Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

BETA - BATTLETECH Update 1.1 Release Notes

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
BATTLETECH 5579 BATTLETECH Bug Reports 3831 BATTLETECH Suggestions 1569 BATTLETECH Mod-forum 704 BATTLETECH Universe 246 BATTLETECH Fan art, fiction & creations 164 News and Updates Archive 129 BATTLETECH Multi-player 106
High Level - I'm happy they are at least trying to address some of the balance issues we currently have (and all the other bug fixes/enhancements look great).

I will say that I'm not sure whoever is in charge of their balance really knows what they are doing. Most of the changes are at least in the right direction, but there's a few that don't make sense and are even at odds with one another (The LRM-15 change really, really makes no sense... like how could anyone conclude that was a good idea?)

I don't expect them to come up with the exact values I would - but it would be nice to see more rigor applied to balance decisions/changes.

I can tell you right now (from fairly extensive play experience) that the stability changes are going to be an issue for a lot of people (and I'm someone who thinks stock stability is generally too low)


Again though - high level this patch looks great. Balance is something that the mod community can easily fix.... and honestly the modding community has some advantages when it comes to tweaking balance anyways.
 
That's an amazing list of alterations! The granular difficulty settings go well beyond what most games offer - we've actually gone from 'no difficulty settings' to 'A+++' levels in less than two months.

I really like the look of the weapon balancing as well.

Excellent work!
 
Wait there are Pulse Lasers!?
Well I guess thats the hint that I had better beat this damn game before you make it harder.
 
pedal_pusher said:
There's nothing impressive about a game developer than gets outpaced by its own modding community when it comes to balancing its own game. The bug fixes, UI and performance improvements they have released have been excellent, but whoever is responsible for improving game balance/design is doing a terrible job. There's been endless threads on this forum/reddit on mission design/weapon balance and they clearly aren't interested in any of them. As you say, it doesn't make a difference to the modding community, but the level of effort they have put into rebalancing the game is just...
Click to expand...

I think you are being most unreasonable on this issue.

This game has been live for 55 days. In corporate terms that is nothing. Given that it takes time to collect feed back, figure out what needs doing, make the necessary changes, test the changes and then publish that, all whilst ensuring that nothing breaks when it goes live, then I think the people at HBS have done an exceptional job with what they have accomplished and the amount of stuff in this update.

Comparing the modding community to the developers is also grossly unfair as well. Modders only have a responsibility to themselves and the tiny fraction of people who might be interested in their mod(s). Modders make stuff for free for people to use at their own risk. If it crashes everything or is too hard/easy then the user can uninstall and go back to vanilla.

HBS has a responsibility to make a game that works for everybody. People pay money to play the game, it has to work other wise people will scream bloody murder and either ask for their money back or trash the brand, probably both. HBS have to take a longer more thorough approach than modders do.

I would also like to point out that one persons "balance" is another persons cheat/impossible mode. HBS has to balance around everyone not just hardcore TT lore nerds or power gamers.

The fact that you have a game that even lets you modify it to play the way you want, also speaks volumes about the quality of HBS as developers. Most games don't even give you that option and come with the unwritten caveat of "if you don't like it, we don't care, cause we already have your money, bye don't call again".
 
Incredible amount of work in a small amount of time. Many great changes. Lots of bugsquashing. Added features I didn't even know I wanted. Thank you HBS. Sincerely!

[Mod edit: Disrespectful]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Morokael said:
However, [Mod edit ].
Click to expand...

I am sure there are more people then just one person involved into decision making when it comes to game balance. Possibly the studio heads themselves (who created the board game in the first place). In a post (can't find it now) someone mentioned that HBS is using a giant spreadsheet that takes all kinds of things into consideration that go beyond the obvious dmg/heat/weight/range factors. So I'd give them the benefit of the doubt.

Note (1): If you disagree with a change, how about writing a detailed post explaining each balance change you would like to see implemented with all the reasons why you believe a certain change is necessary? I am sure chances are much better that way to get some attention by the right people then your reply above. Maybe even the community could join the discussion on this that way. :)

Note (1): This is now brought to *Beta* for testing purposes, so things might still change before they go live.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Camicon Dachass said:
Save games don't work when content is removed, but they do work when content is added. Adding a mod mid-playthrough is possible, removing a mod mid-playthrough is not. I'd assume that major content updates work the same way. Just make sure you reinstall all of your mods after the update, and you should be fine (assuming that the content update doesn't break the mods you're using. This is why I've stuck to only editing/adding .jsons; those are comparatively safe mods, in terms of being compatible with developer updates).
Click to expand...

Hi Camicon,

Thanks for that response.
So are you saying that changing values within .json files won't break on a game update?
To my knowledge these are the only things I've been tinkering around with anyway, so that sounds promising. I certainly haven't added in any game files.
I was a bit sad to hear of the mod warning for the first time a couple weeks back, right after I just started tinkering (having finished the game), but certainly didn't want to lose all of my progress as a result.

Although only yesterday I decided to install RogueTech, as I wanted something new. And now I see this announcement.... haha. Maybe I'll just hold off on any mods until after this major patch is deployed. :)
 
Max_Killjoy said:
Well, I'm glad that didn't make it in, and hope it never does without an on/off switch.

Customization is a big part of what makes Battletech fun for me.
Click to expand...

I agree, this deserves to be an option, like all the other Difficulty settings they've mentioned. Something for veteran players to really test themselves with.
 
me987654 said:
High Level - I'm happy they are at least trying to address some of the balance issues we currently have (and all the other bug fixes/enhancements look great).

I will say that I'm not sure whoever is in charge of their balance really knows what they are doing. Most of the changes are at least in the right direction, but there's a few that don't make sense and are even at odds with one another (The LRM-15 change really, really makes no sense... like how could anyone conclude that was a good idea?)

I don't expect them to come up with the exact values I would - but it would be nice to see more rigor applied to balance decisions/changes.

I can tell you right now (from fairly extensive play experience) that the stability changes are going to be an issue for a lot of people (and I'm someone who thinks stock stability is generally too low)


Again though - high level this patch looks great. Balance is something that the mod community can easily fix.... and honestly the modding community has some advantages when it comes to tweaking balance anyways.
Click to expand...

That is why its a beta test. Test it & offer feedback. This is how the balance is made better.
 
Some serious over-reaction in this thread.

Not naming names, but I've seen game updates that might have been job-termination or demotion material... and this doesn't come even close, not by a long shot.

In fact, I'd say that this is a big update full of good stuff, and a lot more than some companies do with the First Big Update.
 
Last edited:
Morokael said:
Incredible amount of work in a small amount of time. Many great changes. Lots of bugsquashing. Added features I didn't even know I wanted. Thank you HBS. Sincerely!

However, [Mod edit].
Click to expand...
You should try playing the game for yourself before deciding that the new heat values are unbalanced.

Increasing the stability HP of heavier 'Mechs makes the day of cow-tipping an Assault 'Mech with a single LRM20+++ a thing of yesteryear. SRMs have never been able to do this by themselves, with the beefiest of buffed SRM6s only being able to deal 30 stability damage per launcher. Even the best Heavy missile boat in the game, the Jager-A, can't tip an Assault 'Mech by themselves anymore. This effectively solves the issue of LRMs and SRMs being stability damage dealing monsters, though a second balance pass to buff the stability damage of ACs and PPCs might be necessary to keep them from being nothing more than the final *push* on a 'Mech you've already unsteadied with your LRM barrage. I think you should be able to knock an Assault 'Mech down with combined AC and PPC fire, and right now that looks to be a fairly grim prospect unless all the ACs and PPCs you're packing have a stability buff.

Anyways, increasing the stability HP of heavier 'Mechs makes weapons that deal stability damage more important, meaning that PPCs, in combination with their reduced heat, are more necessary and viable in combat. Particularly if you want to fight at range.

In order to keep the LL from being relegated into a complete non-entity, their heat was drastically reduced (almost cut in half!): they're heavier than MLs, take up as many slots as a PPC, but deal less damage and no stability damage; something needed to be done to keep them in the mix without turning them into a lighter, cooler PPC that doesn't deal stability damage (as upping their damage would do).

To keep MLs from being the absolute best choice energy weapon for short-medium range, their heat was increased slightly to make boating them less viable, and pushes them back into the "workhorse" role, where it makes sense to put two or three on a 'Mech but no more than that. The heat on SLs seems to have been increased to reflect that change.

Reducing the accuracy of successive SRMs and MG bursts during a Precision Strike or Called Shot is a great change, and keep them from being the head-hunting, core-destroying beasts that they were.

Unifying the heat progression of LRMs and SRMs makes sense.

Without having played it yet, I think the weapon rebalance makes a lot of sense. I'll probably end up buffing the stability damage of ACs and PPCs slightly, but that's just me.
XViper said:
Hi Camicon,

Thanks for that response.
So are you saying that changing values within .json files won't break on a game update?
To my knowledge these are the only things I've been tinkering around with anyway, so that sounds promising. I certainly haven't added in any game files.
I was a bit sad to hear of the mod warning for the first time a couple weeks back, right after I just started tinkering (having finished the game), but certainly didn't want to lose all of my progress as a result.

Although only yesterday I decided to install RogueTech, as I wanted something new. And now I see this announcement.... haha. Maybe I'll just hold off on any mods until after this major patch is deployed. :)
Click to expand...
I use a fair number of mods that are simply .json edits (and some which introduce new .jsons) and so long as I reinstall them all (properly) after an update my game works just fine.

Yeah, something like RougeTech would definitely be broken by Update 1.1. I've heard that mod is fairly capricious already, so it would be nothing short of a minor miracle if Update 1.1 didn't break it.
 
Morokael said:
Incredible amount of work in a small amount of time. Many great changes. Lots of bugsquashing. Added features I didn't even know I wanted. Thank you HBS. Sincerely!

However, [Mod edit: Disrespect ]
Click to expand...

I really feel that people are missing that word BETA in the title. These changes were all made based on player feedback......but that fact that they're giving us a Beta to play around with first proves that they're keen to get additional feedback from the broader community. So rather than demand people lose their job over trivialities, how about we dive into the Beta & give them the feedback that they desire from us?
 
XViper said:
Hi Camicon,

Thanks for that response.
So are you saying that changing values within .json files won't break on a game update?
To my knowledge these are the only things I've been tinkering around with anyway, so that sounds promising. I certainly haven't added in any game files.
I was a bit sad to hear of the mod warning for the first time a couple weeks back, right after I just started tinkering (having finished the game), but certainly didn't want to lose all of my progress as a result.

Although only yesterday I decided to install RogueTech, as I wanted something new. And now I see this announcement.... haha. Maybe I'll just hold off on any mods until after this major patch is deployed. :)
Click to expand...
JSON changes, such as altering the damage or heat of a weapon or the visual range of units (among others), should not break the game when an update comes out. After a patch the altered files will just be overwritten.

The most common issue I would expect would be adding new equipment/mechs, altering .dlls, or adding lines to the VersionManifest. If you have a mech with an Ultra AC because of a mod and a patch removes the lines in the VersionManifest that tell it where the Ultra AC info is, it won't be able to load. There is an error report which spits out what it couldn't find.

HOWEVER: Modding is not officially supported. HBS has made it easy to mod the game, which I am infinitely grateful for, but there is no guarantee that a patch won't break a mod or that a mod won't break the game. In general, I would recommend trying to understand what a mod does to the files and how to do some basic trouble shooting if you are going to mod the game. Personally, I haven't applied any mods that I didn't build myself and I haven't dug into modding the .dll files yet, just the JSONs. Now I should probably remove the extra mechs I have in there before the patch comes out of beta. It is easy enough to re-add them, but I'd like to get a clean copy going.
 
Cheers Jade_Rock.
Yeah, I was just changing some values in .json's originally.
Getting some SLDF to spawn as rare drops on certain planets, tweaking some other numbers, etc.
Nothing but value changes in existing .jsons. (which I've since learned I should have made as seperate files and used the VersionManifest to load them, but this was early days, before I did a bunch of reading).

Although your post and Camicon's have alleviated most of my concern. If it works, great. If it doesn't... well, I guess it's an excuse for a new playthrough with the new content.

I think it was me just assuming the worst from how the Devs worded the modding warning.
 
XViper said:
I think it was me just assuming the worst from how the Devs worded the modding warning.
Click to expand...
The modding disclaimer uses that wording to be as clear as possible. If they aren't, then someone will post complaining about how the patch broke their game.



Back on topic, this thread is about the new patch, currently in beta. Any feedback from those willing to test it would be helpful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back