156 replies to this topic

[AlmightyAeng]

I see people complaining about ALL KINDS of things here on the forums.

Nerf autocannons!

Nerf tonnage!

Nerf teamwork!

Nerf ECM! ETC.

They also complain about what isn't any good.

Lasers suck!

They nerfed AC2 and AC5, wtf!?!?

Jagers get blown up too fast! ETC. ETC. Ad nauseum.

I'm tired of it. This game isn't a bunch of arena matches...(channels Joseph Mallan) it's a futuristic WAR with no real basis in science.

Last night I took out my Firebrand...my 6xML, 2xAC5 Firebrand.

In my last match we started with a guy who disconnected. We had NO assaults. The other team out-tonned us by 115 tons. We had only 1 ECM cicada to their FOUR ECM mechs. We started on the FAR side of Alpine away from "The Hill" at I9.

Half the people on these forums would be screaming about how unfair it is. Instead, me and my 2 guys bucked up and carried hard. Go Kell Hounds.

So please, everyone, stop with the hyperbolic whining. It's tiresome.



* epeen stroking because this was my best game ever so let me have my moment *

[Rex Budman]

Futuristic war.

Statements like this bug me because this is actually a Video Game.

The game follows Table Top, yet it doesn't. The game is intended to be somewhat of a simulator, but it's not. The game is supposed to emulate a war zone, but not exactly.

notable example; Third person view being used to look around corners or over lips and ledges. (Seriously if PGi wanted people to admire their mechs why not have the TPV show the mech front on?)

Dude come on it's a video game that needs to provide equal opportunity to each play style offered. This is why there are so many chassis and weight classes available. People call for balance because they want to be able to play in the style that was intended by their chassie and weapon choice.

Short range, medium range and long range support/sniper role. Light mechs for speed and agility, heavy mechs for Alpha damage and enough tonnage to be the team battering ram and punching bag.

This is why people complain; they feel that their play style is not being given an opportunity to excel in its role.

Are they right to complain? Well that remains to be confirmed. I myself can't stand LRM boating where there are more than 3-4 on the opposite team causing certain areas uninhabitable, or even the fact that once upon a time they would hit you extremely quick. Am I right? Maybe, maybe not, but the point is I/we are complaining on the basis that one role is heavily dominating too many others, or perhaps not dominating enough that they get stomped by too many others.

Edited by Rex Budman, 17 April 2014 - 05:27 AM.

[Fut]

Ghost Badger, on 17 April 2014 - 05:20 AM, said:

I'm tired of it. This game isn't a bunch of arena matches...(channels Joseph Mallan) it's a futuristic WAR with no real basis in science.

Completely agree with you. Seriously, I'm with you 100%.

This game isn't supposed to be a level playing field in every single possible way. The mere fact that there are 100s of different Mechs available to choose from should be evidence of that.

This is war. Embrace the challenge.
Choose your ride, choose your equipment, and do the best that you can.

Edited by Fut, 17 April 2014 - 05:43 AM.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

I totally understand where you are coming from.

But the logical thought process that should go into designing and balancing a game like this has never happened. PGI just didn't do whatever good designers do.

And it causes a ton of issues to crop up.

Yes there are a ton of crappy players who whine. But there are also a ton of really good players who left because major issues never ended up getting addressed.

And a lot of good players still here who keep trying to help PGI see the issues with things like Ghost Heat to no avail.

Keep in mind...they "changed" AC's in a way that I don't think any of us were actually clamoring for.

[Rex Budman]

Fut, on 17 April 2014 - 05:40 AM, said:

Completely agree with you. Seriously, I'm with you 100%.

This game isn't supposed to be a level playing field in every single possible way. The mere fact that there are 100s of different Mechs available to choose from should be evidence of that.

This is war. Embrace the challenge.
Choose your ride, choose your equipment, and do the best that you can.

Look I appreciate your level of immersion in the game but face it, it's a video game that has to incorporate many different wants and needs while keeping it fair and balanced. Think of MMORPG's and the trinities.

This is a video game, they offer several different options for play and each of those options should excel in one way and disadvantage in another.

Balance will never really be confirmed - balance doesn't really exist.

[TimePeriod]

/cut

Who cares about meta? I only need two rounds of gauss to knock all those pathetic meta crapbuilds out of the sky.

[Joseph Mallan]

Rex Budman, on 17 April 2014 - 05:26 AM, said:

Futuristic war.

Statements like this bug me because this is actually a Video Game.

The game follows Table Top, yet it doesn't. The game is intended to be somewhat of a simulator, but it's not. The game is supposed to emulate a war zone, but not exactly.

notable example; Third person view being used to look around corners or over lips and ledges. (Seriously if PGi wanted people to admire their mechs why not have the TPV show the mech front on?)

Dude come on it's a video game that needs to provide equal opportunity to each play style offered. This is why there are so many chassis and weight classes available. People call for balance because they want to be able to play in the style that was intended by their chassie and weapon choice.

Short range, medium range and long range support/sniper role. Light mechs for speed and agility, heavy mechs for Alpha damage and enough tonnage to be the team battering ram and punching bag.

This is why people complain; they feel that their play style is not being given an opportunity to excel in its role.

Are they right to complain? Well that remains to be confirmed. I myself can't stand LRM boating where there are more than 3-4 on the opposite team causing certain areas uninhabitable, or even the fact that once upon a time they would hit you extremely quick. Am I right? Maybe, maybe not, but the point is I/we are complaining on the basis that one role is heavily dominating too many others, or perhaps not dominating enough that they get stomped by too many others.

The problem I see with those ideas is that they expect to have all the killing ability and endurance as an Assault while piloting a Light. My skills in a Jenner are as bad as I was in an Atlas at the start of closed Beta. I don't complain that the Jenner needs a buff, I look in the mirror and tell myself, "You suck in Lights!" And go back to my Centurion, and Battlemaster.

And Rex It is a Futuristic WAR game. Thus it should make players feel kinda like they are in a war. With all the simulated Panic and Confusion that takes place in a war zone!

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 17 April 2014 - 06:00 AM.

[General Taskeen]

I don't bother anymore.

But its still a fact there are several underlying, terrible game design issues that cause a host of problems. One being the awful heat system (hey more heatsinks, have some heat threshold, yeh!) and PGI constantly picking and choosing at will what "TT" thing they want in the game, which is an absolute detriment. Everyone knows what the underlying issues are, so I'm not going to make another list.

Edited by General Taskeen, 17 April 2014 - 05:57 AM.

[Fut]

Rex Budman, on 17 April 2014 - 05:46 AM, said:

Look I appreciate your level of immersion in the game but face it, it's a video game that has to incorporate many different wants and needs while keeping it fair and balanced. Think of MMORPG's and the trinities.

This is a video game, they offer several different options for play and each of those options should excel in one way and disadvantage in another.

Balance will never really be confirmed - balance doesn't really exist.

I feel like we're close to being on the same page here.
To me, this game shouldn't be perfectly balanced. Some Mechs should be good at some things, but bad at others. It's what makes the game exciting, what makes the game a challenge, and what turns this into a 'Thinking Man's Shooter'.

Same goes for weapons. They shouldn't all be balanced. ACs concentrate their damage on one spot, LRMs spread their damage out, Lasers are insta-hit... They all have pros and cons, they all have a place on the battlefield.

[LiGhtningFF13]

I stopped trying to understand this game here. I just play it and try not to be surprised. There are days where I just quit after half a round and than there are days where I can't stop playing anymore.

Edited by LiGhtningFF13, 17 April 2014 - 06:04 AM.

[Rex Budman]

Fut, on 17 April 2014 - 06:02 AM, said:

I feel like we're close to being on the same page here.
To me, this game shouldn't be perfectly balanced. Some Mechs should be good at some things, but bad at others. It's what makes the game exciting, what makes the game a challenge, and what turns this into a 'Thinking Man's Shooter'.

Same goes for weapons. They shouldn't all be balanced. ACs concentrate their damage on one spot, LRMs spread their damage out, Lasers are insta-hit... They all have pros and cons, they all have a place on the battlefield.

That's balance dude

Like in an MMORPS, assassins burst damage, mages burst or AOE - Healers heal and syphon. that's KINDA balance I just am shit at explaining it.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Fut, on 17 April 2014 - 06:02 AM, said:

Same goes for weapons. They shouldn't all be balanced. ACs concentrate their damage on one spot, LRMs spread their damage out, Lasers are insta-hit... They all have pros and cons, they all have a place on the battlefield.

You had me till this.

It's not that simple.

Some have very MAJOR Pro's with very minimal Con's (AC's).

Whereas you have SRM's which have minimal Pro's and pretty major Con's (and I'm not even including the HSR issues).

Ghost Heat is also making a mess of things.

I'm fine with every weapon have Pro's and Con's, but the Pro's and Con's have to be equal across all of the weapons.

Otherwise you have what we have today, AC's and PPC's dominating.

[Rex Budman]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 17 April 2014 - 06:12 AM, said:

You had me till this.

It's not that simple.

Some have very MAJOR Pro's with very minimal Con's (AC's).

Whereas you have SRM's which have minimal Pro's and pretty major Con's (and I'm not even including the HSR issues).

Ghost Heat is also making a mess of things.

I'm fine with every weapon have Pro's and Con's, but the Pro's and Con's have to be equal across all of the weapons.

Otherwise you have what we have today, AC's and PPC's dominating.

Hence why you run into problems with balance.

Some people see the AC nerfs and say HELL YEAH, others say HELL NO.

It's not as simple as "If you get killed by them and you want it nerfed, you just suck". Yeah sometimes those kinds of things arise, but the fact of the matter is that sometimes those players might have a solid point.

Remember streak boats? Haha

I'll use one of my very wells stressed out concerns; Long Range Missiles. They have been in the game forever - not a new thing, and never have I complained about them. Yet one simple tweak coupled with a shitload of people using them killed the game for me. Why that is, is a story for another day, but the premise is they are a weapon that needed love, but became too domineering.

But again like you say it isn't that simple; MM plays a big part in this as well. One or two boats is one thing - 6 is another! So while we're all using this word "balance", some people need to kick back and think about what that entails. Some people see balance as merely a Damage Nerf/Buff. But this game has tonnage, heat, damage, range - chassis have hardpoint limitations, weight limits; then the MM decides how many of what drop against how many of what.

It's a crazy thing this idea of balance.

Edited by Rex Budman, 17 April 2014 - 06:20 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 17 April 2014 - 06:12 AM, said:

You had me till this.

It's not that simple.

Some have very MAJOR Pro's with very minimal Con's (AC's).

Whereas you have SRM's which have minimal Pro's and pretty major Con's (and I'm not even including the HSR issues).

Ghost Heat is also making a mess of things.

I'm fine with every weapon have Pro's and Con's, but the Pro's and Con's have to be equal across all of the weapons.

Otherwise you have what we have today, AC's and PPC's dominating.

No Nick, they don't. I don't see the need for small lasers SRM2, LRM 5... Those weapons are useless to me. Some players will swear by any and some may even swear by all of them. That to me is balanced. What balances a weapon is the player that syncs with em. In my hands a Jenner is an UP PoS. In Daeso's hands... A Jenner CAN eat 3 Atlases for breakfast... one of them being mine! That is weapon balance to me.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 17 April 2014 - 06:26 AM.

[Bigbacon]

you can sort of see what they want in a way with trying to make it balanced. Think of how many weapon types rarely get used because they have almost no place in the game since most engagements happen outside of their effective range. SL, SPL come to mind.

I look at it like they are trying make all the assets of the game viable options and get them to be used. If everyone is PPCs and AC then 90 some percent of their assets are not being used.

you see mainly LL,ML,AC/2+, and PPC. not a whole lot of variety out there.

though I'm the moron that loads up 8 SL on a firestarter...

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Rex Budman, on 17 April 2014 - 06:19 AM, said:

Hence why you run into problems with balance.

Some people see the AC nerfs and say HELL YEAH, others say HELL NO.

It's not as simple as "If you get killed by them and you want it nerfed, you just suck". Yeah sometimes those kinds of things arise, but the fact of the matter is that sometimes those players might have a solid point.

Remember streak boats? Haha

I'll use one of my very wells stressed out concerns; Long Range Missiles. They have been in the game forever - not a new thing, and never have I complained about them. Yet one simple tweak coupled with a shitload of people using them killed the game for me. Why that is, is a story for another day, but the premise is they are a weapon that needed love, but became too domineering.

But again like you say it isn't that simple; MM plays a big part in this as well. One or two boats is one thing - 6 is another! So while we're all using this word "balance", some people need to kick back and think about what that entails. Some people see balance as merely a Damage Nerf/Buff. But this game has tonnage, heat, damage, range - chassis have hardpoint limitations, weight limits; then the MM decides how many of what drop against how many of what.

It's a crazy thing this idea of balance.

Problems with balance have nothing to do with people whining though. Your whining about LRM's isn't a factor.

Or at least it shouldn't be. Unfortunately Paul seems to work based off of whining.

What it should be based off of, is a look at multiple levels of the game and drawing conclusions based on data.

Here is what Paul did...release a fix for LRM's....coupled with a huge change to NARC....after a YEAR of LRM's being almost totally worthless against anyone who was good.

Then he looked at ones week worth of data...which also included a trial mech that had a ton of LRM's and reversed course.

What a smarter person would've done is A) not release that LRM fix with the NARC fix and made sure that there wasn't an LRM boat trial mech at the time.

Then he would've really took a hard look at which style of players were being impacted by the changes.

That is not at all what happened.

There is no logic behind what PGI does.

Joseph Mallan, on 17 April 2014 - 06:24 AM, said:

No Nick, they don't. I don't see the need for small lasers SRM2, LRM 5... Those weapons are useless to me. Some players will swear by any and some may even swear by all of them. That to me is balanced. What balances a weapon is the player that syncs with em. In my hands a Jenner is an UP PoS. In Daeso's hands... A Jenner CAN eat 3 Atlases for breakfast... one of them being mine! That is weapon balance to me.

Not talking to you about this. Sorry. You just basically said "If I don't care about the weapons, they can suck".

Don't respond to me please, I'd rather not get into this with you.

[Rex Budman]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 17 April 2014 - 06:29 AM, said:

Problems with balance have nothing to do with people whining though. Your whining about LRM's isn't a factor.

Or at least it shouldn't be. Unfortunately Paul seems to work based off of whining.

What it should be based off of, is a look at multiple levels of the game and drawing conclusions based on data.

Here is what Paul did...release a fix for LRM's....coupled with a huge change to NARC....after a YEAR of LRM's being almost totally worthless against anyone who was good.

Then he looked at ones week worth of data...which also included a trial mech that had a ton of LRM's and reversed course.

What a smarter person would've done is A) not release that LRM fix with the NARC fix and made sure that there wasn't an LRM boat trial mech at the time.

Then he would've really took a hard look at which style of players were being impacted by the changes.

That is not at all what happened.

There is no logic behind what PGI does.

Paul can't objectively use each weapon and give a non-biased opinion regarding their balance, Nick. what you call whining, might be beneficial to call "feedback", just for this conversation at least.

I remember once that the LRM was buffed to target the CT. Wow, what a mistake. HUGE! And believe it or not, some people get really pissed off about the fact they were made to spread out more! Those people in their minds believed that their advice of "not being out in the open" was valid to the whole balancing issue, yet the weapon was clearly OP. People gave their feedback, they got nerfed, and the scales tipped. Some were happy, others sad. Overall it was a bad change.

As far as the management of Pgi, I can't give much of an opinion on this, not one that's worth anything anyway. I've played numerous games, everyone has gripes about management.

PGi were lucky enough to have gotten the MW franchise. They should treat it with respect imo - a lot of the player base here, even me, keeps coming back because it's MW.

[Artgathan]

Joseph Mallan, on 17 April 2014 - 06:24 AM, said:

No Nick, they don't. I don't see the need for small lasers SRM2, LRM 5... Those weapons are useless to me. Some players will swear by any and some may even swear by all of them. That to me is balanced. What balances a weapon is the player that syncs with em. In my hands a Jenner is an UP PoS. In Daeso's hands... A Jenner CAN eat 3 Atlases for breakfast... one of them being mine! That is weapon balance to me.

I'm not sure I agree with you Joe. IMO, players of equal skill should define balance. Saying that 1 elite pilot can best several not-as-elite (I don't mean to offend anyone here) pilots doesn't mean the system is balanced. Think of it like this: just because Usain Bolt can beat an obese man on a bicycle does not mean that bicycles aren't generally the faster mode of transport (versus feet in this case).

[Joseph Mallan]

Actually I said, 'depending on who is using the weapons, they suck or are OP.' I saw a Lawman using a Stalker with LRMs and 6 SMALL lasers. after running his bins dry he proceeded to wrack up 2 more kills with small lasers... I'd have died horribly as one of his kills was a Jenner(IIRC)!

[Rex Budman]

Joseph Mallan, on 17 April 2014 - 06:40 AM, said:

Actually I said, 'depending on who is using the weapons, they suck or are OP.' I saw a Lawman using a Stalker with LRMs and 6 SMALL lasers. after running his bins dry he proceeded to wrack up 2 more kills with small lasers... I'd have died horribly as one of his kills was a Jenner(IIRC)!

I'd be interested in seeing a compilation of that build over 50 matches. Anecdotal evidence based on the experience of a few matches just doesn't cut it for me.

Personally I'm surprised he chose that build. Small lasers require close distance which would suit a mech with more mobility.

I'd say he was just a misinformed pilot who got lucky. Or perhaps he was the best darn pilot that ever lived!? Who knows.