356 replies to this topic

[dario03]

Bassault, on 11 January 2024 - 11:02 AM, said:

I'm sorry but this is not true at all. Top tier players play quickplay solo all the time, with a variety of builds. Magic Pain Glove streams all the time, he plays solo almost exclusively, and he plays both good mechs and terrible ones. Geeram used to stream often, and he plays solo almost exclusively. Bear Claw streams every now and then and he plays solo very often, often plays a variety of mechs of many different varieties, some of his favorites include 48.6kph Atlas brawlers (Which are very bad). I've seen Dario03 playing quickplay solo all the damn time. Mister Somaru plays non-meta mechs all the time, plays solo very often. I can go on and on, but this idea that the top players just group up and only play the best meta mechs is false. Of course there are top players who group up and smash pugs, sometimes with meta mechs, but that does not represent all of them and it does not represent the cauldron.

There's also this pervasive idea that if I don't build my mech reasonably or if I don't use a horrible mixture of weapons that won't work together, that means I'm playing a meta mech. I hope this is not what you are referring to, because if you are, then the only thing I can say about that is that it's absolutely silly to run terrible builds that don't work. Putting the heatsinks in the right spot and putting weapons that work well with my chassis does not make a mech a "meta mech." One thing is playing a mech that is bad but doing your best to make it work, or giving it a fun loadout that works in a niche situation, or playing a mech for it's gimmick, but playing something that is just flat out bad with no redeeming qualities is not what the game should be balanced around, because if it was, balance would not exist.
.

Well, you can't expect to make declarations on how things work and should work and then not expect people to check for credibility. Think of it like this, It's like when a quack doctor tries to peddle some miracle diet, people will look at his credentials and merit, and come to the conclusion that he's an idiot or he's lying.

It's been about 3 years since anyone would have seen me as dario03 in a group drop in QP. Maybe a couple drops a couple years ago but I switched to just solo around the time Cauldron started balance decisions. And a couple years before that most QP games were solo, would usually play FP if grouping.
I might go back to solo/group though, can keep track of solo/group separately. Though I do think groups of 4 have to much sway on matches and would support at least trying a group of 3 limit.

[Duke Falcon]

So, if one is better in game "knows" how to balance? Or they know how to bent the game to keep them still "the best" players?
A game MUST NOT BE BALANCED around the best players. Just saying.
WHY?!
The bulk of players play for fun and not "being l33t comps" whom have no real life out of the game. The "balance" would piss of once enough players to leave a game demands a few mechs armed with a few weapons good for only a few certain playstyles.
Then?
You "super l33t compiez" remain alone and wonder why the game deserted and got shut down..?
A game must be balance around and for the weaker players because they grant the bulk of the playerbase. If one is so "good" then not need real balance BECAUSE learned how to adapt and learn new ways and tactics.
Being good in a game means nothing if you are not good in anything in LIFE. And that came from someone who bored by cancer and sometimes want to die. BUT because not belong to the "super l33ts" he's opinion is weightless. I play this game for fun but less and less fun remains because "bent things as balance".
And it's not about (just) the f*cking LRMs. The whole system were damned when neglected that all weapons need lock. You can snap-shot\dumbfire but that ALWAYS has a chance of miss. The solution would be introduce proper lock mechanics or %-chance of miss system shooting without lock. Targeting systems are not invented to waste money and place and have a reason installed on every single vehicles from tanks to f*king ships. Point toward something not MEANS your weapons also head that direction.
Of course mankind and technology seems more and more incompatible, my bad!

EDIT
You know what? I don't care! It's just a mere game...
Be it yours and be happy with it!

Edited by Duke Falcon, 11 January 2024 - 01:21 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Duke Falcon, on 11 January 2024 - 01:16 PM, said:

You "super l33t compiez" remain alone and wonder why the game deserted and got shut down..?

The game "died" well before "l33t compiez" even took over. I'm aware there is still a launcher but Steam is still a good gauge of player population.

https://steamdb.info...200/charts/#all

And pretty sure the cauldron didn't get keys until after this patch: https://mwomercs.com...atch-notes/2500

In other words, this game has long since been "dead"

Edit: I forget Jarl's also shows player count that happens to line up with the steam launch: https://leaderboard.isengrim.org/stats

And it bears a similar graph.

Edited by Quicksilver Aberration, 11 January 2024 - 01:28 PM.

[Vxheous]

Duke Falcon, on 11 January 2024 - 01:16 PM, said:

So, if one is better in game "knows" how to balance? Or they know how to bent the game to keep them still "the best" players?
A game MUST NOT BE BALANCED around the best players. Just saying.
WHY?!
The bulk of players play for fun and not "being l33t comps" whom have no real life out of the game. The "balance" would piss of once enough players to leave a game demands a few mechs armed with a few weapons good for only a few certain playstyles.
Then?
You "super l33t compiez" remain alone and wonder why the game deserted and got shut down..?
A game must be balance around and for the weaker players because they grant the bulk of the playerbase. If one is so "good" then not need real balance BECAUSE learned how to adapt and learn new ways and tactics.
Being good in a game means nothing if you are not good in anything in LIFE. And that came from someone who bored by cancer and sometimes want to die. BUT because not belong to the "super l33ts" he's opinion is weightless. I play this game for fun but less and less fun remains because "bent things as balance".
And it's not about (just) the f*cking LRMs. The whole system were damned when neglected that all weapons need lock. You can snap-shot\dumbfire but that ALWAYS has a chance of miss. The solution would be introduce proper lock mechanics or %-chance of miss system shooting without lock. Targeting systems are not invented to waste money and place and have a reason installed on every single vehicles from tanks to f*king ships. Point toward something not MEANS your weapons also head that direction.
Of course mankind and technology seems more and more incompatible, my bad!

The l33t comps probably have more of a life outside of the game. Back when EmpyreaL won the World Championship 3 times in 4 years, the vast bulk of our players played maybe 30-50 quickplay matches a month. Outside of that, we would spend about 3 nights a week practicing in private lobbies for about 2 hrs each session. Add that all up and that's still far less playtime than the typical "I'm just casual" player that has 300+ quickplay matches a month, playing 1-3 hrs a night 5+ nights a week.

Many of us played at the highest level of the game while still having a "normal" life, aka, families with kids, full time professional job, other hobbies besides gaming, etc. We were successful in game and outside the game, unlike so many "casuals" that make excuses about their lack of skill.

Edited by Vxheous, 11 January 2024 - 01:27 PM.

[Bassault]

Duke Falcon, on 11 January 2024 - 01:16 PM, said:

So, if one is better in game "knows" how to balance? Or they know how to bent the game to keep them still "the best" players?
A game MUST NOT BE BALANCED around the best players. Just saying.
WHY?!
The bulk of players play for fun and not "being l33t comps" whom have no real life out of the game. The "balance" would piss of once enough players to leave a game demands a few mechs armed with a few weapons good for only a few certain playstyles.
Then?
You "super l33t compiez" remain alone and wonder why the game deserted and got shut down..?
A game must be balance around and for the weaker players because they grant the bulk of the playerbase. If one is so "good" then not need real balance BECAUSE learned how to adapt and learn new ways and tactics.
Being good in a game means nothing if you are not good in anything in LIFE. And that came from someone who bored by cancer and sometimes want to die. BUT because not belong to the "super l33ts" he's opinion is weightless. I play this game for fun but less and less fun remains because "bent things as balance".
And it's not about (just) the f*cking LRMs. The whole system were damned when neglected that all weapons need lock. You can snap-shot\dumbfire but that ALWAYS has a chance of miss. The solution would be introduce proper lock mechanics or %-chance of miss system shooting without lock. Targeting systems are not invented to waste money and place and have a reason installed on every single vehicles from tanks to f*king ships. Point toward something not MEANS your weapons also head that direction.
Of course mankind and technology seems more and more incompatible, my bad!

EDIT
You know what? I don't care! It's just a mere game...
Be it yours and be happy with it!

I'm sorry but do you remember WC 2018? It was stock mechs, what you guys always wanted. Claimed that the meta was tailored toward tryhards, that's why you guys weren't doing good. Well, the tryhard compies won that too, with stock mechs, so no you're wrong. Balance isn't tailored to compies, compies will beat you with anything any time, unfortunately for you.

It makes no sense to balance the game for the lowest denominator of skill because at that level, anyone can get away with anything. People stand still and don't realize they're being shot in the back, etc. And then, if players do improve, they will probably quit the game if it's unbalanced at the top. A good video game rewards players for learning how to play it, not handing them everything on a silver platter. Anyway, if you really want to go by that logic that the game should be balanced by the low tiers, we should SEVERELY nerf LRMs, because for the majority of the playerbase, LRMs are very strong because they don't have to aim or think, which covers their weaknesses.

Anyway, the Cauldron always takes into account lower tier experiences so I don't even know what you're complaining about.

As for lock-ons being reworked, it'll never happen because PGI is done putting effort into developing this game. And your suggestion... is awful. % based chance to hit is just a dice roll, and that is very bad game design that creates frustration for players who want things to be fair.

[Vxheous]

Bassault, on 11 January 2024 - 01:30 PM, said:

I'm sorry but do you remember WC 2018? It was stock mechs, what you guys always wanted. Claimed that the meta was tailored toward tryhards, that's why you guys weren't doing good. Well, the tryhard compies won that too, with stock mechs, so no you're wrong. Balance isn't tailored to compies, compies will beat you with anything any time, unfortunately for you.

In 2018, EmP beat pretty much everyone in the comp queue (amd came in 2nd overall in the grand finals), and we did it primarily with LRM/laser combo mechs like a stalker 3F, Archer 2R, and Hunchback 4J. We played the whole "use lights to contest caps while lrm support sways the fight in favour of our lights" get cap lead, continue to burn our lrms into mid game, and then close to use lasers to close out the matches.

We tryhards were still vastly better at playing that style than those that claim it was only the meta that held them back. It didn't matter what mech handicaps we were forced to play with, our overall understanding of the game and situational awareness still proved us as superior MWO players.

That being said, I do not ever want to play IS only stock 3039 tech standard engine single heatsink mechs in any tournament format ever again. It was slow and it was dull

Edited by Vxheous, 11 January 2024 - 02:07 PM.

[BlueDevilspawn]

Balance is balance - there was a point at which IS MPL and CERPPC were the primary weapons and the most viable mechs designed around those. The cauldron has made multiple chassis, variants, and weapons if not meta, then viable. Calculations like dps, dph, sheer alpha, boat-ability, etc. are factors in balance. Good players play ALL the weapon and mech types to see if anything plays poorly or feels weak/overpowered. The builds and skill trees (e.g. for LRMs) must be fully optimized to be tested (not some cludged together mech build nor a non-optimal tree)

Therefore, the notion of being in the Cauldron as a good pilot means one is able to play any weight class, mech, variant, weapons, etc. to properly gauge whether a weapon is too strong or too weak. Anyone can theorycraft, but to actually apply it in QP is another question. If one can't handle gauss charge, or position properly, etc. then they aren't properly testing mechs/weapons for proper balance.

If the game were balanced around the lower tier play, what consistency is there to prove a weapon isn't OP or is? Or a certain chassis is too strong or isn't?

As I've said in a previous post, the overlap of comp is simply because many comp players incidentally happen to be among the best players. However, the Cauldron's focus is primarily on QP.

Finally, as was posted above, I think all of the Cauldron members are professionals with careers (plenty of engineers btw) or in one case a college student, and have all the usual trappings of a "normal" life as one puts it (family, kids, etc). To make the assumption that they have no lives except MWO and live in their parents' basements is a stereotypical and incorrect assumption (frankly it's copium). Oh and a number of them love the universe/lore, but understand the distinction between tabletop and first-person shooter balance.

[redacted]

Edited by Ekson Valdez, 15 January 2024 - 03:15 AM.
discussing moderation

[Heavy Money]

Amazing how the arguments in this thread have devolved into "We have secret balance knowledge because we are bad at the game. You just wouldn't get it, toxic compie."

[Lion El Johnsonn]

[kalashnikity]

I think PGI can clearly see that the player base is enthusiastically not ok with Cauldron regulating LRMs to the dust bin of history, just because a certain tiny subset of customers does not like them and wants to impugn anybody who enjoys using them.

Edited by kalashnikity, 11 January 2024 - 11:44 PM.

[Curccu]

kalashnikity, on 11 January 2024 - 11:43 PM, said:

I think PGI can clearly see that the player base is enthusiastically not ok with Cauldron regulating LRMs to the dust bin of history, just because a certain tiny subset of customers does not like them and wants to impugn anybody who enjoys using them.

Who is this player base?

[Mousarchy]

ScrapIron Prime, on 06 January 2024 - 01:41 PM, said:

Yeah, seconded. ANOTHER LRM nerf? The missiles are already subsonic, you want to slow them down even more? And what, give that velocity back on Artemis so there’s another tax on being able to fire indirect?

It better be a helluva velocity boost for Artemis… like MRM speed.

everyone so set on avoiding using AMS so much because 'muh dps'. they need that 1.5t; they gotta nerf the weapon thats generally considered "bad" unless you boat 80+ of em.
I feel they are justifing the velo nerf cuz "shallower angel so the speed is to make the time to arive approximatly the same" while ignoring this basically means they are weaker to ams AND weak to the smallest of cover

[Duke Falcon]

Bassault, on 11 January 2024 - 01:30 PM, said:

I'm sorry but do you remember WC 2018? It was stock mechs, what you guys always wanted. Claimed that the meta was tailored toward tryhards, that's why you guys weren't doing good. Well, the tryhard compies won that too, with stock mechs, so no you're wrong. Balance isn't tailored to compies, compies will beat you with anything any time, unfortunately for you.

It makes no sense to balance the game for the lowest denominator of skill because at that level, anyone can get away with anything. People stand still and don't realize they're being shot in the back, etc. And then, if players do improve, they will probably quit the game if it's unbalanced at the top. A good video game rewards players for learning how to play it, not handing them everything on a silver platter. Anyway, if you really want to go by that logic that the game should be balanced by the low tiers, we should SEVERELY nerf LRMs, because for the majority of the playerbase, LRMs are very strong because they don't have to aim or think, which covers their weaknesses.

Anyway, the Cauldron always takes into account lower tier experiences so I don't even know what you're complaining about.

As for lock-ons being reworked, it'll never happen because PGI is done putting effort into developing this game. And your suggestion... is awful. % based chance to hit is just a dice roll, and that is very bad game design that creates frustration for players who want things to be fair.

I play since 2021. So no, not remember.
Joined earlier but I were a staunch XP-user so I could barely may able to got MWO work.

But...

Considering everything for REAL, all these debates are pointless. MWO cannot be balanced. You know it, I know it, PGI know it and even Cauldron know it. Most that could be achieved that some terrible things get less terrible but not balanced. That need some "go deep into the code" because certain mechanics are implemented badly.

As for LRMs, I not consider them a real threath ever since I play this game. Those weren't threathing when I were a cadet. Easy to counter them even on low tiers. On my tier. They never were a serious weapon without dedicated help-hands and they just got nerfed again and again. ECM + AMS with some cover and done! The only good thing about them is that it is funny as they fill the sky and rain down BUT you know they would not really cause any real harm. Those just fun to play time to time. Basicly.

HAGs... Splash is a bit strange for them. Spread would be more sane. HAG is essentially GAUSS. But I wonder how splash would work? Like cER-PPC it would transfer 2.5 damage for neighbouring parts? Overall or per bullets? Overall keep them still pretty strong. Per bullets make them a bit strange...

[Samziel]

Duke Falcon, on 12 January 2024 - 01:31 AM, said:

I play since 2021. So no, not remember.
Joined earlier but I were a staunch XP-user so I could barely may able to got MWO work.

But...

Considering everything for REAL, all these debates are pointless. MWO cannot be balanced. You know it, I know it, PGI know it and even Cauldron know it. Most that could be achieved that some terrible things get less terrible but not balanced. That need some "go deep into the code" because certain mechanics are implemented badly.

As for LRMs, I not consider them a real threath ever since I play this game. Those weren't threathing when I were a cadet. Easy to counter them even on low tiers. On my tier. They never were a serious weapon without dedicated help-hands and they just got nerfed again and again. ECM + AMS with some cover and done! The only good thing about them is that it is funny as they fill the sky and rain down BUT you know they would not really cause any real harm. Those just fun to play time to time. Basicly.

HAGs... Splash is a bit strange for them. Spread would be more sane. HAG is essentially GAUSS. But I wonder how splash would work? Like cER-PPC it would transfer 2.5 damage for neighbouring parts? Overall or per bullets? Overall keep them still pretty strong. Per bullets make them a bit strange...

Hag change is indeed per bullet, which reduces its "pinpoint" damage by 20%. Total damage uneffected but I'd say its still quite a nerf in total.

Last year I made a stock only account for fun.I got myself an ACW-A. It has 2 SPL, 2SRM6s and 2 LRM15s. I was able to do 1200 damage mostly with the LRMs in T5. People simply didnt even notice they were rained upon. Obviously that was only a single game, but lurming was easy and quite consistent. The map was FWC btw, a map lots of LRM players complain about having too much cover for LRMs.

Not saying its always this easy, but T5 players are an easy target for them. I stopped playing the account shortly after. It's not fun to smurf.

Edited by Samziel, 12 January 2024 - 02:24 AM.

[w0qj]

I’ve jumped the gun to summarize the Jan’2024 Patch for HAG:
https://mwomercs.com...auldron-changes

Clan: HAG20 / HAG30 / HAG40 (Hyper Assault Gauss Rifle)
~~HAG20: 4x projectile shells per burst (Projectile Shell damage+splash profile: 0.5 / 4 / 0.5)
~~HAG30: 6x projectile shells per burst (Projectile Shell damage+splash profile: 0.5 / 4 / 0.5)
~~HAG40: 8x projectile shells per burst (Projectile Shell damage+splash profile: 0.5 / 4 / 0.5)

Duke Falcon, on 12 January 2024 - 01:31 AM, said:

…HAGs... Splash is a bit strange for them. Spread would be more sane. HAG is essentially GAUSS. But I wonder how splash would work? Like cER-PPC it would transfer 2.5 damage for neighbouring parts? Overall or per bullets? Overall keep them still pretty strong. Per bullets make them a bit strange...

Edited by w0qj, 12 January 2024 - 05:24 AM.

[MechMaster059]

ScrapIron Prime, on 11 January 2024 - 08:39 AM, said:

The first rule of engineer club, don't talk about being in engineer club. I know this because I'm an engineer.

LOL. It appears the forum mod has removed Quicksilver's post asking people to drink a shot every time I claim I'm an engineer, which I wasn't offended by and found amusing.

I say I'm an engineer because I feel it's important people realize what they're dealing with in much of the Cauldron. Yes, many of them are skilled players but they miss simple things over and over every patch and it drives me FRIGGIN NUTS. It took me 1 minute to compute those updated 2 caliber ballistic +ammo/ton skill values on my hand calculator. Those settings are almost certainly in a flat file that could be fixed in 2 seconds. Couple the ease with which these changes could be made with the obnoxious "I know better because I'm Tier 1 so I'm not listening to you" mentality displayed by these "Gold Champ" players and it gets frustrating.

I know my place in the engineer hierarchy. I consider myself merely a decent software engineer, above-average, but nothing spectacular. I'd be blown away by the engineers working at NASA or Tesla. That's what's infuriating though, the bar is set so low for dotting every I and crossing every T in these patches, yet it doesn't get done. Then to make it worse, even after pointing out these flaws I know they likely will NOT be fixed... ever.

Cauldron Motto:
"If we don't fix it, we can pretend it's not broken."

ScrapIron Prime, on 11 January 2024 - 08:39 AM, said:

What he is wrong about is that PGI would care from a customer service point of view.

LMAO


On to... Bassault.

Bassault, on 10 January 2024 - 10:31 AM, said:

Just because a weapon takes no skill to use, that doesn't mean it has to be effective.

I want people to understand just how dangerous this statement is to weapon balance.

Bassault is stating that if a weapon "takes no skill to use", then it's acceptable for it to be INEFFECTIVE. I'm not misconstruing his words am I? I'm not exaggerating right?

Bassault, on 10 January 2024 - 10:31 AM, said:

Lock ons are easy for bad players to use, but their capacity to be effective compared to other weapons is limited (unless you have a narc spotter in a group lol). This is the way it should be

Let me put that in simple terms for all of you: Bassault doesn't care if LRMs or STREAKs suck. In his mind they SHOULD suck because they're so "easy" to use.

Pssst... hey, um Bassault... guess what happens if a weapons effectiveness drops below a certain threshold?... players stop equipping the weapon altogether... ya get it?
/slap Bassault

Yup, I slapped Bassault. That just happened folks. Now I've gone and done it...

Bassault, on 10 January 2024 - 10:31 AM, said:

When you say holding a lock on a light is VERY HARD, it is very hard but not because it takes some mastering of a very difficult skill. It is hard because the LRMs are so limited it just makes that not really possible in most circumstances.

Makes post after post claiming LRMs are easy mode, then acknowledges that holding a lock on a light mech is "not really possible in most circumstances".

Bassault, on 10 January 2024 - 10:31 AM, said:

Holding the lock itself takes no effort at all, its trivial.

You just said in your previous sentence that holding a lock on a light mech was "not really possible in most circumstances". Which is it?

Bassault, on 10 January 2024 - 10:31 AM, said:

You press R and move your mouse over a massive box over the enemy. You dont need to be precise or have perfect timing.

No way this guy has played an LRM mech any time recently. Holding the targeting reticle over a light mech maneuvering in the heat of combat below 300m is not easy at all. I'm not saying it's the hardest thing in the game, but it certainly isn't "trivial" as Bassault glibly claims it to be.

Bassault, on 11 January 2024 - 07:11 AM, said:

You're not good at the game and you clearly do not understand how it works. What makes you think should you be consulted for balancing the game then?

Proclaims I don't understand how the game works even though I reached Tier 2, have used every weapon, and played/own every different role of mech for over a year.
Ignores the fact that 2 changes I advocated for a year ago have been implemented. (increasing ammo/ton for 2,5,20 caliber ballistics; lowering UAC10 jam duration)
Ignores the fact I pointed out 2 flaws currenty in +ammo/ton skills for ballistics. (2 and 5 caliber ballistic +ammo/ton skills were not normalized with the increased ammo/ton buff; HAGs receive too much benefit from +ammo/ton skills)

Then asks me what makes me think I should be consulted for balancing the game. This kids arrogance is through the roof. It's OK Bassault, I know someone who's full of themselves can't help but be condescending.

Bassault, on 11 January 2024 - 07:11 AM, said:

Should I ask the fat guy at the sports bar for advice on how to compete in a NASCAR race or should I ask one of the drivers who has won them multiple times?

Let me give you a more accurate analogy using your NASCAR example. Who maintains the car? The driver or the mechanic?

You see Bassault, you're the driver and I'm the mechanic. And just for the record, the mechanic's job requires FAR MORE INTELLECT than the driver's.

You get to mindlessly drive around the track in your Stone Rhino AKSUM blasting any poor sap who happens to stand in front of you for 2 seconds while I, the mechanic, have to know all the in's and out's of the various car systems. I have to do the calculations and numeric analysis required to post about problems with the game. All you have to do is say "Get Gud" or "Be Tier 1 or GTFO".

Bassault, on 11 January 2024 - 07:11 AM, said:

When I was still learning how to play the game, I did not make great proclamations about balance and how things should be. I listened to others, I learned how things worked, I got good at the game, and then I started giving my two cents on how balance. I think you should improve at the game before you start acting like an expert.

I'm well past the "learning how to play" phase thank you. It's in the nature of the arrogant not to give proper credit where it's due and to look down upon the people around them.

=====

Folks, I could go on responding to Bassault but it's probably already gotten boring for those of you reading this. Let me give you my 2 cents about Bassault and also where I stand in the game.

I've seen Bassault in game. Not just once or twice, but probably about a dozen times. He's always piloting a heavily armed dakka/sniper assault mech. I've never seen Bassault pilot a light mech. None of the statements he makes or attitudes he displays surprise me. He fits every negative stereotype you'd expect of an assault sniper that thinks their style of play takes the most skill.

Let me clearly state that the sniper role is THE EASIEST and LEAST SKILLED way to play the game. I know this for a fact because the mech I used to grind up to Tier 2 was a Night Gyr HAG20 Sniper. (I experimented with Mad Cat II HAG builds and Shadowcat HAG builds as well) Here's my NTG-H build: A;<D<:B1|=Sph0UY7|m<2|l^|<S|<Sqh0SY7|0C|l^|<Sr]0RY7|WC|l^s]0VY7|WC|l^th0WY7uh0XY7v60QY7|mBw806060

Here's a picture of me first breaking into Tier 2:


Here's a picture of me currently back in the middle of Tier 3:


The reason I lost so much rating is that I got tired of grinding with the Night Gyr and had wanted to play some other mechs. One mech that caught my eye is the Charger Number 7 and when its 90% crit chance reduction got buffed to 100% I just had to see what that was like in game. Once I start playing a new mech I tend to go down a rabbit hole playing it incessantly in search of "The Build". I experiment with a wide variety of layouts trying to find what works best. The CGR-N7 was my first time experimenting with Heavy PPCs, regular PPCs, and Binary Laser Cannons. I knew playing a different mech and experimenting with different builds we cost me rating but I just had to play the N7. (This was also intermixed sometimes playing my dakka Rifleman, and my Trebuchet)

I learned a TON more about MWO with my little stint playing the N7. I learned just how under-powered IS PPC weapons are, I learned how kick-azz the BLC is, and I discovered another major flaw in the game.

I have absolutely no doubt I can grind my way back to Tier 2 using the Night Gyr. None. It's just a matter of sticking to the grind. What's so striking about the Sniper play style is just how much safer it is, and just how little margin for error it imposes upon the enemy. I can unload a 64 damage alpha in 1 second through a key hole out to 550m with this build.

Bassault likes to run his mouth about how much "skill" this play style requires but the reality is that "skill" only needs to be maintained for the briefest of moments when you aim and fire. You can massively punish the enemy, from far away, in a short amount of time, for little effort.

=====

Since you think you're more qualified to make balance suggestions Bassault, lets have a little design session here. What are your answers to the follow questions:

- There is a dead node in the skill tree, a node that is nearly useless no matter what mech or build. Can you guess which node?

- There is a cluster of nodes in the skill tree that give barely/no benefit to light mechs after the 1st point in the group. Can you guess which group?

- What do the following numbers refer to and do they indicate any kind of problem:
(3.75x120)/(1.70x0.5) = 529.4; (1.70/3.75) = 0.453
(3.75x150)/(2.00x0.5) = 562.5; (2.00/3.75) = 0.533
(4.30x200)/(1.70x1.0) = 505.8; (1.70/4.30) = 0.395
(4.40x200)/(2.25x1.0) = 391.1; (2.25/4.40) = 0.511
(5.65x220)/(2.55x2.0) = 243.7; (2.55/5.65) = 0.451

- There is a major flaw in how assault mechs move that I discovered when playing the CGR-N7. This flaw significantly reduces the usefulness of the Hard Break skill for assaults. Can you describe this flaw?

Edited by MechMaster059, 12 January 2024 - 03:48 AM.

[Samziel]

MechMaster059, on 12 January 2024 - 03:05 AM, said:

Enormous wall of text

Honestly, you not being higher tier is NOT because you refuse to play meta builds. I got T1 mostly using midrange/brawl builds that werent even comp builds or meta mechs.

Also you being engineer doesnt matter for the balance of a video game. Understanding the game does. Point of people (some blunt, some less so) saying LRMs shouldnt be too effective is that in essence the weapon aims for you. Yes, it shouldnt be a huge chore to get locks, but after you do they shouldnt be aimbot doomsday nukes. Thats whats being changed here. Make the weapon more consistent by offering you better locks and making the weapon (indirect fire) bit easier to evade.

I still wish we got a proper LRM apocalypse so newer players like you have a chance to experience how much it sucks to not be able to do anything after one guy spots you. There was a big exodus of players after one such patch, and I guess thats why Cauldron takes things very carefully when touching LRMs.

Edited by Samziel, 12 January 2024 - 04:11 AM.

[Saved By The Bell]

I played LRM orion (yeah! ON1-M) this week.
I tried many combo with ac20, snubs, mrm, lbx. And eventually returned to lrm, how it should be. It wasn`t bad.

Thats all, you still can play LRMs.

[Dogmeat1]

MechMaster059, on 12 January 2024 - 03:05 AM, said:

LOL. It appears the forum mod has removed Quicksilver's post asking people to drink a shot every time I claim I'm an engineer, which I wasn't offended by and found amusing.

I say I'm an engineer because I feel it's important people realize what they're dealing with in much of the Cauldron. Yes, many of them are skilled players but they miss simple things over and over every patch and it drives me FRIGGIN NUTS. It took me 1 minute to compute those updated 2 caliber ballistic +ammo/ton skill values on my hand calculator. Those settings are almost certainly in a flat file that could be fixed in 2 seconds. Couple the ease with which these changes could be made with the obnoxious "I know better because I'm Tier 1 so I'm not listening to you" mentality displayed by these "Gold Champ" players and it gets frustrating.

Repeatedly claiming to be an engineer is not going to win you any brownie points. There are at least 3 actual qualified engineers in the cauldron. I studied software engineering myself at a QS top 50 ranked university and plenty of my former comp teammates have similar levels of education. However, do you know what that means in terms of knowing and being able to balance a online multiplayer PvP game? Absolutely nothing. Competency and deep knowledge of the game mechanics, as well as a good understanding of the game files is what matters and the Cauldron are among the top of the MWO population in those regards.

Quote

Bassault is stating that if a weapon "takes no skill to use", then it's acceptable for it to be INEFFECTIVE. I'm not misconstruing his words am I? I'm not exaggerating right?

You are misinterpreting what people are telling you. The point is that a weapon that requires less skill to use should not outperform weapons that uses more skill. That would be an incredibly bad design decision. Let me make this simple for you; in basketball an outside shot is worth 3 points because it is more difficult than an inside shot. However, if we made inside shots worth 4 points do you think there would be any reason for people to attempt 3 pointers? This is the same as human aimed weapons vs lock-ons. The former require far more skill to use hence why the rewards should be higher. This is very basic game design logic.

Quote

Proclaims I don't understand how the game works even though I reached Tier 2, have used every weapon, and played/own every different role of mech for over a year.

The bar to get into tier 2 is very low. Tier 3 and lower tends to be populated with players who do not have a good grasp of the game's mechanics such as new and casual players. Someone who understands the game well, and has at least average mechanical skills, should have no issue achieving tier 1 (or tier 2 at worst) within a few thousand games regardless of their preferred playstyle. I was able to go from tier 4 to tier 1 within 100 games using only unskilled trial mechs on a brand-new account. It's really not hard.

Someone who is stuck at tier 3 long-term is likely either a casual player or someone who lacks understanding of the game. Not everyone needs to be try-hard so there is nothing wrong with that, but if a given player doesn't have a good understanding then they are really not going to be the best person to give advice on balancing. That doesn't mean they can't have valid concerns but odds they are going to make a lot of incorrect assumptions about mechanics.

Quote

Let me give you a more accurate analogy using your NASCAR example. Who maintains the car? The driver or the mechanic?

You see Bassault, you're the driver and I'm the mechanic. And just for the record, the mechanic's job requires FAR MORE INTELLECT than the driver's.

The problem is you are a driver and not a mechanic. A better analogy would be that you are an average joe driver who thinks that they are qualified to tell race car mechanics how to do their jobs.

Quote

I'm well past the "learning how to play" phase thank you. It's in the nature of the arrogant not to give proper credit where it's due and to look down upon the people around them.[/color]

No one is past the learning phase and it’s often people who think they are that haven't actually achieved competency yet. This is true in many aspects of life and is no different in mwo.

Quote

There is a dead node in the skill tree, a node that is nearly useless no matter what mech or build. Can you guess which node?

You have posted incorrect assumptions about game mechanics a number of times already on this thread so why don't go ahead and tell us which one you believe is broken first?

Edited by Dogmeat1, 12 January 2024 - 05:46 AM.

[Mechwarrior2342356]

How long will it likely take to gauge the effects of these subtle changes?

I don't play LRMs very much but I am interested in seeing how my prediction pans out.

Also, I will remind Cauldron again that the HSN-8P's LRM5 HSL+ should probably be removed or replaced (missile HSL+1 maybe?)

Edited by the check engine light, 12 January 2024 - 05:36 AM.