115 replies to this topic

[Rebas Kradd]

Thunder Child, on 27 May 2015 - 02:01 AM, said:

What we need for CW, genuine Community Warfare, is BIG maps. We're talking 30 mins, one side to the other, big. Now, I know what some of you are gonna say. "How do we catch that damned light if the map is so big? Hell, how do we FIND him". The answer to that is simple. You don't. He has to find you. Because the match is NOT going to be won by killing all the stompy robots. That is Solaris mode.

Conquering the Planet is about taking over the industries, "liberating" the population, and denying the enemy a foothold. And I don't mean just loitering in a laser box till the light turns green. Destroying enemy compounds, while NOT damaging Civilian structures. Controlling key Choke Points such as a Bridge, or Canyon. Claiming important Industrial Structures such as Mines, Docks, etc. Capturing and Holding Forward Drop Points, so that Reinforcements can arrive closer to the front. And you don't win by collecting enough "tickets", or killing all the enemy mechs (although, if they do run out of reinforcements, it makes it easier....). You win by Completing your objectives, and holding all of them.

Absolutely agreed. Love this.

Unfortunately, you're up against a good portion of the community on this, not just PGI. A number of players have opined that they don't want MWO to be a "walking simulator"; there is a good chunk of the community that wants quick action over tactical gameplay. It's only now becoming obvious to everyone (I'm trying really hard to push awareness of this) that you cannot have both at the same time.

[TWIAFU]

cdlord, on 19 May 2015 - 11:01 AM, said:

EDIT: MERCHANDISING!!!! I WOULD PAY FOR MWO MINIS!

Odd you mention that....

I just found my old, OLD, minis from tabletop. Dusted them off, found some that we have in MWO and some that I pilot, and are prepping to paint in Unit colors.

[Y E O N N E]

Pjwned, on 27 May 2015 - 03:09 PM, said:

If players' idea of balance is not viable at all and they throw a fit because of the game being balanced away from clans being OP that doesn't mean the game is lacking. There are reasons that the game is lacking, but that's not one of them.

That's not the message I was trying to convey, and what is "lacking" is not always a universally bad thing. Lore support, for example, is something many feel this game lacks but that I don't honestly care about. But for the people who do, the game was built incorrectly from the beginning to support the lore, and so has every MechWarrior game before it. It's just that this time, the developers of the current MechWarrior game decided not to just let Clan items be superior in their incorrect environment and therefore implement a de-facto "Clan tax" on the players. Instead, they are changing the Clan gear to be different and equivalent, and that's fine for some of us who have no special love for the lore but sacrilege for those who want a game that represents its background material. These people feel that the game should have been built to accommodate the asymmetrical warfare described in the stories, and so they are upset whenever there is another change to the game that makes Clans less outright superior because it's another step away from the way they feel the game ought to have been built. To them, there is a definite gap that makes them bitter and it only makes feelings worse when changes are implemented that widen that gap.

It's not an entirely rational outlook that these players have, but it's still an attitude that can affect sales and has to be taken into consideration by PGI.

Edit: spelling and stuff.

Edited by Yeonne Greene, 27 May 2015 - 05:28 PM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Joseph Mallan, on 19 May 2015 - 10:49 AM, said:

I was looking to fight in the Clan invasion, trying to repel the Clans from the Inner Sphere. With all the OP trimming that the Clans could bring against me!

What I have so far is, Weekend at My house BattleTech.

This. Cant have real clans, thatd be pay to win -.-

[Sir Wulfrick]

Rebas Kradd, on 27 May 2015 - 03:18 PM, said:

Absolutely agreed. Love this.

Unfortunately, you're up against a good portion of the community on this, not just PGI. A number of players have opined that they don't want MWO to be a "walking simulator"; there is a good chunk of the community that wants quick action over tactical gameplay. It's only now becoming obvious to everyone (I'm trying really hard to push awareness of this) that you cannot have both at the same time.

I agree with the point you make, and also agree 100% with the post you quoted.

What I would say is that for those who prefer quick action there's the public / group queue. Perhaps CW should be further developed for those of us who do want a hard-core mech warfare simulator rather than COD-with-robots.

[Tiamat of the Sea]

Sir Wulfrick, on 27 May 2015 - 04:34 PM, said:

I agree with the point you make, and also agree 100% with the post you quoted.

What I would say is that for those who prefer quick action there's the public / group queue. Perhaps CW should be further developed for those of us who do want a hard-core mech warfare simulator rather than COD-with-robots.

I, at least, had expected this would be what we were getting. It's kind of in that direction, but really not far enough so.

[Rebas Kradd]

Yep. The quick-action people have their modes and maps. I was hoping CW would be something different.

[Thunder Child]

I'm actually going to expand on the Alpine Vale (Alterac Valley) Map idea, and post it in the Feature Suggestions once I thin it's ready.

[Gyrok]

Pjwned, on 27 May 2015 - 03:09 PM, said:

If players' idea of balance is not viable at all and they throw a fit because of the game being balanced away from clans being OP that doesn't mean the game is lacking. There are reasons that the game is lacking, but that's not one of them.

Actually, I had pretty much conceded that balance 10 vs 12 was not going to happen. The many nerfs that reigned clans in to this point left us with what was basically something that could be lived with...before the beam nerfs, and the joke "adjustments" on the most broken IS mechs.

Give the TW up to 30% duration and cooldown nerfs and remove 5% of quirks from the 4N...? Are you insane, or just dense? That makes a gap in favor of the IS at this point.

So, how is that balanced?

Better question...

If your idea of balanced is impossibly bad, how can you sit there and insult the ideas of anyone else?

[CDLord HHGD]

TWIAFU, on 27 May 2015 - 03:18 PM, said:

Odd you mention that....

I just found my old, OLD, minis from tabletop. Dusted them off, found some that we have in MWO and some that I pilot, and are prepping to paint in Unit colors.

I have a bunch of old minis too, even unseens! But I would love to add some MWO pewters to my collection.

[ArchAngelWC]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 27 May 2015 - 04:25 PM, said:

This. Cant have real clans, thatd be pay to win -.-

it'd be more pay to compete for a minute as once the IS starts salvaging Clan tech things go very very wrong and if we're doing Planetary cycles where the IS does succession wars to get adapted to playing other IS houses and the Clans fight on the petagon worlds to fill out their toumans by finding Brian caches and then the invasion happens. Using Tuk as effectively a pause after 3-4 months to asses progress and if the Clans have made enough progress or killed enough IS mechs or taken/destroyed enough infrastructure to prevent the IS production from ramping up...If not
starts to become very very scary +/- new mechs/tech if PGI does salvage and research/reverse engineering..

that tech could be locked for Planetary usage until the appropriate time and only if you are in the appropriate faction +/- all the other fun faction specific stuff...
you would need to be in for the entire cycle as I doubt we are going to do bondsmen and the like..



but I'm sure people who dont understand the dynamics think its imbalanced...and PGI has been willing to bend over the IP for them
eh I'm sure they will keep this game alive for years and years

Edited by ArchAngelWC, 29 May 2015 - 06:04 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 27 May 2015 - 04:25 PM, said:

This. Cant have real clans, thatd be pay to win -.-

Funny. I paid to be A Lyran (founder). And I did so, so I could try and beat teh Clans. I paid to win. I expected to lose, but I payed to win!

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 29 May 2015 - 06:08 AM.

[Lostdragon]

@ OP, I've personally been there a couple of times with the game and taken a break for a while. It always draws me back in eventually though.

[Lightfoot]

MechWarrior balance is not when all weapons are the same thing in a different wrapper, pretty much what we have now. Balance is when each weapon has it's own abilities to grant a certain tactic, but that none are capable of blocking out other weapon's tactics. That allows players skills to become unique and unpredictable and that is what Battle Tech tries to set up.

MWO's balance was best in April 2013 because you had the PPCs, LRMs, Gauss Rifles, and Dakka-dakka Jagers all competing more or less evenly, but then the nerfs started hitting and they took MWO in the wrong direction in an effort to block group-fire/pin-point damage. And MWO still doesn't have a maximum heat cap which mostly makes the high alpha boats unplayable because they explode.

Basically MWO's biggest problem is that just a 30-40 damage point group-fire is a crippling hit because most group-fires will always, always, surpass that mark no matter how they change the weapons. So the nerfs never touch that underlying flaw.

[Y E O N N E]

30 is not crippling, 30 is solid. 30 won't even kill most lights in a single shot to the side torso, and in reality will likely not even open the target because lights are small and can twist the damage very well, unlike Mediums and larger.

Gyrok, on 29 May 2015 - 05:09 AM, said:

Actually, I had pretty much conceded that balance 10 vs 12 was not going to happen. The many nerfs that reigned clans in to this point left us with what was basically something that could be lived with...before the beam nerfs, and the joke "adjustments" on the most broken IS mechs.

Give the TW up to 30% duration and cooldown nerfs and remove 5% of quirks from the 4N...? Are you insane, or just dense? That makes a gap in favor of the IS at this point.

So, how is that balanced?

Better question...

If your idea of balanced is impossibly bad, how can you sit there and insult the ideas of anyone else?

Well, a 30% duration nerf means that non-ghosting alpha fired by the TBR is releasing its damage at the same rate as the non-ghosting 3+3 stagger fire of the Stalker. Total burn on both at that point is 1.5 seconds, so that's 54 points over 1.5 seconds, each. I don't know why they nerfed the cool-down, but that much is not quite as important since you are in cover between shots and the superior rate of fire on the Stalker is useless if you aren't presenting yourself as a target. If anything, the superior rate of fire helps balance out the speed advantage on the TBR since the armor advantage on the Stalker is not sufficient enough to do that.

And, remember, we are talking about 85 tons vs. 75 tons, here, with 30 tons in weapons alone and only 20 DHS. It should have a slight edge in whatever role it can be built to specialize in.

Note, I don't think the nerfs were applied in the right way. A general laser nerf on an omnipod was not the way to go, it should have been an adjustment on the C-LPL and C-ERML themselves, and not +30% on duration and anything at all on cool-down.

Also, sorry for not having a reply to your "vision" post, I haven't composed one yet.

[Sir Wulfrick]

ArchAngelWC, on 29 May 2015 - 06:01 AM, said:

it'd be more pay to compete for a minute as once the IS starts salvaging Clan tech things go very very wrong and if we're doing Planetary cycles where the IS does succession wars to get adapted to playing other IS houses and the Clans fight on the petagon worlds to fill out their toumans by finding Brian caches and then the invasion happens. Using Tuk as effectively a pause after 3-4 months to asses progress and if the Clans have made enough progress or killed enough IS mechs or taken/destroyed enough infrastructure to prevent the IS production from ramping up...If not
starts to become very very scary +/- new mechs/tech if PGI does salvage and research/reverse engineering..

that tech could be locked for Planetary usage until the appropriate time and only if you are in the appropriate faction +/- all the other fun faction specific stuff...
you would need to be in for the entire cycle as I doubt we are going to do bondsmen and the like..

but I'm sure people who dont understand the dynamics think its imbalanced...and PGI has been willing to bend over the IP for them
eh I'm sure they will keep this game alive for years and years

All good points, but there's a good argument for the ultimate answer to "balance" being:

1. Allow all IS mech to use all Clan tech.

2. Allow all Clan mechs to use all IS tech.

3. Remove all quirks from all chassis.

[Dino Might]

I've been defending balance decisions for a while, but that's because I would like to have a large playerbase and continue this game. If I really had what I wanted, it would be full on Clan tech with no gimps, and I don't care about the numbers. I'd be running with Joe against the seemingly unstoppable juggernaut of alien robots, and I'd be shouting, "come at me bro!"

I think doing 12 v 10 or 20 v 15 or whatever would kill the game more than imbalanced tech, because I don't want to play as a single member of a horde. Give me a crappier mech, fine, but don't make it so we are throwaways. Having massive numbers tactically just makes it lackluster in terms of individual contribution. If you aren't running around feeling like the entire battle depends on you, then it's not nearly as interesting.

I would hope, if they did this, that the top tier players would join us on the IS side for a little bit of a challenge. I think roflstomps would just get way too boring. What PGI could do is make IS mechs more exclusive - cost more to buy, outfit, etc. Then you have to grind your way as clan when you're new to "level up" to hard mode.

[ArchAngelWC]

Sir Wulfrick, on 29 May 2015 - 04:50 PM, said:

All good points, but there's a good argument for the ultimate answer to "balance" being:

1. Allow all IS mech to use all Clan tech.

2. Allow all Clan mechs to use all IS tech.

3. Remove all quirks from all chassis.

1. Sure if they salvage it in battle...can afford the repair cost and all that jazz (which should be significantly higher as Clan tech is like them finding the Roswell spacecraft)

2. Sure if they salvage it in battle....I would also decrease the repair cost (IS tech is childs play) but increase the cost of changing pieces as trying to fit a Clantech weapon on a IS tech chassis would take some IIC'ing lol

3. Yes

[ArchAngelWC]

Dino Might, on 29 May 2015 - 04:59 PM, said:

I've been defending balance decisions for a while, but that's because I would like to have a large playerbase and continue this game. If I really had what I wanted, it would be full on Clan tech with no gimps, and I don't care about the numbers. I'd be running with Joe against the seemingly unstoppable juggernaut of alien robots, and I'd be shouting, "come at me bro!"

I think doing 12 v 10 or 20 v 15 or whatever would kill the game more than imbalanced tech, because I don't want to play as a single member of a horde. Give me a crappier mech, fine, but don't make it so we are throwaways. Having massive numbers tactically just makes it lackluster in terms of individual contribution. If you aren't running around feeling like the entire battle depends on you, then it's not nearly as interesting.

I would hope, if they did this, that the top tier players would join us on the IS side for a little bit of a challenge. I think roflstomps would just get way too boring. What PGI could do is make IS mechs more exclusive - cost more to buy, outfit, etc. Then you have to grind your way as clan when you're new to "level up" to hard mode.

IS mechs were never throwaways....The thing is the IS pilots were used to fighting other IS pilots...wheras the Clanners had been fighting other Clanners....
Once they started adapting, figuring out our tactics...exploiting our tactics etc etc....we all know where it went lol

[Templar Dane]

ArchAngelWC, on 29 May 2015 - 05:20 PM, said:

IS mechs were never throwaways....The thing is the IS pilots were used to fighting other IS pilots...wheras the Clanners had been fighting other Clanners....
Once they started adapting, figuring out our tactics...exploiting our tactics etc etc....we all know where it went lol

They also, for the most part, didn't have access to double heat sinks or endo/ferro etc.