19 replies to this topic

[Phasics]

Lil future prediction so forgive me

But I was just curious who here will more likely embrace nerf/buff changes as keeping the game vaguely fair and fresh and who is more likely to jump on here and scream bloody murder about it

Personally I look forward to balance changes (nerfs/buffs) keeps things fresh an interesting even if its only artificial. Even when my favorite loadout gets nerfed I think I'll enjoy finding a new one.

[Greevis]

YAY first , now Im of "those" guys.

Meh it comes with territory , always happens in online gaming always will. Im quite happy to ride out the waves.

Edited by Greevis, 23 June 2012 - 05:55 AM.

[Pedra Forlorn]

might "hurt" you sometimes, might make it better
overall its just for a more pleasant playing experience

hope they do it as often as possible
and mechs vary not too much to make balancing hard (as in lol)

Edited by Pedra Forlorn, 23 June 2012 - 06:04 AM.

[Lipot]

As long as the changes make sense then I am ok with them. Some games make changes stating balance but put something that is already in a poor situation into a worst one.

[grimzod]

Phasics, on 23 June 2012 - 05:52 AM, said:

Lil future prediction so forgive me

But I was just curious who here will more likely embrace nerf/buff changes as keeping the game vaguely fair and fresh and who is more likely to jump on here and scream bloody murder about it

Personally I look forward to balance changes (nerfs/buffs) keeps things fresh an interesting even if its only artificial. Even when my favorite loadout gets nerfed I think I'll enjoy finding a new one.

Well if they use statistics for comparison of chassis and their win/rates the nerf/buff candidates will be obvious and can be tweaked each patch. I'm less interested in fresh/interesting than in actually nerfing overpowered chassis.

Edited by grimzod, 23 June 2012 - 06:14 AM.

[Coolant]

it will happen...my favorite weapon will get a nerf in damage or distance and my jaw will drop for just a moment and inside my head I will be screaming, "Noooo!" and then I'll move on and adapt. Or my favorite mech will have a speed nerf and I'll yell, "Nooooo!" and then I adapt...and hopefully overcome

[Tymanthius]

I expect changes. I hope they are all for the better, to balance things. But even Dev's are human. So I also expect some 'oops, sorry' situations.

I'll live, eitehr way. It's a game, not life support.

[Badgerpants]

The way the game is setup (I.E. "based" on the TT rules) it's already pretty ballanced now, the only things I could see getting Buffed/Nerfed is weapon range/damage, but with the TT ballance already built in I don't see that happening til the Clan tech is introduced!

[Fl3tcher]

I can already hear Assault Pilots screaming for the Lights to be nerfed because they keep circling them to death O_O

[CCC Dober]

My hope is that the weapons and Mechs follow a proper guideline/procedure when it comes to balancing.
Any OP claims or suspicions can be checked properly and this will reduce needless tinkering with the guts of the game.
WoT is a perfect demonstrator for how balance can go to hell when there is no rhyme or reason behind it.

[Black Sunder]

Tbh the way developers balance things most of the time, ie nerfing, is just taking the easy way out rather than trying to spend time looking at the factors that make X OP and then buffing things that could be used to counter X.

CCC Dober, on 23 June 2012 - 06:37 AM, said:

WoT is a perfect demonstrator for how balance can go to hell when there is no rhyme or reason behind it.

You mean how they 'balance' things based on a global win % rather than taking the time to look at things on a deeper level? Or are you talking about their kneejerk reactions to things that kill russian tanks?

[xNightAngelx]

With no clan wepons I feel balance should be pretty easy to achive for mwo, if they ever introduce clan tech then you might have a few more issues since it is desinged to out preform IS tech.

[Argon3]

CCC Dober, on 23 June 2012 - 06:37 AM, said:

My hope is that the weapons and Mechs follow a proper guideline/procedure when it comes to balancing.
Any OP claims or suspicions can be checked properly and this will reduce needless tinkering with the guts of the game.
WoT is a perfect demonstrator for how balance can go to hell when there is no rhyme or reason behind it.

Stats lie sometimes
When I play a Tank well most of the time it is because I know how to play not because the tank is OP
The French tanks got nerfed because they where OP
I had stats WAY above what the average was because the way they needed to play is the way I like to play them

I have been in WoWP alpha and beta testing and I have been flying flight sims for longer than I have been playing Mechs on computer
My stats reflect it
I don't want my mechs nerfed because I took the time and MONEY if needed to get good
They will need to look at mech win/lose ratio and the W/L of the people playing them
If the kids are playing a mech don't buff it due to poor play of the driver

Since they are going on canon so much most is prebalanced
Minor tweeking will be needed

[xNightAngelx]

I just feel like a lot of the balance is already built into the battle tech game it's bases on, and with hard points to reiforce that system of build I don't think you'll see alot of crazy in peoples builds.

[Xandre Blackheart]

I think that any balancing will likely be in the area of repair costs for weight classes and costs of availability for certain weapons. Maybe drop points or however the scenario's are chosen.

The actual Sim rules will be fairly balanced since they follow the TT rules closely.

[CCC Dober]

Black Sunder, on 23 June 2012 - 06:43 AM, said:

Tbh the way developers balance things most of the time, ie nerfing, is just taking the easy way out rather than trying to spend time looking at the factors that make X OP and then buffing things that could be used to counter X.

You mean how they 'balance' things based on a global win % rather than taking the time to look at things on a deeper level? Or are you talking about their kneejerk reactions to things that kill russian tanks?

All of the above. And the basic idea that 'red goes faster' ... look no further than Hellcat vs T50-2. Wait and see what happens when they launch their sophisticated 'fizziks' engine lawl

[Saevus]

If they stick to using the Battletech rules for mech construction as a guide, I don't see a whole lot of "NERFING" to be done. Balances, especially while the game is still in beta will be inevitable, and after launch if people are using one particular tactic because it is better than all the others, I expect to see changes, such is life. However, as I said before I think they have a real advantage here, I've played thousands of tabletop games over the years, they have a system here, that at it's heart uses weight/heat/damage to achieve a decent sense of parity. I've killed assault mechs with an urbanmech just by creative use of jumpjets and terrain.......I want to say this game looks to be on the right track, but who knows. I always take the bad with the good, and anytime something you like gets "nerfed" or balanced, you feel like ****, but it is generally for the better. If it starts to not be for the better, I always try to remember this is my hobby, I can find a new one.

[grimzod]

Black Sunder, on 23 June 2012 - 06:43 AM, said:

Tbh the way developers balance things most of the time, ie nerfing, is just taking the easy way out rather than trying to spend time looking at the factors that make X OP and then buffing things that could be used to counter X.



You mean how they 'balance' things based on a global win % rather than taking the time to look at things on a deeper level? Or are you talking about their kneejerk reactions to things that kill russian tanks?

More like bigots (anyone in wg come to mind?) who hate Germans always nerf german tanks, moving transmission to the front on the e series? Like all american tanks being nerfed to make them less powerful while any historical excuse to buff russian tanks is used? Their use of the win rate has been spotty and only put forth when it is convenient to nerf a non russian tank. They have problems.

[tweeder]

Since the game is based on BT rules for the hardtop game, I really don't see there being too many issues with balance. This is where the 'player skill will make the pilot' aspect of the game comes in.

If you're a better player, you will seem to have a better mech.

If you're not, then every mech will seem OP to you.

All in all, it will come down to playing the game and becoming better acquainted with the mech you're piloting, the role you're filling, the map you're on, and the squad your with.

[Nicolai Deadfield]

Be careful with a question like this. Star Wars Galaxies was the epitome of nerf/buff changes, any I believe that is what killed the game. Changes like these should be made sparingly, and with lots of advance testing with an active player base. Balance is important, but enjoyability is too. Let's keep the player community involved before huge changes are made! (or even a lot of little ones!)