Jump to content

Patch Notes - 1.4.242.0 - 22-June-2021


224 replies to this topic

#41 SockSlayer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 146 posts

Posted 21 June 2021 - 07:51 PM

View PostY E O N N E, on 21 June 2021 - 07:34 PM, said:

Prior to the ghost heat, a Piranha running around with 10-13 flamers could rapidly put the bulk of the enemy team at 90% heat cap with only a second or two spent on each 'Mech. Suddenly an enemy firing line is impotent because none of them can fire enough weapons to deter the enemy, and the match rapidly snowballs into a stomp. I wish Writhenn's Twitch channel still had the videos, because I would love to show you, but it was incredibly broken when used in coordination with other players. We do not need that back in this game.

But did it do damage...not much. And was there light or heavy mg on your team...probably not...sorry but 10 flamers instantly overheating a mech makes no sense either...I have done countless tests. Strategy is strategy, and if even 2 mechs had a decent loadout of mg or a night gyr which is immune to them...that would have never happened...plus pirahnas are fast...they aren't supposed to be hit...prehaps your aim is off...and also your strategy...the flamer is broke now...not then...then it was just decent...now its broke...You do the test...and see if you don't trade for a small laser...I'm done...a flamer is supposed to overheat a mech...but that actually has never happened due to the 90% cap...and yet with that cap it was still further nerfed...I can't name the last time a flamer mech actually overheated me. And the only times they have, its been strategic...if i am expecting them...no worries.

Edited by SockSlayer, 21 June 2021 - 07:53 PM.


#42 -Skyrider-

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The Undertaker
  • The Undertaker
  • 157 posts
  • Locationall about that Seattle life

Posted 21 June 2021 - 07:58 PM

Any news on when the plan is to implement jumpjets changes into the game? I know they were early in the roadmap

#43 justcallme A S H

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2020 Referee
  • CS 2020 Referee
  • 8,753 posts
  • LocationMelbourne, AU

Posted 21 June 2021 - 08:07 PM

View PostSockSlayer, on 21 June 2021 - 07:51 PM, said:

But did it do damage...not much. And was there light or heavy mg on your team...probably not...sorry but 10 flamers instantly overheating a mech makes no sense either...I have done countless tests. .


It doesn't need to do damage if you can run around and heat cap 3-5 mechs. Which is exactly what you could do with 10 flamers. It was tested by high skill players and proven to be absolutely ridiculous.

Run up to Mech, touch flamers for 0.5s, mech at 90%.
Fine next Mech, 0.5s
Repeat all game.

And on and on it went. You could literally neutralise half a teams hest cap in 5-6 seconds. How can anyone shoot back if they have no heat to shoot with?

So yeah, it was absolutely a thing and should never be brought back. It isn't fun.

View Post-Skyrider-, on 21 June 2021 - 07:58 PM, said:

Any news on when the plan is to implement jumpjets changes into the game? I know they were early in the roadmap


Hopefully next patch.

Nothing confirmed or anything yet.

#44 Voice of Kerensky

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 280 posts

Posted 21 June 2021 - 08:36 PM

The new Polar Highlands look very interesting. I already want to try this.
Thanks Francois, thanks to PGI.
It is very sad that neither Cauldron nor PGI paid attention to dead streaks after previous patch.
I am also very interested in when a matchmaker will appear in the game (this is a thing that balances the teams of opponents by the level of players or at least by the tonnage of mechs)?
Are there any plans to separate solo and group queues in quick play?

#45 Y E O N N E

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Nimble
  • The Nimble
  • 16,810 posts

Posted 21 June 2021 - 08:40 PM

View PostVoice of Kerensky, on 21 June 2021 - 08:36 PM, said:

The new Polar Highlands look very interesting. I already want to try this.
Thanks Francois, thanks to PGI.
It is very sad that neither Cauldron nor PGI paid attention to dead streaks after previous patch.
I am also very interested in when a matchmaker will appear in the game (this is a thing that balances the teams of opponents by the level of players or at least by the tonnage of mechs)?
Are there any plans to separate solo and group queues in quick play?


We did consider Streaks, check my post on previous page. It was too late to get anything into the June patch.

Edited by Y E O N N E, 21 June 2021 - 08:40 PM.


#46 Voice of Kerensky

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 280 posts

Posted 21 June 2021 - 08:49 PM

The mobility changes look nice. What about engine sync/desync? Will the status quo be reviewed?

View PostY E O N N E, on 21 June 2021 - 08:40 PM, said:

We did consider Streaks, check my post on previous page. It was too late to get anything into the June patch.

Thank you. I will definitely read it.

#47 SockSlayer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 146 posts

Posted 21 June 2021 - 08:51 PM

View Postjustcallme A S H, on 21 June 2021 - 08:07 PM, said:

It doesn't need to do damage if you can run around and heat cap 3-5 mechs. Which is exactly what you could do with 10 flamers. It was tested by high skill players and proven to be absolutely ridiculous.

Run up to Mech, touch flamers for 0.5s, mech at 90%.
Fine next Mech, 0.5s
Repeat all game.

And on and on it went. You could literally neutralise half a teams hest cap in 5-6 seconds. How can anyone shoot back if they have no heat to shoot with?

So yeah, it was absolutely a thing and should never be brought back. It isn't fun.



Hopefully next patch.

Nothing confirmed or anything yet.

Once again...the fact about light and heavy mg was completely glossed over....they don't do heat, so there is never a danger from flamers. Can anyone actually say they are fine the way they are? I disagree sorely. Still proves strategy problem, not weapon problem. I found flamers plenty hot to my own mech even without the penalty...and even if I agree a penalty is needed, instantly overheating from 10 flamers is stupid too.

Edited by SockSlayer, 21 June 2021 - 08:52 PM.


#48 SPNKRGrenth

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The Benefactor
  • The Benefactor
  • 174 posts

Posted 21 June 2021 - 08:58 PM

Flamers just need a full entire redesign from the ground up. Throw the whole thing out and start fresh.

#49 Y E O N N E

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Nimble
  • The Nimble
  • 16,810 posts

Posted 21 June 2021 - 08:58 PM

View PostSockSlayer, on 21 June 2021 - 08:51 PM, said:

Once again...the fact about light and heavy mg was completely glossed over....they don't do heat, so there is never a danger from flamers. Can anyone actually say they are fine the way they are? I disagree sorely. Still proves strategy problem, not weapon problem. I found flamers plenty hot to my own mech even without the penalty...and even if I agree a penalty is needed, instantly overheating from 10 flamers is stupid too.


Because every 'Mech in the game can mount MGs, right? Because even if they could, because 2 MGs is enough to actually allow somebody to fight off a Flamer-wielding opponent or even their other team mates while sitting at 90%, right?

A mere two flamers is enough to get an opponent to 90% at present. What you seem to want is the ability to permanently stun-lock targets; this is bad gameplay and you won't find such an ability in any of the major PvP games out there. You don't need Flamers to fully shut down the target all the way and for extended periods for it to be useful. You are trying to main a weapon that isn't main-able. Adapt.

#50 Navid A1

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2020 Gold Champ
  • CS 2020 Gold Champ
  • 4,760 posts
  • LocationVancouver, BC

Posted 21 June 2021 - 09:09 PM

Flamers are pretty common in high level play in MWO.

They are one of the scariest and most powerful weapons in a brawl.

#51 Voice of Kerensky

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 280 posts

Posted 21 June 2021 - 09:10 PM

View PostLeone, on 21 June 2021 - 04:38 PM, said:


https://vimeo.com/149093008

Flamers used to be broken, now they're not. Still good. Still short range. So many folk have no idea how to handle being flamed.

~Leone.


Looked at the video given by you. Frankly speaking, in this video I did not see that at least one flamethrower broke. You lost four Flamers in your arms because your arms were destroyed...
Or I just didn't understand what you are talking about due to poor automatic translation (I'm not an English-speaking person).

#52 w0qj

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Wolf
  • The Wolf
  • 1,343 posts

Posted 21 June 2021 - 09:14 PM

Desperately need Smurfy.net to update weapons stats, or another website to do the same.
http://mwo.smurfy-net.de/equipment

And no, MechDB does not even come close to the visual representation needed to make MechLab choices for my mech layout selection. (How many weapons for IS Large Laser vs Large Pulse Laser before ghost heat? What is optimal/max range? What is total damage of 4xLL vs 3xLPL? And what total heat output for each? Cooldown time? etc. etc.
http://mech.nav-alpha.com


View PostY E O N N E, on 21 June 2021 - 05:46 PM, said:


These values are not finalized, Cauldron is meeting later today on Wednesday to have one last debate and reach consensus about them.

IS Changes:
  • ER Small Laser: Heat reduced to 1.9 (from 2.2)
  • Large Laser: Range increased to 480 m (from 450), Heat reduced to 6.4 (from 6.7)
  • ER Large Laser: Range increased to 740 m (from 700)
  • Light PPC: Damage increased to 5.5 (from 5)
  • PPC: some TBD form of damage fall-off between 0 and 90 meters
  • Snub-nose PPC: Damage increased to 1.5+8.5+1.5 (from 1.5+8+1.5)
  • LB-5X: Slot requirement reduced to 4 (from 5)
  • Streak SRM4: Cooldown reduced to 3.25 s (from 3.5 s)
  • Streak SRM6: Cooldown reduced to 4 s (from 4.25)
  • LRM (all): Impulse reduced to 0.15 per missile (from 0.3)...massively reduced screen shake
Clan Changes:
  • Heavy Small Laser: Cooldown reduced to 3.75 s (from 4)
  • Heavy Medium Laser: Cooldown reduced to 4.5 s (from 5), Heat reduced to 7.5 (from 8)
  • Heavy Large Laser: Heat reduced to 14.5 (from 16)
  • Clan ER Large Laser: Range increased to 810 m (from 770)
  • Clan Streak SRM2: Damage increased to 1.75 per missile (from 1.5), Cooldown increased to 2.5 s (from 2), Heat increased to 1.45 (from 1.3)
  • Clan Streak SRM4: Damage increased to 1.75 per missile (from 1.5), Cooldown increased to 3.75 s (from 3), Heat increased to 2.7 (from 2.4)
  • Clan Streak SRM6: Damage increased to 1.75 per missile (from 1.5), Cooldown increased to 5 s (from 4), Heat increased to 3.5 (from 3.1)
  • Clan LRM5: Missile Health increased to 1.5 per missile (from 1.2), Impulse reduced to 0.15 per missile (from 0.3)
  • Clan LRM10: Missile Health increased to 1.25 per missile (from 1.1), Impulse reduced to 0.15 per missile (from 0.3)
  • Clan LRM15: Missile Health increased to 1.05 per missile (from 0.9), Impulse reduced to 0.15 per missile (from 0.3)
  • Clan LRM20: Missile Health increased to 0.95 per missile (from 0.8), Impulse reduced to 0.15 per missile (from 0.3)


#53 SockSlayer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 146 posts

Posted 21 June 2021 - 09:19 PM

But machine guns are mainable...and thats what is so irritating...the same tonnage as a flamer...but which is better for a fight, the mg...the flamer is garbage now and its range is so low...that even a flamerthrower from literally 1944 has it beat 50 m in range...so in 1000 plus years, they haven't improved at all? Laughable... Plus the heat goes 100% away after 90 m?

The flamer still isn't right...it might kind of overheat opponent...but barely. The real issue is maybe 4.5 heat damage was too much...and it should have been maybe 2 or just 1...then you wouldn't need a heat penalty in the first place. Figure it out, its not rocket science...The flamer has never had fair treatment when compared to weapons of same tonnage, please remove it from the game if you can't get it right, Because I have ran design after design...and honestly, flamers are awful...they are crap when I can just use a small laser...besides, my mechs run more heat sinks anyway, I ain't scared of any flamers.

Edited by SockSlayer, 21 June 2021 - 09:21 PM.


#54 Navid A1

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2020 Gold Champ
  • CS 2020 Gold Champ
  • 4,760 posts
  • LocationVancouver, BC

Posted 21 June 2021 - 09:23 PM

View Postw0qj, on 21 June 2021 - 09:14 PM, said:

Desperately need Smurfy.net to update weapons stats, or another website to do the same.
http://mwo.smurfy-net.de/equipment

And no, MechDB does not even come close to the visual representation needed to make MechLab choices for my mech layout selection. (How many weapons for IS Large Laser vs Large Pulse Laser before ghost heat? What is optimal/max range? What is total damage of 4xLL vs 3xLPL? And what total heat output for each? Cooldown time? etc. etc.
http://mech.nav-alpha.com



MechDB will go through a MASSIVE update soon. In terms of features and content.

Hang in there.

Edited by Navid A1, 21 June 2021 - 09:24 PM.


#55 justcallme A S H

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2020 Referee
  • CS 2020 Referee
  • 8,753 posts
  • LocationMelbourne, AU

Posted 21 June 2021 - 09:26 PM

View Postw0qj, on 21 June 2021 - 09:14 PM, said:

And no, MechDB does not even come close to the visual representation needed to make MechLab choices for my mech layout selection


Ok like, mostly sure, I've informed you a couple times MechDB is being rebuilt for 2.0 version. That's still the case. Community resources take time mate. Smurfy has been dated for a very long time. MechDB 2.0 will get here when it gets here.

Here is a link that wasn't really meant to go fully public as it's very unfinished (and a few of us already given plenty of feedback)... Suffice to say K2B is coding his fingers off as a community mate resource. Just have to wait and be patient.



#56 Y E O N N E

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Nimble
  • The Nimble
  • 16,810 posts

Posted 21 June 2021 - 09:34 PM

View PostSockSlayer, on 21 June 2021 - 09:19 PM, said:

But machine guns are mainable...and thats what is so irritating...the same tonnage as a flamer...but which is better for a fight, the mg...the flamer is garbage now and its range is so low...that even a flamerthrower from literally 1944 has it beat 50 m in range...so in 1000 plus years, they haven't improved at all? Laughable... Plus the heat goes 100% away after 90 m?

The flamer still isn't right...it might kind of overheat opponent...but barely. The real issue is maybe 4.5 heat damage was too much...and it should have been maybe 2 or just 1...then you wouldn't need a heat penalty in the first place. Figure it out, its not rocket science...The flamer has never had fair treatment when compared to weapons of same tonnage, please remove it from the game if you can't get it right, Because I have ran design after design...and honestly, flamers are awful...they are crap when I can just use a small laser...besides, my mechs run more heat sinks anyway, I ain't scared of any flamers.


A Machine Gun doesn't stun-lock the enemy and prevent him from exacting any meaningful retaliation, Flamers doing what you want them to do does. You are never going to be satisfied with Flamers because what you want them to do is something that should not be allowed. They make solid support weapons for brawls as they are. Maybe they could do a little bit more real damage or maybe they could have marginally more range, but they are exactly where they need to be for their overheat-enemy use case.

#57 Voice of Kerensky

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 280 posts

Posted 21 June 2021 - 10:04 PM

I looked a little more closely at the list of updated Mech Agility.
What I didn't like.
I noticed that the new patch does not show the mechs that received the mobility improvements in the previous patch. At first glance, everything is logical. However, I disagree with this. This approach views the most immobile mechs separately from all others. But it's not right. It is necessary to consider the mechs not only each separately, but each in relation to other mechs. And now I ask you to understand what I am talking about. The previous patch improved the mobility of the most immobile 'Mechs (except Dire Wolf) in order to bring their mobility up to the mobility of all other' Mechs in the game. Increase their survivability in this way. And that was great. But in the new patch, the mobility of all other mechs was also improved, which again returned everything to its old places (dropped the mechs that received improvements in the previous patch). All the previous improvements to maneuverability with the introduction of this patch will be simply discounted.
Quite frankly, when there was talk of improving the mobility of 'Mechs, I thought it would only improve the mobility of those' Mechs that really have huge problems with their design. Take a look at Timber Wolf, Dire Wolf - a low-lying cockpit, even lower-located main armament (except for the LRM), a huge profile from any angle, weak armor, weak structure. And now, it would seem a holiday - they got an improvement in mobility. But no, all the other 'Mechs got the same improvement in mobility. Thus, these 'Mechs have not really gotten better on the background the rest mechs.

Yes, I understand that many people from the Cauldron (and beyond) will disagree with me, but I want them to at least get acquainted with my point of view.

Edited by Voice of Kerensky, 21 June 2021 - 11:50 PM.


#58 Sereglach

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Fire
  • Fire
  • 1,551 posts
  • LocationWherever things are burning.

Posted 21 June 2021 - 10:11 PM

View PostSPNKRGrenth, on 21 June 2021 - 08:58 PM, said:

Flamers just need a full entire redesign from the ground up. Throw the whole thing out and start fresh.

THIS!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here's the issue that neither side of the debate I'm seeing in this thread is addressing:

Currently Flamers took the exponential scaling heat generation and kept it! Flamers do exponentially increasing heat damage and build-up. Both are affected by exponential scaling. Where is this a huge problem? When the heat damage starts at a whopping 4 Heat DPS and it just goes up from there as long as you keep the flamers on your target (which, lets admit, is not hard to do with a hit-scan weapon). This makes a single Flamer absurd for doing heat damage. Take any comparison metric you want, TT or prior MW games or HBS Battletech, a single Flamer was never meant to be crippling to an opponent.

Then throw in the doubly absurd "free fire window" which causes a Flamer to generate ZERO heat for 4.5 seconds (not including Ghost Heat penalties), and you have a weapon that is ripe for abuse.

If you don't address these inherent flaws, then the weapon remains ripe for abuse to people who know how to abuse it and utter trash for everyone who doesn't. I personally stopped using Flamers when these changes were implemented because I refuse to abuse a broken mechanic. I was also extremely frustrated over the complete removal of any real physical damage from the weapon, which I personally thought was just a pointless move.

Why did this happen? Because Russ refused to dedicate the engineering time (all the way back in 2013, no less, and even with Flamergeddon in 2015) to actually scrap the broken Flamer code that PGI had to admit that THEY DIDN'T UNDERSTAND HOW IT WORKED ANYMORE! Literally . . . the engineer that designed the original Flamer code moved on to a different company. Therefore, now that we have the opportunity, we need to actually fix the weapon.

How do we address this? Scrap the Flamer and restart from scratch.

Copy/paste the core code of the machine gun, another hit-scan weapon with the same basic mechanics. PGI already did this base premise for the Flamers of MW5 and it needs to happen for MWO. After that you tune the weapons for the environment we have in MWO instead of the single player coop experience of MW5.

Give them a fixed flat DPS of 1.2-1.4 so the weapon does what it's always supposed to be able to do, viable physical damage.

Set the heat damage to a fixed flat value such as 1.6-2.0 Heat DPS. Retain the 90% heat cap so that if someone does actually get someone to high heat, stun-locking cannot be abused.

At the same time, set the weapon's heat generation at a flat value of 1.0 HPS. By the time you would get an opponent to 90% heat, you don't have much extra firing time left in yourself, either. Therefore, you can't abuse the system and you're not shutting down a bunch of mechs.

Put in a standard range of 90m and a max range of something small, like 120, which creates a steep but reasonable drop-off. It then feels like every other energy and ballistic weapon in the game with damage dropoff outside of maximum range.

If you really want Ghost Heat at that point, put it in at something such as more than 6 Flamers, because at that point you'd be inflicting up to 12 Heat DPS (depending on what the value is set at), which could get even heatsink laden mechs to 90% in short order . . . as well as yourself.

1 Flamer is a nuisance. 2 is a modest deterrent that negates a fair amount of any DHS equipped mech's cooling. 3-6 becomes dangerous, but more than that becomes difficult for anyone to handle or it's an overboated gimmick that won't be able to handle its own heat generation.

Now, if you don't want to reengineer the entire weapon with copy-pasting techniques, people long ago parsed the game data and realized this could be done with basic XML adjustments to the Flamer's stats. You set the exponential scaling seed values to 0, thereby shutting off the scaling mechanics. Then you set the flat values from there and adjust the other values as necessary.

In the end, the Flamer is supposed to be a support weapon that can cause a hinderance to enemy heat dissipation while also inflicting some damage on the opponent. It's supposed to allow you to move in on the enemy, do some damage, and get out without the fear of as much returning fire from your opponent.

Edited by Sereglach, 22 June 2021 - 10:56 AM.


#59 Aidan Crenshaw

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Mercenary
  • The Mercenary
  • 2,776 posts

Posted 21 June 2021 - 10:38 PM

View PostVoice of Kerensky, on 21 June 2021 - 10:04 PM, said:

I looked a little more closely at the list of updated Mech Agility.
What I didn't like.
I noticed that the new patch does not show the mechs that received the mobility improvements in the previous patch. At first glance, everything is logical. However, I disagree with this. This approach views the most immobile mechs separately from all others. But it's not right. It is necessary to consider the mechs not only each separately, but each in relation to other mechs. And now I ask you to understand what I am talking about. The previous patch improved the mobility of the most immobile 'Mechs (except Dire Wolf) in order to bring their mobility up to the mobility of all other' Mechs in the game. Increase their survivability in this way. And that was great. But in the new patch, the mobility of all other mechs was also improved, which again returned everything to its old places (dropped the mechs that received improvements in the previous patch). All the previous improvements to maneuverability with the introduction of this patch will be simply discounted.
Quite frankly, when there was talk of improving the mobility of 'Mechs, I thought it would only improve the mobility of those' Mechs that really have huge problems with their design. Take a look at Timber Wolfe, Dire Wolfe - a low-lying cockpit, even lower-located main armament (except for the LRM), a huge profile from any angle, weak armor, weak structure. And now, it would seem a holiday - they got an improvement in mobility. But no, all the other 'Mechs got the same improvement in mobility. Thus, these 'Mechs have not really gotten better on the background the rest mechs.

Yes, I understand that many people from the Cauldron (and beyond) will disagree with me, but I want them to at least get acquainted with my point of view.


You are misinterpreting things here. The mobility changes of may and of june came all from the same document that was developed by the cauldron. The initial 8 chassis only got in first because PGI ran into issues implementing the values and ran out of time for the patch. Thus, with today's patch, we see the whole proposal of mech agility by the cauldron come to effect. You could say, the 8 chassis from the may patch were over-agile for one month, not vice-versa.

edit: not a cauldron member, by the way.

Edited by Aidan Crenshaw, 21 June 2021 - 10:39 PM.


#60 masdero

    Rookie

  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 8 posts
  • LocationItaly

Posted 21 June 2021 - 11:09 PM

Please write the all timestamps as UTC+0 time.

"Patch Date and Time - June 22nd 2021 @ 10AM – 1PM PDT", so we do not have to check timezones, DST and so on.

The public of this game is all over the globe, so UTC+0 is simpler, because everybody knows the UTC offset (inclusive of DST) they are in.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users