140 replies to this topic

[Antares102]

I remember that post.
AC2 doing 5 damage with the current cooldown would be so.... atrocious.
A mauler with 6 of them could do >30 sustained DPS.
Just a sign of how little people understand how their proposals would impact the game.
Thus, no power to lore nerds like Samial.

Edited by Antares102, 03 April 2021 - 08:57 AM.

[FupDup]

Antares102, on 03 April 2021 - 08:56 AM, said:

I remember that post.
AC2 doing 5 damage with the current cooldown would be so.... atricious.
A mauler with 6 of them could do >30 sustained DPS.
Just a sign of how little people understand how their proposals would impact the game.
Thus, no power to lore nerds like Samial.

It breaks the lore pretty hard though, which is what makes it ironic coming from him. If MWO followed the lore then the AC/2 would just be a useless tickle gun with lower DPS than a Small Laser.

[SPNKRGrenth]

Capt Deadpool, on 02 April 2021 - 08:13 PM, said:

Does it not seem faaaar more simple to simply nerf the 3 or 4 weapons that were deemed as the current meta, buff 2 or 3 things, make 3 or 4 net-neutral tweaks, and THEN add rescale and agility changes to ensure you are actually increasing TTK whilst simultaneously shaking up the meta and making more weapons actually viable? The entire litany of changes just reads like this to me: POWERCREEP.

The issue with suggesting to mostly nerf the current meta, is PGI has done this many times in the past already, stripping away the fun of using any given weapon system more and more each time. Weapons were nerfed when they were: Strong, or popular, or effective, or someone got killed by them, or a dev got killed by it, ect ect. (That IS small pulse laser nerf years ago anyone?) Most hated, and still hate, such an approach to balance. Heck a good third of these "buffs", are just reverting uncalled for nerfs that were never needed in the first place.

As for concerns of average TTK going down (which it will at least slightly). Super easy answer to that, just nerf double heat sinks by a small amount, instant TTK increase, while still keeping the new balance changes. Currently they dissipate at 0.22, dropping that to 0.2, or even 0.19, would be about as simple and easy a solution as can be.

Heck on the subject of old PGI brand nerfing. When the Clan ER PPC heat got nerfed after the cooldown nerf years ago, because they were then "running too cool" because the nerfed firerate forcing better fire control, which is a crazy reason to do a double nerf. Imagine if a weapon got nerfed because people would commonly pace their shots to better manage heat, no more of that sort of thing thanks.

Edited by SPNKRGrenth, 03 April 2021 - 10:47 AM.

[Capt Deadpool]

Brauer, on 02 April 2021 - 09:10 PM, said:

Nerfing whatever was meta is what brought us to this place. Currently IS MPLs, UAC5s, UAC10s, LBX10s, and CERPPCs are all satisfying to use. I'd like to see other weapons buffed up to the point that they are as satisfying to use, or nearly as satisfying to use as the current top picks. I have no interest in seeing everything nerfed to the point where every engagement feels like a pillow fight.

Regarding TTK, since the top weapons are not being buffed this won't do much to impact the minimum TTK that we saw pre-patch. Overall TTK with this patch is going to be complicated because not all players run optimal builds all the time, but imo this patch just tries to put weapons that currently are not meta on a more even playing field with our current meta.

I am definitely aware of previous nerfs to things over the years. So psychologically, it is an unavoidable fact that gamers prefer buffs to nerfs. I get it. That's the way it is is in every game. Certainly related to some primal brain regions and Pleistocene-era evolutionary adaptations where we don't like any of our favorite toys taken away; we'd rather get new ones. It's irrational, but not unexpected. (And I am sure not a popular position to take that nerfs and buffs are equally effective tools at bringing a game into balance).

Additionally, one of the reasons the current meta weapons seem to feel 'satisfying to use' (which I do not dispute) is because everything is relative, i.e., whether people are aware of it or not (most aren't), the meta weapons are satisfying to use because they are optimal relative to so many other useless weapons. If I were to introduce a new more optimal weapon, a lighter LPL with ultra short duration and less  heat, it would instantly make the current meta feel 'less satisfying.'

But all of this is neither here nor there if we don't care about TTK. I find your asserertion that 'Regarding TTK, since the top weapons are not being buffed this won't do much to impact the minimum TTK that we saw pre-patch' to be highly dubious at best, and outright malarkey at worst, good sir!  (No one get your panties in a bunch please; I like Brauer, he is good people and he is smarter than most of you though you are all lovely )

What you are saying would only be true if everyone was already running those 3 or 4 meta weapon systems all the time. So in comp play, yes I am fairly confident TTK will not be changed much from what it was before the March patch. In Soupy Queue, everyone is going to be running around with shiny new buffed weapons that have been made suddenly viable, i.e., all the people playing less than what was previously considered to be optimized builds/meta weapon systems--let's say a completely arbitrary 80% of players in tiers 4-5, 70% of players in tier 3, and 60% of players in tiers 1-2--have had their effective TTK reduced. This will, overall, reduce average TTK in the game.

Now, I am adaptable: I had fun in solo queue, I have fun in soup queue, and I will be fine whether it unmerges or stays the same, and I don't have the time or energy for comp or FP. Similarly with TTK increasing it or reducing doesn't bother me one way or the other--even if changes were fairly drastic; I will adapt. However, you saying you don't want a pillow fight is a clear indication you aren't really in favor of doing to much to increase TTK (no judgment from me either way), but this seems to be PGI's stated goal. And if rescale and agility increases are more than merely modest relative to the weapon buffs, this potentially is going to have the effect of making things definitely seem more like a 'pillow fight' due to smaller hit boxes and the ability to spread more damage. I suppose you could attempt to balance the agility and rescale perfectly against the weapon buffs so TTK isn't affected. But like PGI said, TTK increase is the goal. Do you think this is the wrong path?

[John Bronco]

I haven't seen anything from PGI re. TTK since 2017, have you?

In fact the last major changes they did, heat in 2018, decreased TTK.

Pretty sure the overall goal is to keep TTK right about where it is now, which most seem to agree is acceptable.

[Capt Deadpool]

John Bronco, on 03 April 2021 - 12:32 PM, said:

I haven't seen anything from PGI re. TTK since 2017, have you?

In fact the last major changes they did, heat in 2018, decreased TTK.

Pretty sure the overall goal is to keep TTK right about where it is now, which most seem to agree is acceptable.

From the April Dev Post on the front page:

'Increasing baseline agility across the board with the purpose of re-introducing fluidity and increasing time to kill (TTK) by giving ‘Mechs the ability to roll, twist and use cover in a much more effective way.'

[John Bronco]

That's not from PGI.

[Capt Deadpool]

John Bronco, on 03 April 2021 - 12:46 PM, said:

That's not from PGI.

Yes, but my dude, PGI is now listening and taking some form of direction from the Cauldron of Gulag.

Edited by Capt Deadpool, 03 April 2021 - 12:53 PM.

[John Bronco]

I read that as increasing TTK after decreasing it with the weapon changes, for an overall neutral. Tough to say how it will play out in the wild, but hopefully we get to find out.

[JediPanther]

I'll just keep playing battletech. A RE-REEEEE-scAle isn't going to make the lights any better. If pgi really gave a dam about that they'd have never done it and let them be trash for years on end.

Other than for trolling no one ever uses is jenners. And having a lame quirk like missile cool down15% with a ct only slot while 80% of the fire power is in under-armored arms isn't doing jenners jack **** either. llct/fle>j7r

[pattonesque]

JediPanther, on 03 April 2021 - 01:24 PM, said:

I'll just keep playing battletech. A RE-REEEEE-scAle isn't going to make the lights any better. If pgi really gave a dam about that they'd have never done it and let them be trash for years on end.

Other than for trolling no one ever uses is jenners. And having a lame quirk like missile cool down15% with a ct only slot while 80% of the fire power is in under-armored arms isn't doing jenners jack **** either. llct/fle>j7r

making lights smaller will objectively make them better. It is no coincidence that the Firestarter fell out of the meta the instant it became the size of a 45-tonner.

Also future Cauldron patches will address mech quirks, including the Jenner.

[Antares102]

pattonesque, on 03 April 2021 - 01:36 PM, said:

making lights smaller will objectively make them better. It is no coincidence that the Firestarter fell out of the meta the instant it became the size of a 45-tonner.

Size also influenced hill-climb for some weird reason.
People running mainly lights (like Polycat) noticed quickly that their lights could no longer climb as fast.
So making them smaller even without increasing mobility directly impacts mobility.

Edited by Antares102, 03 April 2021 - 01:48 PM.

[FupDup]

pattonesque, on 03 April 2021 - 01:36 PM, said:

making lights smaller will objectively make them better. It is no coincidence that the Firestarter fell out of the meta the instant it became the size of a 45-tonner. Also future Cauldron patches will address mech quirks, including the Jenner.

It ultimately depends on what the actual scaling changes will be because so far we only have vague mentionings of assaults getting smaller and 35-ton lights maybe getting smaller. We need actual comparisons and numbers to determine the true impact.

Something to consider is that even if they do scale down the 35-tonners, scaling down assaults will mean that the power gap between big bois and small bois remains just as large or become even larger (especially considering the incoming agility boosts for all assault mechs).

I think there is a very real chance of the Gulag changes having more benefit for the mechs already on the top of the hierarchy than ones at the bottom but we'll have to wait and see.

Antares102, on 03 April 2021 - 01:40 PM, said:

Size also influenced hill-climb for some weird reason. People running mainly lights (like Polycat) noticed quickly that their lights could no longer climb as fast. So making them smaller even without increasing mobility directly impacts mobility.

The reason for it is that the hill climbing code creates an invisible "capsule" around each mech. The capsule has to be large enough to contain the entire mech, meaning that a larger mech requires a larger capsule.

PGI did later decouple this for mechs like the Gargoyle and I think a few others.

[pattonesque]

FupDup, on 03 April 2021 - 01:58 PM, said:

It ultimately depends on what the actual scaling changes will be because so far we only have vague mentionings of assaults getting smaller and 35-ton lights maybe getting smaller. We need actual comparisons and numbers to determine the true impact.

funny you mention that, the rescale first draft is now publicly available:

https://www.dropbox....lanced.pdf?dl=0

[FupDup]

pattonesque, on 03 April 2021 - 02:09 PM, said:

funny you mention that, the rescale first draft is now publicly available:

https://www.dropbox....lanced.pdf?dl=0

Right on que.

So it looks like everything over 25 tons is getting scaled down by roughly the same amount, except for the Flea which gets 4% larger for some reason. This will definitely negatively impact the 20-25 ton lights relative to their peers if their heavier classmates get smaller but they remain unchanged, and also I think smaller heavies and assaults may have a smaller "deadzone" in terms of torso pitch because they're now lower to the ground.

This reinforces my belief that only the bad robot outliers should have been touched in the beginning instead of also buffing the good mechs by the same amount as the bad mechs, because then the power gap doesn't get smaller.

[Antares102]

Most I found was Fafnir with 15% size reduction.

Edited by Antares102, 03 April 2021 - 02:23 PM.

[Capt Deadpool]

Also, if we are looking at TTK through the lens of stomp reduction--which should possibly be one of the utmost priorities of the Cauldron of Gulag, we look at each team having 12 ticks, and understand that as a team's ticks are reduced relative to the ticks on the other team, that tick attrition rate will accelerate until it reaches zero.

I'd wager a good amount that increased TTK is positively correlated with reduced stomp rates, which is what people want. But people also don't want nerfs, they want to have their cake and smear it all over their faces too.

So if the agility and rescale aren't enough to impact TTK enough to mitigate the April Buffering, and all the future Bufferings, then I guess you can just release a patch that increases the armor/structure of every old thing also once the bufferings have been complete.

Again, this all assuming TTK increase actually does reduce stomp rates. I think there might be something to said for pillow fighting...

[Wildstreak]

Capt Deadpool, on 03 April 2021 - 12:52 PM, said:

Yes, but my dude, PGI is now listening and taking some form of direction from the Cauldron of Gulag.

While interesting they listen to some amount does not mean it will work out.

[Heavy Money]

pattonesque, on 03 April 2021 - 02:09 PM, said:

funny you mention that, the rescale first draft is now publicly available:

https://www.dropbox....lanced.pdf?dl=0

Looks good, but I think the Marauder II needs even more of a reduction. Its so huge. (It needs a lot of other help too, of course.)

[VeeOt Dragon]

just checked out that link and i think the assaults got maybe a bit to much shrinkage but will have to wait and see how it looks in-game. as for increases seems only the Flea was enlarged but only by i think 4%. many of the lights were left alone accept some of the worst offenders. mediums got a lot of love it seems as well as some of the Heavies that i love to play but have terrible hit boxes (the *Dragon* for one). not sure how they sink up with their Lore sizes but many mechs that needed it badly got some love. that i'm fine with. again have to wait and see in-game (hence why i think they should bring these sorts of changes to the PTS first to to get a feel for if they are working as intended.) none of them seem drastic so thats good. there are a few that are more noticeable than others (hell i always thought the Cicada was a bit large for its tonnage and role. hell the Blackjack definitely needed a scaling pass. (they BJ-3 was the first mech i ever purchased with C-bills, yeah not my smartest move). some i think didn't need much change but those mostly had small changes. the assaults though are really noticeable. again gonna have to see them for myself before i make a finale call. i would like it if there was a feeling of size difference between the weight classes. assaults should feel like you are piloting a small building.

Edited by VeeOt Dragon, 03 April 2021 - 02:58 PM.