85 replies to this topic

[Gallowglas]

Easy: unbalanced teams.

[Davers]

OpCentar, on 19 April 2013 - 08:13 AM, said:

ClanTech should be high heat, long range, with limited chassis customization options (no engine swapping etc). Also, true DHS and unable to mount any IS tech.

If a IS chooses to mount ClanTech he will lose heat efficiency, more range for less damage over time.


And a Clanner should always be outnumbered, a Clan star (5) vs two IS lances (8) is the ideal ratio. I don't know how to balance three IS lances without giving either side a severe handicap.

5v8 is a good ratio for TT. It assumes that the higher skilled pilots and superior weapons are balanced against superior numbers. However, that doesn't translate well into MWO where the IS pilots can be equally as good, if not better than the Clan pilots, and everyone can fire with pin point accuracy. Not to mention nowhere have the Devs ever stated that the game was going to be anything but 12v12.

[Jawbreaker6]

If the clans are coming there will be no balance unless you have it too.

They are faster, run cooler out range and out gun. They are mobile slaughterhouses. If you're up on your lore you would know that it was the clanners and their ******** war-fighting rules that stopped them, not a bunch of overheated, worn out IS rigs.

"With what will you defend?"
"I will defend with tooth, nail and a shot of bourbon."

[AlmightyAeng]

I guess when I think of 'balancing' clan tech, it isn't in terms of making a 1v1 completely even between a Clan and IS mech.

I see it as a chance to give incentive to clanners to actually play as clanners, and if they don't...well, they lose. Playing as a clanner is optional anyway...they dont' have to, but if they do, why not give them a ruleset?

Bunch of clanners gang up on one inner sphere? Lose xp and creds. Beat the team using 'dishonorable' means? Shameful win = automatic loss.

Clantech isn't built to be on the same level as IS...so if you're gonna have it, run it as intended, with severe playstyle handicaps instead of more faceless similar tech. Wanna rock a godlike cauldron-born? Great...to succeed at the game meta you're gonna have to play it a certain way.

Is that viable? Or will people whine too much?

As for not discussing it 'until we know what PGI is going to do,' well...once they know what they're going to do, no matter what we say as far as input goes the stuff they code is 'working as intended.' So maybe right now, months before they're gonna even consider bringing the clan in, is EXACTLY the time to brainstorm how we can mesh clanners into the game in a manner that's both fun AND doesn't invalidate every piece of IS in existence.

[OpCentar]

Royalewithcheese, on 19 April 2013 - 08:20 AM, said:

I have mixed feelings about this - my suspicion is that you'll run into issues where some options for a given weight class are strictly better than other options. For instance the Kit Fox is basically dead on arrival because it's a light mech that moves at around 100 kph.

Well there are always mechs which are better than others in a given tonnage.

However I think that any Clan mech should be able to outdamage any IS one, so in their role of long range combat 100kph is just fine. Especially if it pack the same firepower as a IS medium.

Davers, on 19 April 2013 - 08:30 AM, said:

5v8 is a good ratio for TT. It assumes that the higher skilled pilots and superior weapons are balanced against superior numbers. However, that doesn't translate well into MWO where the IS pilots can be equally as good, if not better than the Clan pilots, and everyone can fire with pin point accuracy. Not to mention nowhere have the Devs ever stated that the game was going to be anything but 12v12.

Thing is that a Star must be the basic unit type, 5 Clan mechs, I'm not into roleplaying but even I don't like playing Clanner in a IS lance configuration.

That's why I said I don't know how to balance 12mans, 10 vs 12 = Clanners win. 5 vs 12 = IS wins. We will see how the devs sort it out.

Pinpoint accuracy yes, but the job of a Clanner is to pickoff IS mechs as they attempt to close the distance, because if they don't close the distance they will get shredded by superior long range ClanTech.

If they fail in long range combat, when then yes IS will probably win, but if they destroy a mech or two before getting in the brawl then the odds will be much in their favor.

Of course you can take some short range Clan specialists but with only 5 mechs it's a gamble, run into a long range IS team and you will get shredded while you close the distance.

Seems balanced to me.

[Joker Two]

I fele like the balance has to be achieved through asymmetric numbers. Anything else either breaks down the foundations of the construction system and established Clantech superiority (modifying damage/heat/weight/crits) or imposes serious restrictions on playstyle (kill assist penalties, mechanical enforcement of zellbrigen) which would still probably be ignored for the sake of victory, even a less profitable one. The Clanners threw away Zellbrigen when facing Spheroids well before Tukayyid, it's their strategic assumptions and habitual glory-seeking that cost them, and even then it was a close thing.

If Clan 'Mechs aren't incredibly powerful compared to IS 'Mechs, they don't really represent the Clans. If IS 'Mechs can mount Clantech weaponry easily, it becomes an arms race that will further alienate new players.

A 10 v. 16 match-up follows the 5 v. 8 pattern, but gives both sides a little more redundancy in cade of disconnect, and only has two more 'Mechs in-game than a 12 v. 12. Will Clan 'Mechs behave exactly like TT, no. They'll probably be even better, given the potential of converging high-damage alphas. But with the same players on both sides, the skill advantage of TT Clanners will be negated.

[Asakara]

Here is something a bit different... Balance it with group size and elemental consumables.

Drop Setup:
Clanners drop as a star of 5 mechs vs an IS company of 12 mechs, but the clanners also get a star of elementals free (5 units each consisting of 5 battlesuits).

Useage:
Each clan mech carries a point of elementals as a single use consumable who hang on via handholds. Each clan pilot, at any time, can send their elemental point of 5 battlesuits to attack an enemy mech they have in LOS (like firing arty or an airstrike). The elementals will detach and stay as a group as they do 90 meter jumps to the target at around 32 kph.

Elementals In Combat:
They will fire their small lasers, each doing A damage every B seconds at all times they are within effective range. They fire their first SRM salvo using normal SRM2 parameters at 150m. They fire their second SRM salvo when they are at 75m to their target. If they reach 50 meters they will jump and swarm all over the target and each suit will do X damage every Y seconds from their claws and lasers. They will continue to do damage until their target is destroyed. They will stay with that target, even if destroyed for the entire battle, though they will continue to fire their lasers at any enemy within effective range.

Destroying Elementals:
Elementals take 10 damage each (so a single point carried by one clan mech requires 50 damage to destroy). They can be attacked at any time. They can be shot off the clanner mech before they are deployed as well as attacked as they advance. A friendly mech can shoot hostile elementals swarming an ally, but there is a danger that they will hit their friend instead.

Conclusion:
Seems like fun to me.

[Nonsense]

FupDup, on 19 April 2013 - 07:46 AM, said:

The best possible thing PGI or anyone could do with the Clans is create a super-secret beta-within-a-beta server for players (not just the devs) to try it out long before release.

They've already hinted that they're going to implement a public test server.

/thread.

[MustrumRidcully]

FupDup, on 19 April 2013 - 07:32 AM, said:

If you think about every popularly proposed solution long enough, you can find flaws in every one of them. This includes the asymmetrical drops idea. The Clans were designed from the ground up to break TT in half and I simply do not have the creativity to find a way to bring them into an FPS environment without achieving similar results.


I have no envy for whoever at PGI is tasked with dealing with this mess.

My suggestion would be to invent a time machine and convince the Battletech creators that they don't need to sell power and make the Clans just use different technology, but not better one.

And maybe have them publish errata that fixes imbalanced/underpowered weapons.

[Splinters]

another easy solution is to make Clans non-playable. That way we don't even have to broach the ugly mess. Come up with a basic AI and let the players have at it. This is called MWO: Mercs, not MWO: Clans, and given that House units are not clearly a feature that PGI is putting in as an equal of Mercs, it would not be overly surprising if Clans were also treated the same way.

One thing is clear, mixing Clan and IS tech on an IS mech would be the ultimate unbalancer. So that I would not expect to be implemented. The amount of bugs that will likely be introduced with any massive update like the clans means that we're in for a long slog of a bug fixing.

-S

[FupDup]

Royalewithcheese, on 19 April 2013 - 08:04 AM, said:

Seriouspost: IMO the way to balance clan stuff is to make it balanced with but different than IS stuff. So like a clan ER laser might have same damage/heat as a stock IS laser of its type but have a longer range and firing duration. I can't think of a way that there's any way to make balance points like "ER Medium Laser = 1 ton IS Large Laser" work correctly.

I've also had ideas about tradeoffs but they are received with mixed reviews...some folks will want to lynch you for daring to suggest that a Clan ER Laser not be the equivalent of the IS laser of the next higher class.

My own ideas:
Clan ER Lasers and Pulse Lasers: Much longer beam duration (~0.25-0.5s more, depending on which one) and a slower recycle
Clan ERPPC: Can't disable ECM, slower projectile
Clan Flamers: No one will use them
Clan MGs: No one will use them
Clan UACs: Slower unjamming, maybe also slower projectile
Clan LBX: Slower projectile and reload (this only matters for slugs, cluster shots will always be bad)
Clan Gauss: Much higher chance of asploding than the IS Gauss (IS should be ~30%, Clan should be about ~90%)
Clan Narc: No one will use them
Clan Lurms: Can't indirect fire (basically act like a slow-moving lock-on ballistic), lower health per missile (more vulnerable to AMS), maybe slower lock-on and easier to lose lock
Clan Surms: Wider spread
Clan Streaks: Slower lock-on, easier to lose lock, less health per missile
Clan ECM: Smaller radius of effect


Clan pilot tree: Doesn't give +stat buffs, instead upgrades hardpoints to fit new items (i.e. upgrade energy to direct fire, etc.), also fewer modules
Clan XL: Lowered acceleration/deceleration???
Clan DHS: Faster cooling but doesn't add as much to the heat cap???
Clan FF: Higher damage transfer when armor/sections are lost???
Clan Endo: Items more vulnerable to crits???

Edited by FupDup, 19 April 2013 - 10:03 AM.

[Belorion]

I wouldn't balance it. I would make it more powerful than IS tech by maybe 15%.

[MustrumRidcully]

Splinters, on 19 April 2013 - 09:18 AM, said:

One thing is clear, mixing Clan and IS tech on an IS mech would be the ultimate unbalancer. So that I would not expect to be implemented. The amount of bugs that will likely be introduced with any massive update like the clans means that we're in for a long slog of a bug fixing.

So you mean giving both sides access to the same technology cannot create balance? That's strange.

---

Of course, balance is actually not everything here. The general gameplay feel matters a lot, too.

There is a big difference to having both sides firing pea shooters and both sides playing rocket tag with each other. We probably want the game somewhere in between, but if every heavy+ mech can core every other mech with two alpha strike, I doubt this came will be fun for many players. If MW:O players wanted the lethality and speed of a firs tperson shooter but play it with mecha, Hawken already occupies that niche, AFAIk.

[Lightfoot]

Cross-Tech. It's the only way. Sorry about that, but you know it's true unless PGI breaks the timeline with Light Gauss, Heavy Gauss, TBolt-20, RACs, IS SSRM4 and 6, and Omni-Mechs.

Until this gets sorted out, I'll be testing out the Mad Cat.

[Kommisar]

The purpose of the Clans was to increase sales. Buy the new Tech Manual. Buy the new source books. Buy the new miniatures. And the push for everyone to buy the stuff is that the new Clan stuff was WAY more powerful than what you and your buddies had on the table. It was a geek arms race and Clan Tech was designed, as someone else here put it, to utterly break the TT game.

I have no idea what is going to happen with the Clans. The challenge of how to implement the Clans and achieve the following goals:

• Keep the Clan Kiddies from screaming, crying, QQ, and forum raging because you changed "X".
  
• Keep the IS guys (like myself) from being, well, useless hipsters that cling to old useless tech because we don't like Clans.
  
• Not create a P2W environment by making the Clans Premium/Pay only

My fear is that the solution is to make Clan Tech available all of us. So, I can retro-fit my Stalker and change out its weapons for Clan equivalents. Because, at that point, we just wasted a year and a half balancing all these IS weapon systems we will never see on the field again outside of new guys in Trial Mechs.


And, unbalanced drops are not going to work. Do a quick head count (poll or something). Given the option, most of the player base is going to go Clan the second it is available. I'm not hating (much... still don't like Clans! ); but it is true. The majority of guys was Madcats, Vultures and cool, high-end tech FTW. It is really hard to run, say, 12v10 or whatever, when over 60% of your player base is Clan. Look at the issues SWTOR had when almost everyone went dark side. And that game wasn't completely focused on PvP.

Don't know what is going to happen. Full disclosure, I'm one of the old guys that is not looking forward to the Clans in the least. I would have been very, very happy with the initial concept of setting the game back in 3025 and keeping it all Succession Wars. Bringing in the Clans, IMHO, will always end in tears.

[Merky Merc]

Homogenize all weaponry. Let people use the mechs and guns they want.

[MustrumRidcully]

Kommisar, on 19 April 2013 - 10:03 AM, said:

The purpose of the Clans was to increase sales. Buy the new Tech Manual. Buy the new source books. Buy the new miniatures. And the push for everyone to buy the stuff is that the new Clan stuff was WAY more powerful than what you and your buddies had on the table. It was a geek arms race and Clan Tech was designed, as someone else here put it, to utterly break the TT game.

Not disagreeing with your hear, but I think there might be another factor.
Look at this Assault mech's armnament:

• 1xPPC
  
• 1xAutocannon/5
  
• 1xSmall Laser

I find it pretty... underwhelming. It just doesn't have the vibe of a powerful, weapon-loaded destructive mech.

Now look at this loadout of a heavy mech:

• 2xER Large Lasers
  
• 2xER Medium Lasers
  
• 1xMedium Pulse Laser
  
• 2xLRM-20s
  
• 2xMachine Guns

This feels more like it.

It was imbalanced, it was an attempt to sell your suppements via power creep. I hate power creep. But I can see that Clan Tech might have actually been a more... "interesting" level of power.

[Scratx]

FupDup, on 19 April 2013 - 09:27 AM, said:

My own ideas:
Clan ER Lasers and Pulse Lasers: Much longer beam duration (~0.25-0.5s more, depending on which one) and a slower recycle

Something like that is to me the best idea, yes. Better alpha/range but about same DPS.

Quote

Clan ERPPC: Can't disable ECM, slower projectile

Um, no. Keep ECM-disabling otherwise it's unfair to the clans, and slower projectile makes no sense. Make reloading slower to keep around same DPS instead, and maybe keep TT heat (which means higher heat load than MWO's IS ER PPC)

Quote

Clan Flamers: No one will use them
Clan MGs: No one will use them

Hate to agree with you. Unless they're overhauled, nobody will want to use them.

Quote

Clan UACs: Slower unjamming, maybe also slower projectile

Not sure. Frankly, we only have the UAC/5 to compare against, and the UAC/5 owns as it is. I think the UAC line has to be nerfed a bit, in fact. Yes, IS version too.

Quote

Clan LBX: Slower projectile and reload (this only matters for slugs, cluster shots will always be bad)

Until they get a munition worth using for the LBX it's moot to try to balance IS/C versions of it. They'll both suck if they use "shotgun" principles.

Quote

Clan Gauss: Much higher chance of asploding than the IS Gauss (IS should be ~30%, Clan should be about ~90%)

... No. I'd keep all the same stats 'cept maybe a slightly longer reload time on clan gauss, making it actually less deadly than the IS one in exchange for the tonnage and crits it doesn't cost.

Quote

Clan Narc: No one will use them

There is no glory!

Quote

Clan Lurms: Can't indirect fire (basically act like a slow-moving lock-on ballistic), lower health per missile (more vulnerable to AMS), maybe slower lock-on and easier to lose lock

Well.... ... I actually don't disagree much on indirect fire there. Though I should point out that it IS capable in TT of IF IIRC.

Frankly, CLRMs are one of the tricker bits to balance because they're so much ridiculously better than IS counterparts... half tonnage for launchers, no minimum range.

I should point out, though, that heat will help keep LRM spamming in check. I actually remember SHS catapults having to pace their fire back in closed beta.

I don't really know what to do with CLRMs at the moment... in part because IS LRMs already are borderline suck at the moment.

Quote

Clan Surms: Wider spread
Clan Streaks: Slower lock-on, easier to lose lock, less health per missile

SRMs have the same problem as LRMs, hard to tell how to tune balance on something that's currently semi-broken.

Quote

Clan pilot tree: Doesn't give +stat buffs, instead upgrades hardpoints to fit new items (i.e. upgrade energy to direct fire, etc.), also fewer modules
Clan XL: Lowered acceleration/deceleration???
Clan DHS: Faster cooling but doesn't add as much to the heat cap???
Clan FF: Higher damage transfer when armor/sections are lost???
Clan Endo: Items more vulnerable to crits???

Clan pilot tree will likely have to be changed anyway simply because Omnimechs all have only one variant. The loadout may be different but they are the same mech otherwise.

No, really. That's how Omni-tech works.

I don't see any reason to change Clan FF or Endo as long as they're only usable on clan mechs and, I'll remind people, when dealing with Pod-space on an Omni-mechs, armor and structure slots are fixed. If they keep TT rules for building, you will not be able to juggle floating criticals around at your convenience.

Clan XL... I see that as a "F U CLANNER" to make the engine crappier in any way, but it may be necessary. I'm not convinced, though, and in the case of omnimechs you may be unable to change the engine anyway. The quirk system may be able to balance things there.

Clan DHS ... no comments at the moment. It affects weapon balance too much.

[Tickdoff Tank]

I would balance clan tech by not introducing it in the first place. The implementation of Clan tech ruined battletech and I am afraid the same thing will happen here. But at least I will have some good times until it happens.

[MustrumRidcully]

Scratx, on 19 April 2013 - 10:13 AM, said:

Something like that is to me the best idea, yes. Better alpha/range but about same DPS.



Um, no. Keep ECM-disabling otherwise it's unfair to the clans, and slower projectile makes no sense. Make reloading slower to keep around same DPS instead, and maybe keep TT heat (which means higher heat load than MWO's IS ER PPC)



Hate to agree with you. Unless they're overhauled, nobody will want to use them.



Not sure. Frankly, we only have the UAC/5 to compare against, and the UAC/5 owns as it is. I think the UAC line has to be nerfed a bit, in fact. Yes, IS version too.



Until they get a munition worth using for the LBX it's moot to try to balance IS/C versions of it. They'll both suck if they use "shotgun" principles.



... No. I'd keep all the same stats 'cept maybe a slightly longer reload time on clan gauss, making it actually less deadly than the IS one in exchange for the tonnage and crits it doesn't cost.



There is no glory!



Well.... ... I actually don't disagree much on indirect fire there. Though I should point out that it IS capable in TT of IF IIRC.

Frankly, CLRMs are one of the tricker bits to balance because they're so much ridiculously better than IS counterparts... half tonnage for launchers, no minimum range.

I should point out, though, that heat will help keep LRM spamming in check. I actually remember SHS catapults having to pace their fire back in closed beta.

I don't really know what to do with CLRMs at the moment... in part because IS LRMs already are borderline suck at the moment.



SRMs have the same problem as LRMs, hard to tell how to tune balance on something that's currently semi-broken.



Clan pilot tree will likely have to be changed anyway simply because Omnimechs all have only one variant. The loadout may be different but they are the same mech otherwise.

No, really. That's how Omni-tech works.

I don't see any reason to change Clan FF or Endo as long as they're only usable on clan mechs and, I'll remind people, when dealing with Pod-space on an Omni-mechs, armor and structure slots are fixed. If they keep TT rules for building, you will not be able to juggle floating criticals around at your convenience.

Clan XL... I see that as a "F U CLANNER" to make the engine crappier in any way, but it may be necessary. I'm not convinced, though, and in the case of omnimechs you may be unable to change the engine anyway. The quirk system may be able to balance things there.

Clan DHS ... no comments at the moment. It affects weapon balance too much.

So what? You can't change a Hunchback from normal to Endo Steel at all in the table top. Certainly not for free. SO I see no real reason to believe that a Clan Mech would suddenly have more limitations than an IS mech, when the entire point of Omnimechs was that they were more flexible and cheaper to mod then IS mechs.

Maybe if we start needing to actually pay for the extensive modifications we do on our mechs, but for now, we mostly pay for the parts, and if we want to rip out 3 PPCs and install a Gauss Rifle, we do it for free. Omnimechs can't get cheaper than free, can they? So if their entire point was that they were more flexible, it makes no sense to add limitations because you sure as hell can't give people the cost benefits Omnitech brought. Unless we get money back when we modify Omnimechs.