13 replies to this topic

[H I A S]

They are dying so easily. Its not good for my cbill outcome.
Pls for the mother of god give them some structurquirks.

Edited by arivio, 10 July 2016 - 12:34 PM.

[Cygone]

If you give them Armor and Structure quirks, I can farm more c-bills via dmg

[Honiara]

Just shoot their arms first that will increase your damage and salvage numbers!

[feeWAIVER]

No, salvage is gained by killing mechs efficiently.

[Czarr]

I feel like in scounting I rather play clan but in invasion I rather play IS , I guess clan has better lights and mediums ?

Edited by Czarr, 10 July 2016 - 12:43 PM.

[A Shoddy Rental Mech]

arivio, on 10 July 2016 - 12:30 PM, said:

They are dying so easily. Its not good for my cbill outcome.
Pls for the mother of god give them some structurquirks.

Count Zero 74 is that you? your troll is strong.

[Carl Vickers]

Sarcastic troll post is sarcastic troll.

[Kmieciu]

Honiara, on 10 July 2016 - 12:36 PM, said:

Just shoot their arms first that will increase your damage and salvage numbers!

NOPE.
If you destroy the side torso, you get the damage for the destroyed arm.

[Kin3ticX]

Fully agreed with OP and make sure you sprinkle some of that quirk fairy dust on the Kodiak-3 just to be extra sure you get the balance right

Thank you for making this thread so that PGI can be extra aware of the problem

[KinLuu]

The Banshee-3M also could be nerfed some more. It still is somewhat viable. Unacceptable.

[Knightcrawler]

I played a few games recently after a few months. From what I saw, clamz have been losing a lot because:

1) They spend too much time in scouting matches instead of invading matches, including good players from organized teams. If nobody "seeds" invasion drops because they think waiting is pointless, then you'll only get full 12-mans dropping in invasions, meaning the battle lines will stagnate due to not enough matches being fought. Of course, since IS players outnumber Clam players, if Clam players ignore scouting matches, IS will eventually get Long Tom support and win every match regardless, and the IS players won't get full points for those kills, either. So the Clams are kinda damned either way, but at least there'd be some chance if they seeded invasion drops. TBH Scouting missions had a negative impact on CW/FW.

2) A lot of big units have really weakened over the past 6-12 months (CWI for instance), and some over the past 12-24 months (CGBI for instance). This is for a lot of reasons. Clams "won" several times in a row, but were not rewarded for it at all except with some meager cockpit items. Every time the Clams won, PGI reset the map. Even when the Clams surrounded Earth completely, PGI didn't do anything cool like allowing an invasion of Earth (which Wardens might dislike outwardly, but Crusaders would love), or an inter-clan Trial of Possession for Earth, or a clan being chosen as ilClan. Some Clammers wanted to take over the entire Inner Sphere, but oops, map reset. After 3 resets, a lot of Clammers really didn't see any point. They'd already proven themselves as much as PGI would allow them to. Why keep playing CW/FW? So a lot of good players stopped playing that mode, or the game, and a lot of units stopped burning the midnight oil. Because despite what a lot of IS players might have thought, "winning" the previous CW/FW "games" was really, really hard and took a lot of effort.

3) The Tournament is sucking a lot of good players away from CW/FW, which in turn is leading more people toward scouting, quick play, or other games. Since the Clams have a smaller player base, losing their best players affects their strategic options more than it affects the IS. Let's say that the Clams and the IS both lost an average of 100 active players at any given time. If before the tournament, the IS was fielding 250 players and the Clams were fielding 150 players, then at that time the IS outnumbered the Clams by 67%. If both sides lose 100 players, that means the IS is fielding 150 players and the Clams is fielding 50 players. Now the IS outnumbers the Clams by 200%. I don't know what the actual numbers are, but the trend should be the same.

4) I haven't really been up-to-date with the quirks being handed out to both sides. I have a general sense that PGI has stopped applying many negative quirks to Clam mechs, removed some that they had applied, and have removed some of the key offenders on the IS side. But the effect of quirks when I left was still such that there was several IS configurations that were better at every single type of buildout than any Clam mech. If you wanted to build a long-range mech, IS had the best there was. Medium? Short? IS had the best. Fast mechs? Slow mechs? IS mechs had the best. Anti-light? Anti-assault? IS had the best. And pretty much every IS mech out-DPSes every Clam mech (the exception perhaps being SRM builds, which still run too hot to win knife fights with against relatively fresh mechs). Clam mechs are only better for middle-of-the-road builds, which is generally not a good way to win matches.

At least, that's how quirks were when I stopped playing consistently. "Hey, let's give a Hunchback a 50% cooldown reduction on its gauss rifle... almost doubling its DPS per unit weight/volume/weapon slot." "Hey, let's stack general heat generation buffs with specific heat generation buffs with general heat reduction buffs with specific heat reduction buffs with general weapon cooldown buffs with specific weapon cooldown buffs... basically doubling the DPS of a specific set of weapons and still providing huge bonuses to slightly less specific sets." Clammers did their best to deal with this over the years, and a lot of players started to take it really personally from PGI, along with all the resets and lack of appropriate recognition/rewards for their victories. PGI displayed the attitude of "Hey, if the Clams win, we obviously need to change something."

So yeah, a lot of Clammers stopped playing CW/FW. The Clammers who are left have a lower average skill than before, and do not have the drive and zeal they once had. Quirks won't fix that.

Edited by Knightcrawler, 11 July 2016 - 01:11 AM.

[Lehmund]

I don't think Clan mechs need to be buffed per se, but I do feel like some chassis need to have better variant-specific buffs that better equate what the IS mechs have. The omnipod system allows for some specialization but if Clan mechs get only a -3% ballistic cooldown and a +5% ballistic rate of fire (for example) overall to make that variation /omnipod better at ballistics while an IS counterpart gets -10% cooldown and +15% ballistic RoF, it seems at least odd and unfair.

I would think giving mech chassis + variants some additional specialization is cool and focuses the mech (or omnipod) some more direction is fine design-wise but should be applied similarly across the board, or not applied at all. Nothing wrong with leaving some chassis the way they are with their hardpoints + customization options and only add quirks to account for bad hitbox geometry (for example). We have to remember that these mechs and their original stats come from a board game that didn't worry about the angle of fire towards different body parts like our FPS type game.....

The Quirk system allows the mitigation of the above, which is fine to keep chassis viable in combat, but weapon performance and agility quirks are not necessarily needed. So if the latter are added, please apply over IS and Clan mechs equally well IMO.

[F1oyd]

Apart from the general balance between is and clans i can't believe how long it takes to realise and/or react to the issue that some mechs a just terribad compared to others?

What is about the Summoner, Ice Ferret, Kit Foxe, Myst Lynx, Orion/Highlander IIc (the latest structure buffs help a little but the mechs are still not good or in range with the good clan chassis), etc? And there are problematic chassis on is side as well.

Is it that complicated to look at the numbers or play a few games or ask ppl who invest tons of time in the game and change a few numbers in the code? Idk, the quirk system (no judgement in general on that here) is implemented. So how about some adjustments on the fly? I`d like to see a little more dynamic in this area.

Edited by Floyd Foster, 11 July 2016 - 05:38 AM.

[Lily from animove]

i vote for +30 structure on each chassis left leg.

Edited by Lily from animove, 11 July 2016 - 05:47 AM.