333 replies to this topic

[denAirwalkerrr]

justcallme A S H, on 20 October 2021 - 03:03 AM, said:

Because c ERPPC is extremely strong.

Why would you buff something that is one of the strongest weapons in the game?

Because I play only clans in FP and whine how OP IS mechs are.

[Hawok79]

It is an open secret that Balancing for PGI means,buffing the IS.We all know why!!!In this Game its all About pinpoint and mobility.
Every Time i chose an IS Mech,I twice my kills.They have simple a better mobility and less Facetime,most of them buid flat,have more Armor,more Buffs,higher and better splited Hardpoints etc.

In 5 Years iplay this Game i always hear ,mimi Clans are OP.
The Oposite is fact.A skilled Player takes more advantage of playing the IS Side.

Edited by Hawok79, 20 October 2021 - 03:17 AM.

[Rosarius]

Staude, on 20 October 2021 - 01:00 AM, said:

you may be right but there are things where you should ask yourself if that is correct
Comando buff ?
Stalker buff?
Fafnir?

why was the speed of the ERPPC from IS side changed after so many years

Weapons system with point damage are on the IS side

2x Heavy Gauss
2x Light Gauss-2x ERPPC
3 Snub Nose 1 AC 20 all no gost heat
max 50 DMG

There are only a relatively small number of mechs that can field these effectively (that is, not have to sacrifice too much armour / ammo / engine to make it work). We are talking 70t IS mechs or more

Staude, on 20 October 2021 - 01:00 AM, said:

Clan
2x Gauss or
2x ER PPC
max 30 DMG

There has never been, and never will be, a perfect balance And I think you know exactly what I mean

On the other hand... 2 x ER PPC can easily fit on a clan light mech (adder, cute fox). Dual gauss, easy on a 50t HBK-IIC. Bigger mechs can field these PLUS extra

Heaven forbid we mention a dual gauss, dual er large, six er med dire wolf's ghost heat free alpha. Sure it's not all pinpoint but shooting at centre mass will remove SOMETHING important

[Staude Coston]

justcallme A S H, on 20 October 2021 - 01:34 AM, said:

IS ERPPC has not had a velocity change.

denAirwalkerrr, on 20 October 2021 - 03:09 AM, said:

Because I play only clans in FP and whine how OP IS mechs are.

Yes, exactly, and I got the 3x Rank 20 from the IS side as a gift

[McGoat]

justcallme A S H, on 20 October 2021 - 03:03 AM, said:

Because c ERPPC is extremely strong.

Why would you buff something that is one of the strongest weapons in the game?

Plz give cERPPC buffs.

[Gas Guzzler]

Staude, on 20 October 2021 - 01:55 AM, said:

Clan AC10 or 20 no point damage

IS ER PPC was increased a long time ago
but as always you are right

4 cAC10 and 2 cER PPC does 40 PPFLD damage, and 60 total (70 including splash). cAC10s have TWO pellets, and it is extremely easy to get that on target.

IS ER PPC had more velocity than the rest because it is heavier and larger than a cER PPC and doesn’t have any splash damage.

[C337Skymaster]

Commoners, on 19 October 2021 - 02:38 PM, said:

A good example of power creep or power inflation was when the KDK was released, particularly the KDK3, with its original agility stats. That moved the baseline so far upward that a whole lot of chassis in that 600-700m role were rendered almost immediately obsolete.

The solution to that should have been to simply remove the extra ballistic hardpoints and leave the rest of the 'mech alone. KDK is known for mobility, not firepower, but PGI made it into a firepower platform, and took away its mobility. I miss my launch-day Kodiaks.

pattonesque, on 19 October 2021 - 03:25 PM, said:

you gotta put it on a Fafnir-6U, which is an incredibly slow mech with hitboxes that vacuum every shot to the CT

It's a monstrously powerful build balanced by the fact that if you let a Fafnir get that close to you it's kinda on you, you know?

Yes and no: if your own firepower is similarly range limited, you kinda have to get close, you know?

Heavy Money, on 19 October 2021 - 02:45 PM, said:

I actually agree with you here. I'm not convinced that buffing everything to match the highest performance weapons instead of nerfing just those was the correct way to go. But I do remember the community discussing this, and I certainly had the impression of a consensus that people didn't want any nerfs. So, maybe it was the wrong general policy. But, accepting that this policy has been chosen, the balance decisions made since then are all very internally consistent.

When did "the community" discuss this? I don't remember any forum posts regarding these changes at all, until after they were set in stone. I wouldn't consider any Discord channel owned or operated by anyone to be representative of "the community" since it's guaranteed to have less than a quorum signed up to participate, just by the sheer volume of discord channels in existence, and the sheer number of casual players.

I can bet, though, that public opinion can be easily manipulated by how information is presented: yes, everyone hates the word "Nerf" (which I'm sure that corporation is becoming increasingly incensed by ), but if you present data in the form of a bar graph, instead of using the word "nerf", it will be plainly obvious to anyone looking at it, that you drop the two or three high bars so they line up with the rest of the graph, rather than raising the entire graph to match the one or two high bars. If nothing else, it's less work to change one thing than to change many things.

How a thing is presented is as important, if not more, than what is being presented.

Just food for thought.

Oh, and as far as the power creep cycle: even if you're simply "equalizing" the weapons based on one or two baselines, the total firepower coming from 12 'mechs went up. I haven't been in a match, yet, where all 12 'mechs were running cERPPCs or IS MPLs, so the power of the remaining weapons went up, thus the total firepower on the map went up. Now, we're buffing armor quirks to try to compensate for all that added firepower. If you maintain a policy of "no nerfs" (which seems to be how this all started) then when an armor quirk overshoots, the weapons have to be brought up to match it, etc. That is the "power creep cycle" that is being observed. It is now up to the Cauldron and PGI to prove that observation wrong.

If, on the other hand, the three or four outlying weapons had been nerfed, then the remaining mass of weapons, and consequently the armor quirks, wouldn't have needed to be touched, or could even have been reduced, which at one point was a stated objective of what has become known as "The Dequirkening".

[Rizzi Kell]

denAirwalkerrr, on 19 October 2021 - 09:51 PM, said:

Rizzi's worst nightmare: https://mwo.nav-alph...18e99ad5_ARC-5W

and here is danAirwalkerrrs nightmare, oh it could not kill an Kraken or a kingcrab...
https://mwo.nav-alph...67e3_DWF-PRIMEI

[John Bronco]

C337Skymaster, on 20 October 2021 - 08:21 AM, said:

If you maintain a policy of "no nerfs" (which seems to be how this all started) then when an armor quirk overshoots, the weapons have to be brought up to match it, etc.

That may be the general policy, but there's plenty of evidence that cauldron will implement nerfs where necessary, just off the top of my head they've nerfed:

• IV4, BJ, AWS quirks
  
• cLPL ghost heat increases
  
• Micropulse heat limit
  
• HPPC heat
  
• Snubs
  
• Streaks
  
• SNV-1 and NSR-9P

[pattonesque]

C337Skymaster, on 20 October 2021 - 08:21 AM, said:

Yes and no: if your own firepower is similarly range limited, you kinda have to get close, you know?

then it sounds like the mech requires either the pilot to be good enough to get close or the enemy to make a mistake to allow him to get close, which sounds balanced to me

[Rizzi Kell]

btw i give you a shortcut of what i whant to discuss for upcomming patches:
tonnagelimit on clanside: make it equal to IS Side
combination of 6 Medlasers on clan without ghostheat when firing additional small lasers, equal to IS
Get back to pree patch of april. okay get the mobilitypatches done that was a good part.

[Duke Falcon]

Yesterday I patched the game...
Today tried to launch it but can not: suggested to use the fixing tool...
Used...
GAMEDATA missing?! WTF?!
Now downloading gamedata.pak...

Cool patch. The next would also mix up the base game files? Or it is a special trick-or-**** event?
Because the problem occurred right after the latest patch. Prior to patch game worked well, sooooooooooo.................

[C337Skymaster]

pattonesque, on 20 October 2021 - 09:08 AM, said:

then it sounds like the mech requires either the pilot to be good enough to get close or the enemy to make a mistake to allow him to get close, which sounds balanced to me

I'm not sure if you're misunderstanding me, or if I'm misunderstanding you.

The build is what, a Fafnir with dual UAC/20's and some sort of energy backup?

Take as its opponent an Atlas with 4x ASRM6 and an AC/20 (or even a UAC/20).

If the argument in favor of the Fafnir's firepower is that you have to get close to use it, then it should be compared against other builds that will have to fight it within the same range bracket, such as that Atlas (which was a Meta build back in the Pre-Desync days).

Now I haven't run any numbers, or compared hitboxes, or have any idea which of those two would actually win a duel between exactly equal pilots. My point simply is that saying "it's your fault for getting close to it" is a bad excuse when you don't have any weapons that can outrange it.

[pattonesque]

C337Skymaster, on 20 October 2021 - 11:55 AM, said:

I'm not sure if you're misunderstanding me, or if I'm misunderstanding you.

The build is what, a Fafnir with dual UAC/20's and some sort of energy backup?

Take as its opponent an Atlas with 4x ASRM6 and an AC/20 (or even a UAC/20).

If the argument in favor of the Fafnir's firepower is that you have to get close to use it, then it should be compared against other builds that will have to fight it within the same range bracket, such as that Atlas (which was a Meta build back in the Pre-Desync days).

Now I haven't run any numbers, or compared hitboxes, or have any idea which of those two would actually win a duel between exactly equal pilots. My point simply is that saying "it's your fault for getting close to it" is a bad excuse when you don't have any weapons that can outrange it.

I think you're being a bit pedantic here. If that Fafnir and an Atlas go head to head it's probably a tossup as the Fafnir will heatcap quickly, has no jam quirks, and has worse hitboxes. I was referring mainly to things that outrange it.

[C337Skymaster]

pattonesque, on 20 October 2021 - 12:01 PM, said:

I think you're being a bit pedantic here. If that Fafnir and an Atlas go head to head it's probably a tossup as the Fafnir will heatcap quickly, has no jam quirks, and has worse hitboxes. I was referring mainly to things that outrange it.

Well, that's always supposed to have been the tradeoff with any weapon systems: Long ranged weapons are inefficient at close range, usually because of damage, or heat, or something. Brawling with ERLLs isn't supposed to be possible.

But my point again: it's unfair to blame someone for simply "getting too close", because their build may not allow them any alternatives. That's the only point I was trying to make. It doesn't have to be an Atlas. It can be any SRM or AC/20 brawler.

EDIT: as for being pedantic, have you read ANY of my forum posts?!

Edited by C337Skymaster, 20 October 2021 - 12:22 PM.

[justcallme A S H]

pattonesque, on 20 October 2021 - 12:01 PM, said:

I think you're being a bit pedantic here. If that Fafnir and an Atlas go head to head it's probably a tossup as the Fafnir will heatcap quickly, has no jam quirks, and has worse hitboxes. I was referring mainly to things that outrange it.

Spot on. You just cannot compare something "oh but 1v1"...

When you have 12 players per side. Multiple modes. Engagement ranges and so on. The bigger picture comes well into play and that is what balancing is about.

If you can get your Dual UAC20 anything into position against enemies because of their lack of awareness, your good positioning or both... Pain should right be swiftly delivered.

[Damocles Commando]

Staude, on 20 October 2021 - 02:45 AM, said:

Yes, I know, but the question was why something like this was even done, or for what reason when there has been no change at the ERPPC for so many years

One word. Chris.

[D V Devnull]

Weird... I've read through approximately 12 pages of posts, and yet I don't see any info on what called for the ER Laser Duration Nerf to the SNV-1 Variant posted here. I unfortunately do not own one yet. Would it be possible to ask for some insight on this, please?

~D. V. "just curious what got the SNV-1 toasted out of a Quirk with the Oct. 2021 Patch stuff" Devnull

[The6thMessenger]

D V Devnull, on 20 October 2021 - 04:23 PM, said:

Weird... I've read through approximately 12 pages of posts, and yet I don't see any info on what called for the ER Laser Duration Nerf to the SNV-1 Variant posted here. I unfortunately do not own one yet. Would it be possible to ask for some insight on this, please?

~D. V. "just curious what got the SNV-1 toasted out of a Quirk with the Oct. 2021 Patch stuff" Devnull

I think it's because it got +1 LL., that means it can alternate between 3 by 3 CERLL from a distance, would be completely oppressive on massive maps like Boreal Vault and Alpine Peaks.

I wonder how broken a 3x HLL though?

[dario03]

D V Devnull, on 20 October 2021 - 04:23 PM, said:

Weird... I've read through approximately 12 pages of posts, and yet I don't see any info on what called for the ER Laser Duration Nerf to the SNV-1 Variant posted here. I unfortunately do not own one yet. Would it be possible to ask for some insight on this, please?

~D. V. "just curious what got the SNV-1 toasted out of a Quirk with the Oct. 2021 Patch stuff" Devnull

Because in a previous patch it got erll hsl+1 which is a strong quirk. And one of things that makes it strong is it allows the mech to fire all of its lasers in a shorter duration. So for instance a common build is 6erll and instead of 2+2+2 you just have to delay once and do 3+3.