186 replies to this topic

[Merky Merc]

Kdogg788, on 11 March 2013 - 05:29 AM, said:

The absolute craziest thing, which will happen btw, is when trial mechs face off against clan tech. If a fully spec'd out Tier 2 tech Atlas would get shredded by the clan tech of lore, how do you think the trials are going to fare against them? It wouldn't break my heart if they took another year on this, besides clan technology is unimportant when compared to community warfare.

-k

That goes into a general problem with trial mechs. Those need to be changed from stock configs to at least be slightly customized but more capable general purpose builds.

[Mar-X-maN]

Phew. Made all the way through. Some good stuff there. Not going to recap or summarize, but I liked what I could agree with mostly. Now my two cents are, why do we need balance at all?

There are some of versus games that get away with having asymetrical teams. Left 4 Dead and Aliens Colonial Marines for example. They work because they force players to actually play both sides. Though there are some that refuse to play the less favourite side it still generally works out. There could be a counter implemented that goes maybe up to 10. You get to play a clan mech 10 times in a row but then you have to play an IS 10 times in a row to do it again. Every time you play an IS mech the counter is reduced by one. Maybe also make it 5 on 8 when its all clan against all IS.

side notes: I support
-mixed tech and IS/Clan tech according to SARNA rules
-Clan weapons being mountable on IS mechs
-Clans being overpowered according to TT rules
-Clan mechs being more expansive (1,6 times more would reflect 5 on 8)
-Clans LRMs being LOS only with faster lock on times (maybe equal to Artemis)

I object to Clan weapons being made artificially made less effective by heat or recycle times.
Zellbriggen / Batchall or other nonsense rules being implemented, except maybe through XP/C-Bill rewards/punishments.

[TexAce]

yesterday I had another idea while playing with a hardcore BT fan, who didn't like the way PGi is going, to be exact he didn't like that all mechs were kinda omni-mechs which have way more hardpoints than they should. This leads to people boating weapons and maximizing DPS.

So I had an idea:

since we can make our mechs much much better than stock, wouldn't it be fair to make clan-mechs stock-only?
Without giving IS mechs clan-tech of course.

So we can alter our mechs the way we want while everyone who wants to pilot clan mechs, has to rely on stock configurations.

Shouldn't this even out the matches?

[Taemien]

Being able to relay target information to teammates is probably the strongest thing in the game right now (which is why you see so much ECM hate, or at least thats what was voted on the poll not so long ago). Other MechWarrior games didn't have this feature (you simply appeared on radar when in range regardless of terrain). Though MWLL had it, and you could share info via C3 and eventually MW4 had it (added in by MekTek).

Take that ability away from Clan mechs and they will be at a disadvantage. They may even need a buff to their weapons over TT values if this was done. But I'd like to see that done to see what happens. Let them come in at equal numbers (8v8 and 12v12), and their weapons come in at default values (like IS weapons were in the beginning of closed beta), cept LRMs do 1.7 and SRMs do 2.5. But no sharing of target data and see what we get in results (it is a beta so it needs to be tested).

[Cairbre]

Taemien, that is a thematically appropriate, and damned easy solution to the problem. Heck, the c3 system was more or less built to combat the clans, and their one on one warrior machismo. It would either force clan players to have amazing communication, or fight solo, as their honor would normally require them to do. Plus it is probably just one piece of code you could stick in just the clan mechs and be good to go. I approve of this message!

[Taemien]

Now it does have its drawbacks, or rather mitigating factors. One being teamplay using VOIP. In 8v8's it might not make much a difference, but then again it might:

"Target Alpha behind the hill"
"I can't see him, yet"

Might be common. Sort still forces your teammates to go and look, rather than beelining, such as Inner Sphere would be able to:

"Target Alpha behind the hill"
*Launches LRMs at Alpha*

[Dragonkindred]

Mar X maN, on 14 March 2013 - 02:27 AM, said:

Phew. Made all the way through. Some good stuff there. Not going to recap or summarize, but I liked what I could agree with mostly. Now my two cents are, why do we need balance at all?

There are some of versus games that get away with having asymetrical teams. Left 4 Dead and Aliens Colonial Marines for example. They work because they force players to actually play both sides. Though there are some that refuse to play the less favourite side it still generally works out. There could be a counter implemented that goes maybe up to 10. You get to play a clan mech 10 times in a row but then you have to play an IS 10 times in a row to do it again. Every time you play an IS mech the counter is reduced by one. Maybe also make it 5 on 8 when its all clan against all IS.

side notes: I support
-mixed tech and IS/Clan tech according to SARNA rules
-Clan weapons being mountable on IS mechs
-Clans being overpowered according to TT rules
-Clan mechs being more expansive (1,6 times more would reflect 5 on 8)
-Clans LRMs being LOS only with faster lock on times (maybe equal to Artemis)

I object to Clan weapons being made artificially made less effective by heat or recycle times.
Zellbriggen / Batchall or other nonsense rules being implemented, except maybe through XP/C-Bill rewards/punishments.

Having to play "x" number of games in IS mechs is a good idea, but you would need to ensure that DCs don't count towards it.
There are enough legitimate DCs at the moment without having to deal with the increased volume that would be caused by this type of system.

It might also be good to make clan drops PUG only (at least to start with). Obviously some people will try and sync drop, but they would only get a percentage of their group being together, instead of a whole star.

I don't agree with messing with any of the clan weapon specs or systems of operation (like your suggestion about LRMs). Just balance them against other clan weapons and then have at it.