337 replies to this topic

[Vasces Diablo]

Tennex, on 08 April 2013 - 06:35 PM, said:

I don't understand why the devs are so resistant to balance changes.

competitive games like league of legends, starcraft 2 make balance changes almost every patch.

One could argue that if balance changes are required almost every patch, than those games are not (and never have been) balanced.

[Shumabot]

Vasces Diablo, on 09 April 2013 - 11:22 AM, said:

One could argue that if balance changes are required almost every patch, than those games are not (and never have been) balanced.

One would be foolish and silly for arguing such for numerous reasons.

[Tennex]

Vasces Diablo, on 09 April 2013 - 11:22 AM, said:

One could argue that if balance changes are required almost every patch, than those games are not (and never have been) balanced.

1. an online game is never balanced. because players discover new ways to use what is in the game and discover new builds. constantly.

2. a F2P game introduces content constantly as a means of making money. This newly introduced content always requires periods of balance. As well as shifting the effectiveness of previous content.


so your right over the course of its life a F2P like MWO is never balanced. But at any moment it can be better balanced for a better player experience.


The sSRM2 are fine now. but do you expect them to add sSRM6 and make no balance adjustments?

Edited by Tennex, 09 April 2013 - 11:28 AM.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Garth Erlam, on 09 April 2013 - 10:50 AM, said:

"There's a bunch of changes in testing, but it takes awhile."


"We are going to change them again."

So you agree they are not right? Then why start that firestorm in ATD?

[N0V0CAIN]

Tombstoner, on 09 April 2013 - 09:07 AM, said:

Face--->palm

You just compared your game (cut and past weapon stats/ no cone of fire) to a game with cone of fire based on real weapons.
Then somehow come away with "We're doing pretty damn good" cause 12 of your weapons are competitive out of 26vs. 4/24

I'm done. I'm out. Its game over. Nothing we have to say matters since Garth consults with the best of the best.

One more legendary founder on the scrap heap: cored to the chest with skill based play that exploits perfect convergence.

Awesome, see you later.....

[Nicholas Carlyle]

MustrumRidcully, on 09 April 2013 - 11:16 AM, said:

Being able to set up your own server for MW:O with customized settings...

I'd pay a few MC for that.

If PGI had presented the game like this, they'd be RAKING in the money.

Instead of F2P, they could design the game, and give people the tools to run their own CW/Private Servers. And we would pay for it. And do all the hard work that comes along with those things.

Now they have this mess.

[Vasces Diablo]

Tennex, on 09 April 2013 - 11:24 AM, said:

1. an online game is never balanced. because players discover new ways to use what is in the game.

2. a F2P game introduces content constantly as a means of making money. This newly introduced content always requires periods of balance.


so your right a F2P like MWO is never balanced.

I completely agree. I should have posted more initially:

I am very much in favor of the slow tweaking that PGI is doing right now. It's a young game and a "tweak something and let it play out" approach is warranted (IMO). Baby steps, not pendulum swings. As you say in your first point, a game will never be balanced, so why alter things rapidly trying to chase it?

A game like LoL is generally established. They introduce new heros and this leads to changes to other heros, but the core mechanics remain essentially te same. MWO doesn't even have all it's core mechanics in place yet.

Let it get there and let things simmer a little while, then we'll truely know what things need to be changed to try and reach "balance" which of course, is impossible.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Vasces Diablo, on 09 April 2013 - 11:33 AM, said:

I completely agree. I should have posted more initially:

I am very much in favor of the slow tweaking that PGI is doing right now. It's a young game and a "tweak something and let it play out" approach is warranted (IMO). Baby steps, not pendulum swings. As you say in your first point, a game will never be balanced, so why alter things rapidly trying to chase it?

A game like LoL is generally established. They introduce new heros and this leads to changes to other heros, but the core mechanics remain essentially te same. MWO doesn't even have all it's core mechanics in place yet.

Let it get there and let things simmer a little while, then we'll truely know what things need to be changed to try and reach "balance" which of course, is impossible.

Slow? You mean Glacial. How do you expect them to balance the clans when they can't figure out something as simple as a machinegun?

[Mechteric]

Balance doesn't come suddenly but through careful design

Edited by CapperDeluxe, 09 April 2013 - 11:51 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 09 April 2013 - 11:34 AM, said:

Slow? You mean Glacial. How do you expect them to balance the clans when they can't figure out something as simple as a machinegun?

Easy their, tiger. Machine Guns are complicated!

[Vasces Diablo]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 09 April 2013 - 11:34 AM, said:

Slow? You mean Glacial. How do you expect them to balance the clans when they can't figure out something as simple as a machinegun?

They have tweaked once already: they have decided to make it purely an internal crit seeking weapon. Just because you don't agree with the change they made doesn't mean they haven't done anything with it. I'm not saying I think it's the right direction, but that's not the point. PGI has basically said "we feel some mechs should fill very specific roles based on their potential weapons load outs." Spider 5K is apparently a scout/crit mech.

Ultimately, it comes down to what "Balanced" means and there will NEVER be agreement on that. Machine guns suck against armor but are supposed to be anti-internal. That's a bonus paired with a disadvantage.

Related but not relevant: you have to admit they sound awesome.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Vasces Diablo, on 09 April 2013 - 12:10 PM, said:

They have tweaked once already: they have decided to make it purely an internal crit seeking weapon. Just because you don't agree with the change they made doesn't mean they haven't done anything with it. I'm not saying I think it's the right direction, but that's not the point. PGI has basically said "we feel some mechs should fill very specific roles based on their potential weapons load outs." Spider 5K is apparently a scout/crit mech.

Ultimately, it comes down to what "Balanced" means and there will NEVER be agreement on that. Machine guns suck against armor but are supposed to be anti-internal. That's a bonus paired with a disadvantage.

Related but not relevant: you have to admit they sound awesome.

Tweaked it? To be a Crit Seeker you say? Except it doesn't even do that job.

This isn't an instance of them changing the item, and me not liking what they changed it too.

It's an instance of them changing the item...and it's still worthless after the change.

I don't care what it does. But it needs to actually do it and be worth taking.

When someone mounts 4 of them and is only able to do 40 damage in an entire game. Something is wrong.

[Yokaiko]

Vasces Diablo, on 09 April 2013 - 12:10 PM, said:

Ultimately, it comes down to what "Balanced" means and there will NEVER be agreement on that. Machine guns suck against armor but are supposed to be anti-internal. That's a bonus paired with a disadvantage.

Now why would I crit seek with a machine gun (or four in some cases) when I can use a chassis that can mount mlas in the same number and just remove the part.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

This really isn't even about balance. MG's are worthless. Given the choice you NEVER want to take one.

The only times you do, is when you are forced via hard points and tonnage.

And thus our request...

Have Garth fill the basic skills of a Spider 5K with 4 MG's (Or even 6 if he wants a custom version), and share the experience.

[Tennex]

Yokaiko, on 09 April 2013 - 12:13 PM, said:

Now why would I crit seek with a machine gun (or four in some cases) when I can use a chassis that can mount mlas in the same number and just remove the part.

why would you seek crit period. when you can simply kill the mech in the time it takes to disable it

[Yokaiko]

Tennex, on 09 April 2013 - 01:18 PM, said:

why would you seek crit period. when you can simply kill the mech in the time it takes to disable it

Exactly.

[Jace Lancer]

Garth Erlam, on 09 April 2013 - 10:52 AM, said:

The hundreds of thousands of other players, though, aren't.

hundred of thousands? There a stat somewhere that shows how many are online? i sure hope there are that many. But with all of these posts I see with people spotting devs playing... there can't be that many...

[Tennex]

Garth Erlam, on 09 April 2013 - 10:50 AM, said:

"There's a bunch of changes in testing, but it takes awhile."


"We are going to change them again."

what? does this mean a MG dps buff?

just give it the dps buff. critical component is a horrible balance mechanic. only 1/3 of the mech. and its random.

[jeffsw6]

Shumabot, on 09 April 2013 - 10:58 AM, said:

They're losing players and have admitted to having a lot of trouble keeping new players around.

The new player issue is not so much a game balance one as ... the new player experience sucks. There are a zillion posts about this. They have put a tiny bit of effort into it with that community-selected Dragon variant.

I noticed a lot of in-game friends stop playing when their LRM boats became ineffective, and sniping became the dominant strategy on most maps (even Forest Colony, FFS!) These things happen when dramatically over-powered weapons are allowed to persist for a long time, and then are suddenly nerfed.

When I really noticed most of my in-game friends no longer signing on was when they patched in the Heavy Metal and the game began crashing very frequently, not recording matches, HUD is rarely working correctly, resource capture screwed up, you guys know this crap.

It's not careful adjustments to weapons that are chasing away players. It is ridiculously-buggy patch and huge LRM nerf that totally changed the way almost every map is played. That was stupid.

EDIT: Oh, I forgot, dropping into Tourmaline Desert over and over and over until mechs have worn a hole in the freaking sand.

Edited by jeffsw6, 09 April 2013 - 01:35 PM.

[Tennex]

Garth Erlam, on 09 April 2013 - 10:52 AM, said:

The hundreds of thousands of other players, though, aren't.

you guys introduce a ton of balance issues in patch bugs.

if you spent more time testing for bugs instead of balance changes that will never go into the game. and simply applying balance changes live.


you wouldn't have such a buggy game. which in turn makes it easier to balance