59 replies to this topic

[shabowie]

I don't really understand why ballistic hard points weren't split into two categories earlier in the beta process, large and small, with small only being able to fit mg, ac2 and ac5 and larges being able to fit the rest.

It seems like many issues involving balance of ballistics can be made to work on one gun, or even on multiple guns in different setups (like widely separated and vulnerable in arms, or controlled under different reticles, arm and torso), but the fact they are both doubled and so close together (helps with convergence issues) along with being in small, hard to hit side torsos in the Cat presents a big problem.

Was there ever a push to nerf them or solve the problem in closed beta? I didn't read the forums much at the time, but when I came back after open I was surprised to see them still in the game. And they are still very much easy mode. Command chair posts about autocannon and gauss present solutions that will effect single users of such weapons much more than cats with dual guns.

Why doesn't the developer do something about them? It doesn't seem possible they intended either build.

Edited by shabowie, 29 November 2012 - 04:12 AM.

[Bloody Moon]

They got nerfed slightly, also the popular Phract and Streak Cat builds wipe the floor with the Gauss Cat.

[SouthernRex]

In the words of Ayeka: "Pleeeeeease... shut up."

[shabowie]

Bloody Moon, on 29 November 2012 - 04:12 AM, said:

They got nerfed slightly, also the popular Phract and Streak Cat builds wipe the floor with the Gauss Cat.

Phracts don't, boated streaks are acknowledged as broken.

[Urza Mechwalker]

shabowie, on 29 November 2012 - 04:09 AM, said:

I don't really understand why ballistic hard points weren't split into two categories earlier in the beta process, large and small, with small only being able to fit mg, ac2 and ac5 and larges being able to fit the rest.

It seems like many issues involving balance of ballistics can be made to work on one gun, or even on multiple guns in different setups (like widely separated and vulnerable in arms, or controlled under different reticles, arm and torso), but the fact they are both doubled and so close together (helps with convergence issues) along with being in small, hard to hit side torsos in the Cat presents a big problem.

Was there ever a push to nerf them or solve the problem in closed beta? I didn't read the forums much at the time, but when I came back after open I was surprised to see them still in the game. And they are still very much easy mode. Command chair posts about autocannon and gauss present solutions that will effect single users of such weapons much more than cats with dual guns.

Why doesn't the developer do something about them? It doesn't seem possible they intended either build.

Because soon you will have mechs that are even more devastating to worry about. If you have probkems with gauss cats then you maybe should drop the game already. Eventually we will have assautls taht can field 3 gauss. Like the TDK or anihilator.

[Belorion]

There is nothing wrong with the k2 builds. Run one for a while then come back and tell us what you think. I dont even currently own a k2. My best game ever was with a 2uac Phract.

[BlackSquirrel]

lol the 3 guassphract is not going to be that big of a deal. Novelty at best.

But yes I would like to see LG and SM points as well. However I understand that it could lead to confusion for new people.

[Cole Allard]

Simply because they know more of their game, then we do?

Streak doesnt need nerf, at least until ECM is brought in.


ECM will come on the 4th, with it, those streaks will not be able to lock on target and on targets within 150 (or 180m) of that ECM mech. In others words, Lock on weapons will get close to impossible to use on certain battlemechs, unless you got a counter ECM running (or one in your group close to you).

Yes, that ECM will change the way we play and see battles at the moment. And since you do not nerf something to unnerf it again two weeks later...well, you get the answer?



This means,

[shabowie]

Urza Mechwalker, on 29 November 2012 - 04:31 AM, said:

Because soon you will have mechs that are even more devastating to worry about. If you have probkems with gauss cats then you maybe should drop the game already. Eventually we will have assautls taht can field 3 gauss. Like the TDK or anihilator.

Didn't say I have a problem with them, I said they present a balance problem within the game, and the solutions for those problems presented in the command chair posts more adversely effect mechs only using one.

It isn't really just a question about ballistic points either, I don't get why hard points for energy and missile weapons aren't more size specific as well.

100 ton mechs with gauss rifles in multiple easier to hit and harder to use well locations (in arm, and/or split between torso and arms in placement) doesn't seem as powerful.

Many designs using *a* gauss rifle or AC20 seem pretty gimped right now.

Edited by shabowie, 29 November 2012 - 05:54 AM.

[Asmosis]

ECM launch is going to be interesting to say the least. They should really put ECM onto at least one of the trial mechs, just so pugs stand a chance vs teams by sheer dumb luck.

[shabowie]

Belorion, on 29 November 2012 - 04:39 AM, said:

There is nothing wrong with the k2 builds. Run one for a while then come back and tell us what you think. I dont even currently own a k2. My best game ever was with a 2uac Phract.

I have. I made master in it real fast, along with the rest of the cats (Artemis LRM boat, gausscat and split 2xartemisLRM15 cat/4xssrm2cat are all super powerful right now).

My first post was me telling you what I think and wondering why it was never nerfed or tweaked and asking if there was ever a discussion about it. Did PGI even ever say if they intended it to be possible to replace machine guns with rail guns or massive cannons? Seems like an obvious whoops to me.

Edited by shabowie, 29 November 2012 - 04:59 AM.

[MadPanda]

There will always be people who go for the most efficient build to fulfill certain role and PG can't stop that, nor should they try. The gauss/ac cat falls into this category. Very effective single point damage. But do you see these guys in every game? No you don't because it's a different play style and not everyone enjoys it. It is irrelevant that it may be the most effective build in the game. Trying to nerf extreme builds will only dull the game. Unless everybody and their mother starts running gauss/ac cats, I don't see any problem seeing them every now and then. You can deal with them.

[shabowie]

Mad panda, boated gauss rifles being high damage, long range, low heat and is seen as a problem by PGI. So they are obviously going to try to do something, and their command chair posts on weapon balance says as much. The problem is their "solution" of making the gauss rifle more fragile will effect the boat builds much less than those using single rifles.

Similarly they talk about boated ssrms being an issue but don't know how to fix them. I bet their solution to that will be bad for users of 1-2 ssrms as well.

Edited by shabowie, 29 November 2012 - 05:14 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

There will always be people who go for the most efficient build to fulfill certain role and PG can't stop that, nor should they try

You absolutely can stop that. Its called balance.

In any given game, players will always seek to maximize their own advantages. However, if no single weapon conveys an advantage, and all choices are equally appealing, then the game is considered balanced. the whole reason Gauss is popular is because it gives a huge advantage over all other weapons. In other words its unbalanced... and PGI is aware of it thats why Gauss is getting a health nerf.

Edited by Khobai, 29 November 2012 - 05:22 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

The simple thing is - Gauss or ACCats aren't OP. The problem is that the energy weapon alternatives are underpowered, and the stock builds is seriously underpowered.

If PPCs could be made to be as effective as Gauss Rifles, then people wouldn't feel such a high need to run AC or Gauss Cats. But PPCs deal less damage for far more heat and thus are overall not as sustainable. So people looked for alternatives - and found them in the Gauss and other ACs.

And I say the other weapons are underpowered because I don't think that a Gauss Cat deals incredible large amounts of damage that make it impossible to deal with them. It takes some skill to hit with ballistic weapons and deliver precise and clean shots, and most people will ge their misses or at least not hit the intended mech components, so overall, the damage output is quite reasonable.

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 29 November 2012 - 05:28 AM.

[MadPanda]

Khobai, on 29 November 2012 - 05:16 AM, said:

You absolutely can stop that. Its called balance.

In any given game, players will always seek to maximize their own advantages. However, if no single weapon conveys an advantage, and all choices are equally appealing, then the game is considered balanced. the whole reason Gauss is popular is because it gives a huge advantage over all other weapons. In other words its unbalanced... and PGI is aware of it thats why Gauss is getting a health nerf.

Very easy for you to talk. "Balance the game PG". You are living in a dream world. There will always be build X that is better than build Y. I don't see a problem with that in a game like this. Problem comes only when it's so good that nearly everyone is using it which destroys the game because there is no variety. That has not happened with the gauss cat. It has more or less happened with the streak cat however and that needs to be dealt with.

[Congzilla]

Belorion, on 29 November 2012 - 04:39 AM, said:

There is nothing wrong with the k2 builds. Run one for a while then come back and tell us what you think. I dont even currently own a k2. My best game ever was with a 2uac Phract.

The only problem with the K2 builds is that the Gauss / AC20 should be in the arms not the side torsos. The weapon location gives it an advantage over dual gauss Cataphracts.

[Urza Mechwalker]

shabowie, on 29 November 2012 - 04:50 AM, said:

Didn't say I have a problem with them, I said they present a balance problem within the game, and the solutions for those problems presented in the command chair posts more adversely effect mechs only using one.

It isn't really just a question about ballistic points either, I don't get why hard points for energy and missile weapons aren't more size specific as well.

100 ton mechs with gauss rifles multiple easier to hit and harder to use well locations (in arm, and/or split between torso and arms in placement) doesn't seem as powerful.

Many designs using *a* gauss rifle or AC20 seem pretty gimped right now.

If game was as you siggest it woudl be horrible. We have too few weapon options on this timeframe for IS. THerefore limiting by size would basically shutdown almsot all chance of customization, making this game worse than WoT.

Your idea could work if the game was in 3067 where you have 5-7 types of weapons of each category for each size imaginable.

[Oy of MidWorld]

Weapon convergence and dual gauss being extremely centered makes all the difference. It's what makes the gausspult an extremely overpowered (canonically ridiculous) mech for low skillers. And hey, don't worry about heat, range, or effectively firing weapon groups. An effective but sad build.

[shabowie]

MustrumRidcully, on 29 November 2012 - 05:26 AM, said:

And I say the other weapons are underpowered because I don't think that a Gauss Cat deals incredible large amounts of damage that make it impossible to deal with them. It takes some skill to hit with ballistic weapons and deliver precise and clean shots, and most people will ge their misses or at least not hit the intended mech components, so overall, the damage output is quite reasonable.

It's not the amount of damage dealt, while not shabby, but its the precision, range and fact it will never overheat.

It's a good sniping mech AND a good brawling mech where you can just go to max cyclic on it until you are out of ammo or everything is dead.

MadPanda, on 29 November 2012 - 05:27 AM, said:

There will always be build X that is better than build Y.

By a little bit sure. We are talking about things that are way off here.