), their monstrous dimensions remain the same, their terrible mobility remains the same. It is this combination of factors that prompts me to think that playing on assault mechs for an indefinite amount of time (months / years?) will be terrible.
I'm glad the weapon is getting upgraded. But I also do not forget about many other problems.
Thank you Cauldron, Mat and Daeron. Hopefully I will witness a real improvement the game.

IIRC all of these are potentially being changed at some point. The decision was made to not change everything all at once. But maybe if the weapon changes go well, more changes can come out quicker.

[Storky]

Very interesting meta breaking changes. I'll be excited to come back in a game, especially with some yummy event

[Krasnopesky]

Voice of Kerensky, on 07 April 2021 - 01:19 AM, said:

I read the announcement of the upcoming patch. I read all the comments.
I have a discreet sense of optimism.
For a year now, I pumping all the mechs that are in the game (at least one from each chassis). Naturally, almost all the weapons in the game are installed on these mechs.
Thus, during this time, I managed to get acquainted with all the negative aspects of the weakest mechs and the weakest weapons.
On the one hand, I am very glad that the weapon, which gave me a lot of unpleasant hours in the game, will receive its portion of improvements.
On the other hand, I do not see any improvement in the mechs (especially the bad ones) that would allow the mechs to survive for a longer time. And this worries me.
I don't see any improvement (actually fixes from last year's bugs) in the spawning points.
I see no reduction in the size of the swollen mechs.
I do not see an increase in the maneuverability of bad mechs and their controllability.
I don't see a separation between solo and group queues.
But all this, although they are indirect fixes, but in fact they have a direct impact on the gameplay.
Analyzing all this, I come to the conclusion that after the introduction of the patch, the game on large assault mechs will become simply disgusting. The range of many weapons systems has been increased, the projectile flight speed has been increased, the damage of some systems has been increased, but the disgusting spawning points of Assault Mechs have remained the same (and I'm already starting to think that this will never be fixed), their monstrous dimensions remain the same, their terrible mobility remains the same. It is this combination of factors that prompts me to think that playing on assault mechs for an indefinite amount of time (months / years?) will be terrible.
I'm glad the weapon is getting upgraded. But I also do not forget about many other problems.
Thank you Cauldron, Mat and Daeron. Hopefully I will witness a real improvement the game.

Good news! This is just the first stage in all the planned balance passes.

The other passes that The Cauldron are planning in the coming months (provided this patch is successful and PGI allows us):

• Mobility pass - mobility buffs for Mechs that need it (particularly certain assault Mechs)
  
• Mech rescale - scale reduction for some Mechs that are oversized
  
• Quirks pass - increasing the defensive quirks on underperforming Mechs, reducing the offensive quirks on some key overquirked Mechs and using quirks to introduce more interesting options in Mechs that are rarely utilised

PGI are already working on spawn points for maps. Daeron has said that Tourmaline spawn points will be changed in the April patch and there are some fixes coming for Canyon Network spawn points planned for the May patch. I believe PGI's intention is to do a pass on every map to fix the spawn points and make them far better for Assault Mechs in particular.

Separating the queues would be ideal, but I think PGI must be careful as to the timing. The population definitely needs to increase first for it to be successful. Likewise the group queue would likely need to be 8v8 and ideally involve an 'opt-in' option for solo players to ensure that matches in the group queue flow properly. All that needs more players and ultimately an engineer to implement.

Edited by Krasnopesky, 07 April 2021 - 10:12 AM.

[Bad_Wolf]

Does the Cauldron have any planes for fraction warfare?

[Corbon Zackery]

The use of small lasers, and small pulse dropped off because the engagement distance for a light mech was pushed to 260 meters. This is due to size increases to IS light mechs, LBX cannons, streak missiles, ATM, and LRM.

If I run a Jenner up to 90 meters in front of a double LBX 20. I will lose a leg for sure or get my back blown out running away.

The Jenner is so big right now with speed restrictors you can hit a Jenner with a ER PPC at max range with a zoom lens.

[Beesoldier]

these changes sound really interesting! cant wait!