704 replies to this topic

[Aedryel]

Voice of Kerensky, on 07 April 2021 - 06:27 PM, said:

Thanks for the comment. Thanks for all the comments you make in this discussion.
I understand what you are saying. I really want to hope that all these changes will be implemented (and I would like it to happen as soon as possible), that all these changes will lead to an improvement in the game.
I really want to hope for all this because, in my opinion, at the moment the game is in an even worse state than a year ago (before the spring-summer changes). In the spring and summer of last year, the PGI began to change the game, the game immediately broke a new bottom. Game stayed this bottom for a long time, until it broke this bottom with the March patch of this year.
This is why I am cautiously optimistic, constantly reminding myself that PGI can easily make a game worse than it already is.





It seems to me that you are confusing cause and effect.
If you read your message, you can conclude that the insane amount of LRM Mechs in battles is caused by the appearance of only four Mechs: Prianha, Kit Fox, Nova, Corsair.
However, I am more than sure that this is not the case. People are forced to use multi-AMC mechs due to the fact that the game has become insanely many LRM warriors. This is a defensive reaction. People will not sacrifice the firepower of their mech, its cooling, simply because they want to ride a multi-AMC mech for no reason. People get tired of the endless cowardly fire from behind the hillock. People want to play the game, and not hide behind a stone because the brave Lurm warriors have rolled out their Lurm boats and are playing tensely, poking one button of their mouse, standing in one place behind cover.
I draw your attention to the fact multi-AMS mechs mechs may not be present at all in battles, but at least one frantic Lurm warrior will be found in every battle with a 99% probability.
Currently, the situation with lurm warriors and lurm boats has already reached the point of absolute absurdity. 80 LRM? Yes, they can be placed on medium (!) mech. 90 LRM? Yes, you can take heavy (!) mech for this. 95-100 LRM? An assault mech is perfect for this purpose. And now for Lurm warriors is golden times: you can gather in one group, coordinate in voice chats and have a NARC mech. And you want more buffs for the Lurms? Come to your senses. Stop crazily playing on the mechs that contain all the LRMs in the world, and you will not see multi-AMC mechs on the battlefields anymore.

Except I didn't....I think. My argument about LRMs was about back in the day they were mostly either an IDF type of weapon OR if one got his own locks, he at least had the chance to torso twist to even out the incoming damage while holding the missile locks until they connected. The cone nerf eliminated the latter and that, with the increased target lock time forced LRM users into a stationary torso angle which definitely not playing in their favor.

You are right people won't ditch their faved mechs for multi AMS platforms, but it seems a fact to me, that AMS will be more widely accessible due to the lower heat, higher ammo count and non-exploding ammo. The only factor not to bring one will be either the tonnage or, in the case of omnis, the dedicated omnipod limitation. And while I accept your argument that AMS fest is a reaction to LRM fest, it still won't help the people who WOULD use ATMs. My point is if 2/3 of people in a team have just 1 AMS equipped, ATMs will be unable to do a meaningful amount of dmg and due to their lower tube count, the tool which was supposed to counter LRMs will negate ATMs entirely. Prove me wrong.

[DAEDALOS513]

Krasnopesky, on 08 April 2021 - 08:44 AM, said:

The Cauldron's main aim is to increase the enjoyment of as many people as possible who play this game. Already we have received a ton of positive feedback and many people returning to the game. So perhaps from your perspective we are trying to ruin MWO, but from our perspective we are trying to improve it for everyone by returning fun to the game.

If everyone has to use the same nerfed weapons we will have the exact same issue we have had for over half a decade, people not enjoying the game due to the continuous nerfs PGI has implemented which ultimately results in many people leaving.

I understand your point of view and have considered it along with others, but I do not agree with it, just as you do not agree with The Cauldrons approach. At the end of the day we will see the results after the April patch. If you are correct the patch will not be successful and the negative feedback will be apparent. I personally do not think this will happen, I believe the feedback will be positive overall and there will be more players playing MWO and enjoying it.

Players got pissed at pgi for nerfing because customers would buy (expensive) mech-paks specifically for how well those mechs did with certain weapons.. (whether it be due to quirks, or being able to boat more of it than other mechs).. and then nerf the mechs (or the weapon) because of the outcry from the playerbase.. Yes players demanded nerfing!

That ONE mech/chassis abused that weapon system. Obviously people got bitter and blamed the nerf instead of pgi's strat of releasing OP paks to drive sales.

I hope the feedback will be positive too, and in the beginning excitement will most assuredly be high if only because this is something new that we haven't had in a long time. But don't confuse that initial excitement with the belief that it was a good patch.

I just hope match times aren't further reduced which I'm afraid is inevitable once people are through experimenting.

Edited by DAEDALOS513, 08 April 2021 - 08:57 AM.

[Antares102]

I really do not understand people comlaining about the moderate weapon changes that will be introduced.
Mostly I read TTK will go down.

Weapon performance is just one aspect of all planned changes.
Of course, they will have an impact on balance, TTK and all that stuff that's why they are supposed to do BUT you have to always consider the whole package what Cauldron is proposing not just one set of changes in isolation and then you should start to comlain.

Seriously what I am much more concerned about are "local optimums" considering all proposed changes for certain platforms.

My example would be a Timberwolf with 2xLPL and 6x ML, 25 DHS.
Compared to today and assuming all Caldron changes are implemented you will get:

• LPL heat 10 => 9, damage 12 => 13, Duration 1.09 => 1
  
• ML heat 6.3 => 5.5, duration 1.25 => 1.15
  
• Acceleration 17,72 => 35, Deacceleration 19,67 => 35, Turnrate 42,4 => 60, Twist speed 68 => 100
  
• +10 Armor for CT/LT/RT
  
• 9% size reduction

In simple words you get:

• a 65 alpha@400m+
  
• with the shortest ever laser burn time 0.9-1s (including 10% duration skill)
  
• with the coolest laser weapons ever of 51 heat that you can alpha twice with full skills
  
• an 30-50% more agile platform
  
• that also has more armour and is smaller.

Compared to the current Timberwolf with the same build I would say few mechs get a such many combined buffs.

Edited by Antares102, 08 April 2021 - 08:52 AM.

[Athom83]

Smutty, on 08 April 2021 - 07:53 AM, said:

Remember, MRM10s en masse generate a lot more heat than larger launchers of equivalent tube count. If you can eat the heat, sure, but it's not quite a direct upgrade

I'd say the opposite and that the "lot more" heat is negligible given the tonnage saving allowing for more heatsinks. An MRM 20 will make 6 heat while 2 MRM 10s will make 8, that difference is quite literally the heat of a single ER Small laser while being 1 ton lighter. Plus if MRMs were your primary weapon, then you could chain fire them (which is even more viable with the halved duration) to mitigate any heat issues if running 4+ of them.

[Smutty]

Daedalos out here single-handedly proving that even 95%+ players can have nuclear takes lmao

Considering Cauldron has made it their entire purpose to bring crap guns back into viability without overtuning them (or buffing weapons that clearly do not need buffs) I'm not sure how the mental gymnastics go from that to "omg guise guns are 2stronk we need to make sure everything is properly awful so that TTK is omega high." Isn't it desirable to see all weapons in the game suitable for killing fools? When's the last time someone recommended an IS laser skirmisher that didn't involve Yet Another MPL build? Like come on, why is this even a point of contention?

"We should bring underperforming weapons up to spec then tune from there"
"No"

Doesn't that sound absurd to you?

[Krasnopesky]

Athom83, on 08 April 2021 - 08:51 AM, said:

I'd say the opposite and that the "lot more" heat is negligible given the tonnage saving allowing for more heatsinks. An MRM 20 will make 6 heat while 2 MRM 10s will make 8, that difference is quite literally the heat of a single ER Small laser while being 1 ton lighter. Plus if MRMs were your primary weapon, then you could chain fire them (which is even more viable with the halved duration) to mitigate any heat issues if running 4+ of them.

Chain firing MRMs is a very bad idea compared to shooting them all in one alpha. Very few Mechs would bother shooting one MRM20, most either shoot one MRM30/40 along with other weapons. If the Mech is a dedicated MRM Mech the quantity of MRMs will typically be 60 or higher (50-55 tonne Mediums can comfortably run this).

I already compared 6x MRM10s to 2x MRM30 and MRM20+40 in a comment above, but basically you get a lot of negatives for the positives. The largest negative is over 50% additional heat, which your tonnage saving no where near accounts for. MRM10s are not used much now, nor are they particularly effective. The buffs will give them a niche on certain Mechs and open up MRMs as a non-meme weapon for light Mechs.

Edited by Krasnopesky, 08 April 2021 - 08:59 AM.

[DAEDALOS513]

Smutty, on 08 April 2021 - 08:53 AM, said:

Daedalos out here single-handedly proving that even 95%+ players can have nuclear takes lmao

Considering Cauldron has made it their entire purpose to bring crap guns back into viability without overtuning them (or buffing weapons that clearly do not need buffs) I'm not sure how the mental gymnastics go from that to "omg guise guns are 2stronk we need to make sure everything is properly awful so that TTK is omega high." Isn't it desirable to see all weapons in the game suitable for killing fools? When's the last time someone recommended an IS laser skirmisher that didn't involve Yet Another MPL build? Like come on, why is this even a point of contention?

"We should bring underperforming weapons up to spec then tune from there"
"No"

Doesn't that sound absurd to you?

Read my previous replies.. basically the only reason weaker weapons aren't being used or seen as 'inferior' is because of the few crutch weapons available that provide relatively easier damage.. remove those few crutches and you will see more weapons, better balance and more variety.. without lowering ttk

Edited by DAEDALOS513, 08 April 2021 - 09:07 AM.

[ghost1e]

Antares102, on 08 April 2021 - 08:50 AM, said:

Compared to the current Timberwolf with the same build I would say few mechs get a such many combined buffs.

Given the timber is one of the worst mechs in the game rn (at least in my personal experience and conversations with others), to the point where even saying "I'm gonna play a timber" in 2020/21 is a complete joke, it might deserve those buffs.
And honestly, even if the timber gets a bit stronger, I personally wouldn't mind it, as it still is one of the most iconic mechs in the mechwarrior franchise. Having the timber ingame and being useless is worse than it being too strong imho.

Edited by TheUltimateGhost, 08 April 2021 - 09:13 AM.

[Navid A1]

DAEDALOS513, on 08 April 2021 - 09:00 AM, said:

Read my previous replies.. basically the only reason weaker weapons aren't being used or seen as 'inferior' is because of the few crutch weapons available that provide relatively easier damage.. remove those few crutches and you will see more weapons, better balance and more variety.. without lowering ttk

Nerfing things that perform well has never been successful.

ttk in MWO has alot more to do with how the levels are designed and the single-spawn nature of the game

Edited by Navid A1, 08 April 2021 - 09:14 AM.

[Navid A1]

I give you one example:

Give a look at how a map like the new Frozen city is played on assault mode... game lasts more than 10 minutes normally, just because you have room to operate multiple angles, you can't risk a full dealth ball, but you can't also sit back all the time, since a couple brawlers can move up to your face while having support from their snipers.

that's how level design plays into ttk.

[DAEDALOS513]

Navid A1, on 08 April 2021 - 09:13 AM, said:

Nerfing things that perform well has never been successful.

ttk in MWO has alot more to do with how the levels are designed and the single-spawn nature of the game

Agree to disagree.. I already explained why nerfing has left such a bad taste in our mouth.. don't blame the nerf, blame the implementer.

Navid A1, on 08 April 2021 - 09:16 AM, said:

I give you one example:

Give a look at how a map like the new Frozen city is played on assault mode... game lasts more than 10 minutes normally, just because you have room to operate multiple angles, you can't risk a full dealth ball, but you can't also sit back all the time, since a couple brawlers can move up to your face while having support from their snipers.

that's how level design plays into ttk.

Regardless.. we still have to work with what we got..

Edited by DAEDALOS513, 08 April 2021 - 10:00 AM.

[byter75]

Athom83, on 08 April 2021 - 07:08 AM, said:

Another issue is IS Streaks... why the nerf? Was anyone actually using them? Personally I thought they were quite bad compared to just learning how to aim with equivalent SRMa, and with base SRMs getting a better spread that makes IS Streaks just that more redundant.

Krasnopesky, on 08 April 2021 - 07:48 AM, said:

IS Streak boats have very high and reliable DPS due to their never-miss homing mechanics when compared to SRMs, which will often miss with at least some of the missiles, especially against faster moving targets. We have reduced just the cooldown of IS streaks to reduce their DPS to a lower level.

Ultimately we had many different ideas for streaks, but many of the ideas are impossible to do with just XML changes and as such need to be implemented by a PGI engineer. The Cauldron believes streaks will continue to work very well at their role when the patch hits, but if that turns out to be not the case we can make further changes to them in the May patch.

I am curious what IS streak mechs you or the cauldron thinks is seeing play right now, I would like to keep an eye on them to tell how well they work at their role after the patch hits.

[Albert C]

Gonna bring back the 12 spl nova after the patch. Also the lpl erml ebj and even the tbr which was one or my favorite mechs back in mw4 days. Tbr is so miserable currently in mwo, its big hitbox, ****** hardpoint position and awkward agility make it basically at the same level of BNC(maybe not that weak but still feels like a piece of trash).

[Krasnopesky]

byter75, on 08 April 2021 - 10:12 AM, said:

I am curious what IS streak mechs you or the cauldron thinks is seeing play right now, I would like to keep an eye on them to tell how well they work at their role after the patch hits.

Some of the top IS streak Mechs (from my perspective):

ASN-23: 3x SSRM6
BJ-2: 4x SSRM4/6
Various DV: Mix of streak builds, DV-FR with 4x SSRM2 + 4x SSRM4/6 in particular
KTO-18: 4x SSRM6
TBT-7M: 3x SSRM6
ACR-5S/5W: many different streak builds
CP-10-Q: 7x SSRM6

I am sure there are others, but those are some of the ones I can think of at this moment. Keep in mind the balance considers all the game modes to a certain extent, not just Quick Play (although QP is considered a lot comparatively); Faction Play, Comp Play, Solaris, and Scouting.

Edited by Krasnopesky, 08 April 2021 - 11:57 AM.

[katoult]

Navid A1, on 08 April 2021 - 09:13 AM, said:

ttk in MWO has alot more to do with how the levels are designed and the single-spawn nature of the game

I wouldn't agree there necessarily.

Not when the current PPC patch has been able to produce matches like this one - and yes, that's a 12:0 stomp in a T1 match in probably less time than it takes from clicking the quickplay button to dropping onto the ground - on a map that isn't particularly known for spawn problems or other movement predictability.



edit: names removed

Edited by katoult, 08 April 2021 - 11:32 AM.

[PraetorGix]

Smutty, on 08 April 2021 - 07:53 AM, said:

Remember, MRM10s en masse generate a lot more heat than larger launchers of equivalent tube count. If you can eat the heat, sure, but it's not quite a direct upgrade

Not a direct upgrade, true, but pretty damn close. The example given by Athom was 2xMRM10s versus 1xMRM30 and in that situation the increased heat is very manageable, MRM 10s are above the curve from the others, with only the 40 coming close... and that is if you have the weight available to use it. 10s don't need any more love.

Edited by PraetorGix, 08 April 2021 - 11:32 AM.

[PraetorGix]

TheUltimateGhost, on 08 April 2021 - 09:12 AM, said:

Given the timber is one of the worst mechs in the game rn (at least in my personal experience and conversations with others), to the point where even saying "I'm gonna play a timber" in 2020/21 is a complete joke, it might deserve those buffs.
And honestly, even if the timber gets a bit stronger, I personally wouldn't mind it, as it still is one of the most iconic mechs in the mechwarrior franchise. Having the timber ingame and being useless is worse than it being too strong imho.

Hell yeah, Timby is iconic as hell and lore-wise it's supposed to be everything it's not in the game: agile, powerful and performing very well in all areas. The sad joke it's been reduced to in MWO is almost insulting.

I never posted about this but it's a proposal I have for the upcoming maybe rescale: dedicated weapon pods like the Timby's ears or the Asp's shoulder cannons should be its own separate hitbox, like the way it worked on MW4. That way you are actually making the mechs independent of it's geometry and you don't punish people for wanting to use some loadouts. Also, you don't need to overquirk a mech to artificially make it good. I know it'd take a lot of work but if PGI really wants to put the effort to improve things that should be a priority IMO.

Edited by PraetorGix, 08 April 2021 - 11:40 AM.

[Krasnopesky]

katoult, on 08 April 2021 - 11:26 AM, said:

I wouldn't agree there necessarily.

Not when the current PPC patch has been able to produce matches like this one - and yes, that's a 12:0 stomp in a T1 match in probably less time than it takes from clicking the quickplay button to dropping onto the ground - on a map that isn't particularly known for spawn problems or other movement predictability.



edit: names removed

That is one of the smallest maps in the game where you can literally see the enemy teams spawn after moving less than 50m.

That is also a 4 man of comp players playing top tier meta Mechs, at least 3 of them using the current Clan ERPPCs that are more powerful than they ever have been. The Cauldron's patch will reduce the strength of the March Patch Clan ERPPC by reverting them to their former level.

I don't think it is the best example to support your argument that maps do not contribute towards reduced match time. This map is tiny, you can see and shoot the enemy team almost immediately, and there is an imbalance of skill level and Mech choices between the teams that all contribute to the low match time.

Edited by Krasnopesky, 08 April 2021 - 11:50 AM.

[DAEDALOS513]

From Cauldron:

Heavy Medium Laser (Clan):
Cooldown decreased to 5.0 (from 5.5)
Laser duration decreased to 1.3 (from 1.45)

Notes: HMLs are intended as a primarily alpha-focused, rather than DPS, weapon. These adjustments hope to rectify the excessive cooldown and duration that preclude its usefulness.
Heavy Large Laser (Clan):
Damage increased to 18 (from 16)
Cooldown decreased to 5.5 (from 5.75)
Laser duration decreased to 1.45 (from 1.55)

Notes: HLLs currently come at a considerable cost to what they offer; increased laser duration, significantly longer cooldown, costing 3 slots rather than 1, and having significantly less range. These factors make them inferior to their laser counterparts. Addressing each of these elements for the better will help position them back as a viable choice.

PURE INSANITY. Yes heavy lasers have all the downsides you mention but they do because they have amazing upsides.. very light weight weapons for insane damage output. Like you said, they are an alpha build.. alpha AND TAKE COVER. Not alpha, cooldown quick and fire again. That's what medium lasers are for, med pulse, even large pulse.. and when you combine your cooldown and duration buffs they piggy-back eachother for even higher re-fire rate..

Besides that.. heavy lasers are usually too hot to fire rapidly.. so all your buffs are doing are helping them insta-core the enemy with their insane alpha.. if players want a quick-trade build they will choose from the myriad other lasers available to them..

Are you trying to completely dumb down the game like clan peeps have? Disregarding the role of weapons and just making them work in all situations? Like your doing with atms moving them into lrm territory? The more I look at the patch the more it doesn't make sense..

Been rocking this build all day.. 72 alpha with 22 heatsinks.. scary how op this build will be with higher alpha and better duration after patch day.. talk about cutting TTK.. nom nom nom

Edited by DAEDALOS513, 08 April 2021 - 01:46 PM.

[DAEDALOS513]

Krasnopesky, on 08 April 2021 - 11:45 AM, said:

That is one of the smallest maps in the game where you can literally see the enemy teams spawn after moving less than 50m.

That is also a 4 man of comp players playing top tier meta Mechs, at least 3 of them using the current Clan ERPPCs that are more powerful than they ever have been. The Cauldron's patch will reduce the strength of the March Patch Clan ERPPC by reverting them to their former level.

I don't think it is the best example to support your argument that maps do not contribute towards reduced match time. This map is tiny, you can see and shoot the enemy team almost immediately, and there is an imbalance of skill level and Mech choices between the teams that all contribute to the low match time.

You're logic is flawed.. just because walk time is removed from the equation doesn't mean it's ok for a match to last under 3 minutes. If anything it better HIGHLIGHTS how strong weapons are.. open your eyes people.

By your logic walk time adds value to a match? If that's the case, why not make all maps the size of polar.. as long as TTK is increased right? Wrong..

If you remove walk time from the other maps by subtracting say 1 minute from the average 4:30-5:30 minute game you're still looking at a 3:30-4:30 engagement time.. pure garbage.

Edited by DAEDALOS513, 08 April 2021 - 04:19 PM.