27 replies to this topic

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Quirks need to stop being used as bandaids for bad weapon balance. Rather than trying to quirk the hell out of mechs that use badly balanced weapons, why not buff the weapon to appeal on mechs outside of that one.

Example, PPCs in general, very rarely used outside of mechs with very specific quirks for them, in particular velocity buffs. So the question is, would it not be better to just make PPCs fly faster and put the quirks into heat gen or something else rather than making a weapon inherently bad so only specific mechs can use it. I'm sure part of the reason this hasn't happened is out of fear of the PPC becoming the goto weapon again like it was for more than a year, but a lot has changed since then and that's still not considering the PPC got hit hard with the velocity nerf for a supposedly mid-range weapon.

Then there is the I-ERPPC which requires a significant heat gen quirk to even contemplate running it, and even then it is generally a main weapon rather than a supporting one because of the heat demands. This one doesn't really need much in the way of velocity, but it would be nice to see the heat reduced slightly instead of quirked so it can be useful on other mechs. Maybe 12.5 heat instead of 15. This also helps balance it against the C-ERPPC since it now becomes more heat efficient to make up for the 1 ton difference and lack of splash damage.

This is also another thing, the weapon balance needs to be improved so quirks can be less of a band-aid to improve the IS vs Clan tech parity and more for flavor and boosted inherently flawed chassis'. I guess under that you could consider being IS tech an inherent flaw, but that is part of the problem, imo that should not be the case. The parity between tech should be equalized and weapon balance is still a good way to help that.

[Ultimax]

The goal was to address imbalance among mechs not weapons.

I believe they specifically want to control what mechs are good with some weapons, like ppcs.

There are definitely weapons that need work, but it needs to be both weapon systems and quirks in combination

Edited by Ultimatum X, 27 March 2015 - 03:23 PM.

[Red1769]

Not 12.5 heat, that would make it too cool of a weapon. I would still go with a higher velocity buff to the ERs, and for the IS version, making it 14 or 13.5 heat instead...maybe increase its range a bit. But keep the Clan version range the same, maybe not as big of a velocity buff or not at all, and make it completely front loaded, 15/15 or more front loaded than what it is. Makes the IS version more heat efficient and more accurate, while the Clan version hits harder, but has a higher heat demand and is less accurate at range. If need be, increase CD for the Clan version?

But alas, I agree with Ultimatum as well. Quirks should make flavor among mechs and make less popular/good mechs more viable and a reason to take. At the same time, I don't think quirks should ever go above 25-30% on anything offensive.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

I say adjust the heat system before further weapon stat tweaks.

Dissipation lags behind our Rate of Fire, made worse with Quirks (and not really the fault of quirks), and IMO Heat Capacity should not be able to get as high as it currently can.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Ultimatum X, on 27 March 2015 - 11:59 AM, said:

The goal was to address imbalance among mechs not weapons.

I believe they specifically want to control what mechs are good with some weapons, like ppcs.

They are definitely weapons that need work, but it needs to be both weapon systems and quirks in combination

I think that was how it started, but there is a common theme among many of the weapon quirks when it comes to certain weapons. How many Medium Laser quirks are there among all the IS weapons, I get that it still is one of the better support weapons the IS has and is mounted on a lot of them due to its utility. The problem is that almost all of these share buffs to a weapon that should not need any buffs outside of mechs like the HBK-4P or any other medium laser boat. I still think there is a little too much fear over PPCs in general. Buff the weapon slightly to remove the necessity of certain quirks, and put those quirks to better use elsewhere. The LBX10 quirks stand out in my mind as well, as even the most significant of quirks still can't save this weapon from being only "meh". Quirks aimed at MGs are another decent example.

I guess what I'm really driving at, is the current good chassis are not running certain weapons for a reason, that unless you have significant quirks related to that weapon, it is worthless to run. Or in cases like the LBX10, even significant quirks can't save this weapon from being bad. This is very telling of bad weapon balance and I feel like a lot of quirks aim to correct that imbalance rather than just add flavor.

Praetor Knight, on 27 March 2015 - 12:23 PM, said:

I say adjust the heat system before further weapon stat tweaks.

Dissipation lags behind our Rate of Fire, made worse with Quirks (and not really the fault of quirks), and IMO Heat Capacity should not be able to get as high as it currently can.

While I agree, this is not the context of the discussion because it is somewhat obvious we will never get this thanks to he who will not be named.

Edited by WM Quicksilver, 27 March 2015 - 12:41 PM.

[Ultimax]

WM Quicksilver, on 27 March 2015 - 12:37 PM, said:

I think that was how it started, but there is a common theme among many of the weapon quirks when it comes to certain weapons. How many Medium Laser quirks are there among all the IS weapons, I get that it still is one of the better support weapons the IS has and is mounted on a lot of them due to its utility. The problem is that almost all of these share buffs to a weapon that should not need any buffs outside of mechs like the HBK-4P or any other medium laser boat. I still think there is a little too much fear over PPCs in general. Buff the weapon slightly to remove the necessity of certain quirks, and put those quirks to better use elsewhere. The LBX10 quirks stand out in my mind as well, as even the most significant of quirks still can't save this weapon from being only "meh". Quirks aimed at MGs are another decent example.


I guess what I'm really driving at, is the current good chassis are not running certain weapons for a reason, that unless you have significant quirks related to that weapon, it is worthless to run. Or in cases like the LBX10, even significant quirks can't save this weapon from being bad. This is very telling of bad weapon balance and I feel like a lot of quirks aim to correct that imbalance rather than just add flavor.

I don't disagree, and you made a lot of important points.

It needs to be a combination of equipment/weapon balances and also quirks where needed.

To be honest I have a post brewing on lasers, and range and trying to close the gap a touch between IS & Clan (and then going back and reducing some quirks) to normalize factional balance and then address any mechs that need to be up-tweaked or down-tweaked).


The good part is that all of the Clan-only crew have told me range is meaningless, so they will all likely be on board!

Edited by Ultimatum X, 27 March 2015 - 03:30 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Ultimatum X, on 27 March 2015 - 03:28 PM, said:

I don't disagree, and you made a lot of important points.

It needs to be a combination of equipment/weapon balances and also quirks where needed.

I agree, I'm not against weapon quirks as a whole like with the HBK-4G, it just needs to be done for flavor.

Ultimatum X, on 27 March 2015 - 03:28 PM, said:

To be honest I have a post brewing on lasers, and range and trying to close the gap a touch between IS & Clan (and then going back and reducing some quirks) to normalize factional balance and then address any mechs that need to be up-tweaked or down-tweaked).


The good part is that all of the Clan-only crew have told me range is meaningless, so they will all likely be on board!

I have been thinking about lasers as well, because once the IS get the rest of the ER lasers and the Clans get Heavy Lasers, things start to get messy. Throw in X-Pulse and ER Pulse and things just get complex because of the relationships each laser has with another family.

[kapusta11]

The cause of all this mess is boating or alpha striking, not BT/TT type of boating, MWO type, where you stack weapons of the same type (not only name) and hit single location in the process. First it was 4xPPC Stalker then Gauss+3xPPC Highlander because of higher damage and JJs that gave it more survivability due to reduced facetime. When Ghost Heat came out people switched to Gauss+2xPPC combo. When PGI added Gauss charge mechanic people switched to AC20+2xPPC combo. Then, when AC20 got nerfed, people switched to 2xUAC5(AC5)+2xPPC combo. Then, when UAC5(AC5) projectile speed got nerfed, people switched back to Gauss+2xPPC. Then PGI nerfed PPCs to the oblivion.

The important part here is reasoning. PGI actually tried to do the right thing - reduce the amount of damage applied in one hit becuse all weapons in that shot hit single component, forcing players to pass two "aiming checks" is another way of spreading damage, buisiness friendly one as it won't alienate players with RNG cone of fire or frustrating convergence systems. Alas their means were dumb. They've introduced 20 damage soft cap for PPC and A20 with Ghost Heat, caped Gauss damage at 30 when Dire Wolf came out but all this band-aid fixes have a loopholes - weapon combos, it's the reason why we have laser vomit meta right now which laughs at builds above because of much higher potential damage.

PGI could've just caped group fire damage for weapons of particular type (FLD, Hitscan DoT) and none of this stupid nerfs would ever existed.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Yeah, quirks seem to be a bandaid.

Cuz if they took the PPCs

PPC: 10/10, 3.75s CD, 1100ms
IS ERPPC: 10/13, 3.75s CD, 1200ms
CERPPC: 15/15, 5s CD, 1300ms

each would have its place, each would be unique in its own right and we wouldnt need quirks to buff them and stuff

Since the IS are the high damage output, low heat faction, making their PPC lower overall damage, faster CD, meh velocity and lower heat would fit that bill

While the CLans, they would get a 15/15 CERPPC, higher damage at a slower rate, higher heat, higher velocity, longer CD. Would be no need to quirk all the mechs...

[Ultimax]

LordKnightFandragon, on 28 March 2015 - 07:03 AM, said:

Yeah, quirks seem to be a bandaid.

It's not just about PPCs, there are multiple issues they are trying to address and things they have yet to fully address.

1) IS inter-faction balance
> IS inter-weight class balance (ex: 60T heavies vs. 75T heavies)
> Mechs with Good Geometry vs. Mechs with Bad Geometry
> Mechs with Good Hardpoints vs. Mechs with Bad Hardpoints
> IS weight class balance (ex: Lights vs. Mediums vs. Heavies vs. Assaults)
> Overall IS vs. IS weapon balance

2) Clan inter-faction balance
> Clan inter-weight class balance (ex: 60T heavies vs. 75T heavies)
> Mechs with Good Geometry vs. Mechs with Bad Geometry
> Mechs with Good Hardpoints/Omni-pods vs. Mechs with Bad Hardpoints/Omni-pods
> Mechs with Good, Mediocre & Poor available "free" tonnage
> Mechs with locked and unlocked equipment
> Clan weight class balance (ex: Lights vs. Mediums vs. Heavies vs. Assaults)
> Overall Clan vs. Clan Weapon balance

3) Faction vs. Faction balance
> Engines
> Weapons
> Crit slot disparity
> Locked vs. Unlocked Equipment

Edited by Ultimatum X, 28 March 2015 - 10:47 AM.

[Anjian]

This game is built on a record number of kludges, and quirks is just one of them. The rest, among others, are already mentioned by others.

Its one bandaid this, bandaid that, short terms fixes trying to hide deep long term fundamental problems.

[mogs01gt]

It's more than just weapon balance. Some mechs are simply poorly designed for MWO and need quirks to be useless. The Orion would need to be over quirked to be useful.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Ultimatum X, on 28 March 2015 - 10:45 AM, said:

1) IS inter-faction balance
> IS inter-weight class balance (ex: 60T heavies vs. 75T heavies)
> IS weight class balance (ex: Lights vs. Mediums vs. Heavies vs. Assaults)

2) Clan inter-faction balance
> Clan inter-weight class balance (ex: 60T heavies vs. 75T heavies)
> Clan weight class balance (ex: Lights vs. Mediums vs. Heavies vs. Assaults)

These are the ones that are incredibly hard to pull off, and the Adder is proof of that. Having played in a planetary league for 5 years, the inter-weight class balance is usually balanced by the team tonnage limit system. Simply put, without changing the underlying mech construction rules, lights never have a 1 to 1 worth with heavies. So it is best to make classes fit within roles and each mech have some sort of trade-off if it is not the heaviest of the class. As it is now, the game has a very "accept no substitutes" attitude about it, probably because it is a very confused game that wants to do too many things that are often contradictory to each other.

Ultimatum X, on 28 March 2015 - 10:45 AM, said:

3) Faction vs. Faction balance
> Engines
> Weapons
> Crit slot disparity
> Locked vs. Unlocked Equipment

This is the one I really dislike them doing, I'd much rather see Clan vs IS be distinct yet equal. Right now they seem to insist that Clans have some sort of edge and use quirks to prop up the IS, but they want to keep that edge minimal which to me is still just bad design. Especially give the F2P status of this game and how often they have flirted (and sometimes crossed) the P2W line.

mogs01gt, on 28 March 2015 - 10:56 AM, said:

It's more than just weapon balance. Some mechs are simply poorly designed for MWO and need quirks to be useless. The Orion would need to be over quirked to be useful.

I understand that. I'm not saying quirks are bad, I'm saying quirks that are intended to fix the current weapon balance is bad.

Edited by WM Quicksilver, 28 March 2015 - 11:10 AM.

[Ultimax]

Anjian, on 28 March 2015 - 10:51 AM, said:

Its one bandaid this, bandaid that, short terms fixes trying to hide deep long term fundamental problems.

Many, if not most*, of the "deep long term fundamental problems" derive directly from trying to apply the IP source material into a first person game - and that includes even things like mech design and geometry.


Personally, I like piloting a giant mech.

Realistically the foundation for the game would have been better in a top down RTS type of game where unit costs have an actual impact and player as general vs. player as general works if you have one side with the "cannon fodder" type army vs. one side with the "elite unit army".


That's not the game we are playing though.

Everyone wants to make an impact, everyone wants their mech choice to count.

That requires balance, and balance on that scale requires a lot of work, and is an ongoing process of constant tweaks and maintenance that ultimately will never be fully realized.



*In other places PGI has made good strides but also dropped the ball. Some mechs are scaled very well, and others are scaled very poorly for example.

Edited by Ultimatum X, 28 March 2015 - 11:17 AM.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

PPC and ERPPC quirks are fine. The weapons themselves remain very strong, especially in combination with certain other weapons (AC5s and Gauss Rifles, for instance). The fact that they aren't the be-all-end-all weapon any longer is more a sign of balance than anything else, which for a long time they were the mainstay of nearly every serious build.

The LBX-AC, however, needs work aside from the quirks. I prefer adding damage per pellet. 1.1 or 1.2 to start, but I could see it going as high as 1.5, given how it works mechanically. A quirk for 5% tighter spread is not particularly meaningful, but a damage boost to the base weapon would both significantly help those mechs "stuck" with LBX-AC quirks, and make the LBX more attractive as an option compared to its competitors.

[Ultimax]

WM Quicksilver, on 28 March 2015 - 11:07 AM, said:

This is the one I really dislike them doing, I'd much rather see Clan vs IS be distinct yet equal. Right now they seem to insist that Clans have some sort of edge and use quirks to prop up the IS, but they want to keep that edge minimal which to me is still just bad design. Especially give the F2P status of this game and how often they have flirted (and sometimes crossed) the P2W line.

Distinct yet equal is an admirable goal, but one I feel is highly unlikely in a game with an IP such as this one.

All of the IS weapons/tech are the predecessors of Clan weapons, except Clan weapons are just superior versions.



Unfortunately that makes "equal but different" unrealistic for the most part because at their base they are basically the same things.


If the source material in BT had clans actually be really alien and different in their weapons and design then that would have been possible - but that's not what we have.


As I stated above, the design of Clans vs. IS with Clans having outright superior items could make more sense in an RTS where Player A has 5000 points to spend on cheap but weak troops vs. Player B spending 5000 points on ultra-expensive elite units.

That's not the game though.

Edited by Ultimatum X, 28 March 2015 - 11:30 AM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Ultimatum X, on 28 March 2015 - 11:28 AM, said:

Distinct yet equal is an admirable goal, but one I feel is highly unlikely in a game with an IP such as this one.

Well you have to make some serious compromises as far as the source material goes (in regards to weapon stats), but I believe it is possible having played in one that is decently balanced as far as tech goes.

The real key is getting the weapons to feel different and not just different colored versions which MWO has more tools to do than MW4 ever did (better burst fire mechanics, beam durations, missile streams, etc).

Edited by WM Quicksilver, 28 March 2015 - 11:40 AM.

[Evan20k]

I partially agree with you. There's some weapons that are just outright underpreforming (LBXs, PPCs, IS Small lasers, flamers, mgs) that need global buffs, but in others there's just some mechs that outright do things better than others. Quirks are used to define the difference in intended playstyles between the two mechs. A great example of this is the Stalker 4N which, were it not for quirks, would be objectively worse than the rest of the stalkers in every way. Now granted, I think the 4N is a little bit overdone right now, but the point still stands that quirks give it a unique identity that none of the other mechs in the game can fill. Ideally in a balanced game, quirks will give each mech a niche that only they can fill and the battlefield will flourish with the diversity that this creates.

Disclaimer: This post applies equally for IS and Clans. This isn't a "Nerf Stalker4N" post at all.

Edited by Evan20k, 28 March 2015 - 11:46 AM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Evan20k, on 28 March 2015 - 11:45 AM, said:

I partially agree with you. There's some weapons that are just outright underpreforming (LBXs, PPCs, IS Small lasers, flamers, mgs) that need global buffs, but in others there's just some mechs that outright do things better than others. Quirks are used to define the difference in intended playstyles between the two mechs. A great example of this is the Stalker 4N which, were it not for quirks, would be objectively worse than the rest of the stalkers in every way. Now granted, I think the 4N is a little bit overdone right now, but the point still stands that quirks give it a unique identity that none of the other mechs in the game can fill. Ideally in a balanced game, quirks will give each mech a niche that only they can fill and the battlefield will flourish with the diversity that this creates.

Again, I think you confuse what I'm actually asking for. The STK-4N is currently an example of a mech that need quirks over the other Stalkers to differentiate itself from the others, that I agree. At the same time, a lot of mechs that had LL oriented quirks needed them to be heavy handed because the LL has been one of the worst laser weapons since the death of the 6 LL Stalker back before ghost heat was introduced.

Edited by WM Quicksilver, 28 March 2015 - 11:49 AM.

[zagibu]

kapusta11, on 28 March 2015 - 03:26 AM, said:

The cause of all this mess is boating or alpha striking, not BT/TT type of boating, MWO type, where you stack weapons of the same type (not only name) and hit single location in the process. First it was 4xPPC Stalker then Gauss+3xPPC Highlander because of higher damage and JJs that gave it more survivability due to reduced facetime. When Ghost Heat came out people switched to Gauss+2xPPC combo. When PGI added Gauss charge mechanic people switched to AC20+2xPPC combo. Then, when AC20 got nerfed, people switched to 2xUAC5(AC5)+2xPPC combo. Then, when UAC5(AC5) projectile speed got nerfed, people switched back to Gauss+2xPPC. Then PGI nerfed PPCs to the oblivion.

Indeed. Any competent game dev would quickly have noticed that the problem lies not in the individual weapons, but in those problematic combinations, but PGI still tried to "fix" it by changing the weapon, instead of fixing the root of the problem. This of course also "fixed" the weapons for anyone who wasn't using these combinations.

One day I'm going to show everyone how this whole mess could be solved, one day.

Edited by zagibu, 28 March 2015 - 12:49 PM.