77 replies to this topic

[Andi Nagasia]

=0=(Poll Here)=0=

ok with the all the IS to Clan Balance Talks about,
and it seems like Every Discussion leads into an Epeen Contest,

Let me Bring Something up that Many feel is or isnt important,
the Tonnage and Crit differences between IS and Clan Weapons,
Weapon Balance Aside, it seems like Tonnage/Crit are their own Discussion,


=Thoughts on Balance=
This Topic is to Discuss the Balance between Faction, Tonnage and Crits,
In doing, This Topic Assumes that all Weapons are balanced Stats wise,
(they may not be but thats for another Topic not this one)
-
But why Discuss IS to Clan, Tonnage and Crits?
Because many Good Topics on Clan Balancing have been shot down on it,
Valid ideas Cast aside, because Clan Weapons are Abit smaller and Weigh less,
This Topic Seeks to Discuss this and Find a Solution to Tonnage & Crit Balance,


=Current Weapons=
=Energy=
Small Lasers/Pulse take up same Tonnage and Crits,
Medium Lasers/Pulse take up same Tonnage and Crits,
-
IS Large Lasers take up 1 more Ton and 1 more Crit vs Clan ERLL,
IS Large Pulse take up 1 more Ton vs Clan LPL,

=Ballistic=
IS AC2 +Ammo take up 1 more Ton But 1 Less Crit vs Clan UAC2 +Ammo,
IS AC5 +Ammo take up 1 more Ton and 1 more Crit vs Clan UAC5 +Ammo,
IS AC10 +Ammo take up 2 more Tons and 2 more Crit vs Clan AC10 +Ammo,
IS AC20 +Ammo take up 2 more Tons and 2 more Crit vs Clan UAC20 +Ammo,
IS Gauss +Ammo take up 3 more Ton and 1 more Crit vs Clan Gauss +Ammo,

=Missile=
IS LRM5 +Ammo take up 1 more Ton and 1 more Crit vs Clan LRM5 +Ammo,
IS LRM10 +Ammo take up 2.5 more Ton and 1 more Crit vs Clan LRM10 +Ammo,
IS LRM15 +Ammo take up 3.5 more Ton and 1 more Crit vs Clan LRM15 +Ammo,
IS LRM20 +Ammo take up 5 more Ton and 1 more Crit vs Clan LRM20 +Ammo,
-
IS SRM2 +Ammo take up 0.5 more Ton vs Clan SRM2 +Ammo,
IS SRM4 +Ammo take up 1 more Ton vs Clan SRM4 +Ammo,
IS SRM6 +Ammo take up 1.5 more Ton and 1 more Crit vs Clan SRM6 +Ammo,
-
IS SSRM2 +Ammo take up 0.5 more Ton vs Clan SSRM2 +Ammo,



=0=My Solution=0=
Lasers are mostly Fine, but for Missiles and Ballistics,
give all IS Ammo Based Weapons 1Free Ton of Ammo
this Balances out the Problem almost Completely,

=NEW Weapons=
=Energy=(No Change)=
Small Lasers/Pulse take up same Tonnage and Crits as Clan,
Medium Lasers/Pulse take up same Tonnage and Crits as Clan,
-
IS Large Lasers take up 1 more Ton and 1 more Crit vs Clan ERLL,
IS Large Pulse take up 1 more Ton vs Clan LPL,

=Ballistic=(IS +1FreeAmmo(1FreeTon&1FreeCrit)=
IS AC2 +Ammo take up same Tonnage But 2 Less Crits vs Clan UAC2 +Ammo,
IS AC5 +Ammo take up same Tonnage and Crits as Clan UAC5 +Ammo,
IS AC10 +Ammo take up 1 more Tons and 1 more Crit vs Clan AC10 +Ammo,
IS AC20 +Ammo take up 1 more Tons and 1 more Crit vs Clan UAC20 +Ammo,
IS Gauss +Ammo take up 2 more Ton vs Clan Gauss +Ammo,

=Missile=(IS +1FreeAmmo(1FreeTon&1FreeCrit)=
IS LRM5 +Ammo take up same Tonnage and Crits as Clan,
IS LRM10 +Ammo take up 1.5 more Ton vs Clan LRM10,
IS LRM15 +Ammo take up 2.5 more Ton vs Clan LRM15,
IS LRM20 +Ammo take up 4 more Ton vs Clan LRM20,
-
IS SRM2 +Ammo take up 0.5 Less Ton and 1 Less Crit vs Clan SRM2 +Ammo,
IS SRM4 +Ammo take up 1 Less Crit vs Clan SRM4 +Ammo,
IS SRM6 +Ammo take up 0.5 more Ton vs Clan SRM6 +Ammo,
-
IS SSRM2 +Ammo take up 0.5 Less Ton and 1 Less Crit vs Clan SSRM2 +Ammo,

As you can See the Weapons Now Appear more Balanced,
some Larger Ballistics and Missiles are Still down but are Much Closer,
This Also Keeps with the Idea that IS & Clan are to be Asymmetrically Balanced,
Equal But Play abit different for Flavor and Fluff of the Faction,
-
this Change also give some Smaller IS weapons Advantage over Clan,
Such as AC2s and SRM2-4, this will also Encourage Lights to take these Weapons,
Which Could really help some IS Tonnage Starved Lights, (LCT, COM, ect),


=8=Please NOTE=8=
Im not Proposing the Changing of Tonnage or Crits for Any Weapon,
Im Proposing Every IS Ammo Weapon Gain a Free Ton of Ammo Internally,
this is to bring IS Weapon Tonnage and Crits closer to Clan Weapons,


=0=Explanations=0=
=Game Reason=
For Balance Purposes of IS Ammo Based Weapons will have 1 Ton Ammo Built into the Weapon,
This is here to Negate the Advantage of Clan Weapons Weighing less and taking up less Crits,
-
=Lore Reason=
due to the Feed Type Systems of the IS, all IS Ammo Weapons have to be Pre-loaded with Ammo,
Clans due to their Technology have be able to Negate this with Advanced Feed Systems leading to Lighter Weapons,

=0=(Poll Here)=0=

Thoughts, Comments, Concerns?
Thanks,

Edit- Explanations,
Edit2- some Reworks,

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 14 September 2016 - 12:17 PM.

[El Bandito]

So, Ghost ammo? Newbies need to be notified of it though, cause it is adding to the convoluted mechanics of the game. How about just increase IS ammo count instead?

Edited by El Bandito, 27 March 2016 - 08:17 PM.

[Wolfways]

Because mechs from both factions don't need more ammo/ton...

[Adamski]

WTF? How are you reducing crit size of some of these weapons that are already only at a single crit?

And tonnage & crit are not a separate discussion from weapon balance. They are integral to weapon balance, because a weapon that weighs more and takes up more room should be stronger, because it is using up more resources.

Beyond that, you need to ignore the Clan AC weapons, and focus on the UAC weapons. The AC are just placeholders for LBX that got added to the game and then left to rot.

[Khobai]

IS autocannons are already way better than clan autocannons, why should they get free ammo too? that makes no sense.

I could maybe see IS SRMs getting a free ton of ammo. But IS autocannons are fine.

[102_devill]

Why should IS and CLAN mech be balanced at all?

[Pjwned]

RokerSaMoravu, on 28 March 2016 - 01:01 AM, said:

Why should IS and CLAN mech be balanced at all?

You're right, IS mechs should just be completely irrelevant.

[Andi Nagasia]

El Bandito, on 27 March 2016 - 08:16 PM, said:

So, Ghost ammo? Newbies need to be notified of it though, cause it is adding to the convoluted mechanics of the game. How about just increase IS ammo count instead?

its Easy,
=Game Reason=
Hey Noobs for Balance Purposes of IS Ammo Based Weapons will have 1 Ton Ammo Build into the Weapon,
This is here to Negate the Advantage of Clan Weapons Weighing less and taking up less Crits,
=Lore Reason=
due to the Feed Type Systems of the IS, all IS Ammo Weapons have to be Pre-loaded with Ammo,
Clans due to their Technology have be able to Negate this with Advanced Feed Systems leading to Lighter Weapons,
-
See Both Make Sense in Game and can Be easily Explained,

Also

Wolfways, on 27 March 2016 - 09:03 PM, said:

Because mechs from both factions don't need more ammo/ton...

Just this, this Garentees a -1Ton&1Crit to all IS Ammo Weapons,
this also Helps Light Lights with Ammo Dependency(COM, LCT, Ect.)

Adamski, on 27 March 2016 - 09:21 PM, said:

WTF? How are you reducing crit size of some of these weapons that are already only at a single crit?

And tonnage & crit are not a separate discussion from weapon balance. They are integral to weapon balance, because a weapon that weighs more and takes up more room should be stronger, because it is using up more resources.

Beyond that, you need to ignore the Clan AC weapons, and focus on the UAC weapons. The AC are just placeholders for LBX that got added to the game and then left to rot.

the idea is one Ton of Ammo is already in the Weapon, so you have 1Free Ton & 1Free Crit Per weapon,
as discribed above this gives Flavor to the Factions, and will close the Bar between IS & Clan(Ton & Crit),
-
I know it is but if its handled here right now Separately with this Idea we can Fully Focus on Balance,
if not than Every Clan Buff Warranted or not will be shot down, because(All Clan Stuff is Lighter and Smaller),
-
I thought i did, i used UACs for the Test,

Khobai, on 27 March 2016 - 10:40 PM, said:

IS autocannons are already way better than clan autocannons, why should they get free ammo too? that makes no sense.

I could maybe see IS SRMs getting a free ton of ammo. But IS autocannons are fine.

The idea was to Aid All IS Ammo Based Weapons as to bring their Tonnage Crits closer to Clan Values,
After this they may be more Easily Balanced, with one another which is the Hope if this Gets Accepted,
(also this May Make AC2 Viable for Some IS Lights as it comes with 75Free Ammo Now),

RokerSaMoravu, on 28 March 2016 - 01:01 AM, said:

Why should IS and CLAN mech be balanced at all?

because a MAD and a TBR have the same Tonnage and should have the same Viability,
or the TBR would always be Chosen over the MAD in every Single Instance ever,

Pjwned, on 28 March 2016 - 01:10 AM, said:

You're right, IS mechs should just be completely irrelevant.

or this,

[Wolfways]

I don't agree with "free ammo" being added to any weapons. I also don't agree with any "ammo buff to IS only".
Both factions need more ammo/ton.

[Wolfways]

RokerSaMoravu, on 28 March 2016 - 01:01 AM, said:

Why should IS and CLAN mech be balanced at all?

2 reasons.

1) Apparently pgi cannot make asymmetrical matches. (No idea why.)
2) Most players whine if they personally are considered an underdog because...well I'm not sure why. It seems that MWO is not considered a team game after all.

[Adamski]

Wolfways, on 28 March 2016 - 07:14 PM, said:

2 reasons.

1) Apparently pgi cannot make asymmetrical matches. (No idea why.)
2) Most players whine if they personally are considered an underdog because...well I'm not sure why. It seems that MWO is not considered a team game after all.

1) Asymmetrical matches will not solve the issue. If mechs are supposed to hew more closely to TT values, then the Summoner becomes a completely junk mech when it loses all of its quirks along with the IS mechs.
1b) Asymmetrical matches would require all players on a team to be driving the same faction, which means friends could not group together unless both were driving the same faction all the time.

2) Players will always whine about balance, either because balance is off, or because its perceived as being off. Generally more communication from the developer about balance decisions can help with this,
Or if they were at least more responsive to player needs. Letting the Summoner, Ice Ferret, Mist Lynx, Vindicator, Victor, etc etc collect dust for months on end is inexcusable.

[Wolfways]

Adamski, on 28 March 2016 - 07:30 PM, said:

1) Asymmetrical matches will not solve the issue. If mechs are supposed to hew more closely to TT values, then the Summoner becomes a completely junk mech when it loses all of its quirks along with the IS mechs.

So then mechs could be balanced on an individual basis.

Quote

1b) Asymmetrical matches would require all players on a team to be driving the same faction, which means friends could not group together unless both were driving the same faction all the time.

I don't care.
It's done in MMO's, why not MWO? You join a faction and fight with that faction. Plus, anyone can make two accounts so anyone can play both factions (or pgi could allow 2 "pilots" per account).

Quote

2) Players will always whine about balance, either because balance is off, or because its perceived as being off. Generally more communication from the developer about balance decisions can help with this,
Or if they were at least more responsive to player needs. Letting the Summoner, Ice Ferret, Mist Lynx, Vindicator, Victor, etc etc collect dust for months on end is inexcusable.

My comment was more about the "underdog team" rather than individual mechs. Players would complain (as they already have) if they were 12 IS vs. 10 Clan because the IS team had weaker mechs (but more of them), because most players care more about "me" than "team".

[Tewaz]

You know...I just started playing MW4: Mercenaries again and that is the way things are in that game except all weapons come stock with 1 ton of ammo and the ammo doesn't take up crit slots. Really nice how it works and the ammo cap is controlled with up down arrows to add/subtract ammo by the ton. Dunno about balance but would be nice if ammo didn't take up mech slots so this system could be used..

Edited by Tewaz, 28 March 2016 - 09:22 PM.

[Adamski]

Wolfways, on 28 March 2016 - 09:04 PM, said:

So then mechs could be balanced on an individual basis.

I don't care.
It's done in MMO's, why not MWO? You join a faction and fight with that faction. Plus, anyone can make two accounts so anyone can play both factions (or pgi could allow 2 "pilots" per account).


My comment was more about the "underdog team" rather than individual mechs. Players would complain (as they already have) if they were 12 IS vs. 10 Clan because the IS team had weaker mechs (but more of them), because most players care more about "me" than "team".

If you are balancing mechs on an individual basis, then why bother having asymmetrical teams? Just make each mech value per ton roughly the same. BOOM, that is what PGI is already attempting.

Implementing a new system should provide benefits, asymmetrical is just all downsides. It requires significant development time to implement a new matchmaker, it creates problems for friends who want to play together, and it doesn't even solve for balance issues by still making the Summoner directly compete with the Timberwolf.

12v10 is just fanfiction theory craft anyways, TT bidding required Clan pilots to abide by Zellbriggen and had IS outnumber them by roughly 3.5:1. So asymmetrical teams would be closer to 18v5 with no quirks.

Don't believe me? Go look at the Sarna Wiki article on the Battle for Tukayyid, where Comstar and the ilKhan negotiated forces prior to the battle and then calculate just how many battlemechs were involved. (The Comstar forces had all the same equipment that MWO IS pilots currently have access to, in addition to being able to choose where the objectives were located and where the enemy landed)

Edited by Adamski, 28 March 2016 - 09:35 PM.

[MechWarrior849305]

One stupid idea after another. More ammo per ton for BETTER ballistics? WTF with you, man?

[DovisKhan]

Lets just **** the lore a bit and let all mechs be modified with both, Clan and IS stuff and have Clans be able to fully modify their mechs like IS can.



Then we can get rid of all quirks and any need for balance topics.


Of course no one would ever use an STD or IS XL engine from that point and no one would use IS small lasers and of course no one would use IS missiles since they weight 2x for the same damage

Edited by DovisKhan, 28 March 2016 - 10:22 PM.

[102_devill]

Pjwned, on 28 March 2016 - 01:10 AM, said:

You're right, IS mechs should just be completely irrelevant.

Well, they were never balanced in Battletech. It is like if you would balance a Sherman and a Panther tank. Were they balanced in their "lore"? No they weren't, you needed about 5 Shermans working together to take down one Panther.

My point is, we shouldn't ask PGI to "balance" IS and CLAN mechs, we should ask them to have DISIMILAR engagements, ie. not 12vs12, but 12 IS vs 10 CLAN or something like that...

[DovisKhan]

RokerSaMoravu, on 28 March 2016 - 10:37 PM, said:

Well, they were never balanced in Battletech. It is like if you would balance a Sherman and a Panther tank. Were they balanced in their "lore"? No they weren't, you needed about 5 Shermans working together to take down one Panther.

My point is, we shouldn't ask PGI to "balance" IS and CLAN mechs, we should ask them to have DISIMILAR engagements, ie. not 12vs12, but 12 IS vs 10 CLAN or something like that...

worst idea for a pvp game, because then you get a small minority that have maxed out **** and a vast majority that just feeds them, the game would bleed new users real fast.

[102_devill]

Adamski, on 28 March 2016 - 07:30 PM, said:

1b) Asymmetrical matches would require all players on a team to be driving the same faction, which means friends could not group together unless both were driving the same faction all the time.

You know, this was not a problem until a few years ago. I spent 10 years actively flying IL2 Sturmovik exclusively online with my friends. We played coop campaigns where you couldn't fly a Zero if your side was Allied, or couldn't fly a Mustang if your side was Axis. So what??? Next time you play another side (faction) and you get to play with your favorite mech/plane/whatever.

Why is this such a big deal? It's not like you can't afford to have a correct mech for every fight; they are FREE.

Do you know how much does it cost (real money) to have a DCS plane which is required to play a co-op campaign with your friends? A shitload of money! Yet nobody in the DCS community would ***** about not being allowed to fly his favorite MiG21 when the rest of the squadron flies A-10s!

[Adamski]

RokerSaMoravu, on 28 March 2016 - 10:37 PM, said:

Well, they were never balanced in Battletech. It is like if you would balance a Sherman and a Panther tank. Were they balanced in their "lore"? No they weren't, you needed about 5 Shermans working together to take down one Panther.

My point is, we shouldn't ask PGI to "balance" IS and CLAN mechs, we should ask them to have DISIMILAR engagements, ie. not 12vs12, but 12 IS vs 10 CLAN or something like that...

Reasons why dissimilar team sizes will not happen:
1) Asymmetrical matches will not solve the issue. If mechs are supposed to hew more closely to TT values, then the Summoner becomes a completely junk mech when it loses all of its quirks along with the IS mechs, and has to compete with the Timberwolf and Ebon Jaguar on its own merits. Same with the Gargoyle, and Mist Lynx

2) Asymmetrical matches would require all players on a team to be driving the same faction, which means friends could not group together unless they were all piloting the same faction all the time.

3) It requires a significant recoding of the matchmaker

4) If you want to go by lore values, you are looking at 18 IS Lostech Battlemechs for every 5 Clan Omnimechs.
Source: http://www.sarna.net...tle_of_Tukayyid