19 replies to this topic

[EvilCow]

Hi,

If you had to vote a single balance issue in this game, what would your pick be? It is possible the game has several but which one should be given absolute priority in your opinion?

If you think there are multiple issues please feel free to post your analysis after voting the main one.

[Acid Phase]

The lack of hard point restriction is a major issue. Just because a mech has 6 energy hard points does not mean you should "boat" 6 PPCs. Want to know what I mean? Just refer back to the weapon allocation in MW4. It was brilliantly done.

[Zyllos]

EvilCow, on 29 April 2013 - 09:26 AM, said:

Hi,

If you had to vote a single balance issue in this game, what would your pick be? It is possible the game has several but which one should be given absolute priority in your opinion?

If you think there are multiple issues please feel free to post your analysis after voting the main one.

There is one problem I have with this vote:

Most of the above listed problems are interconnected and co-dependent on each other.

But I voted pin-point accuracy for the number 1 issue.

[Brilig]

Thanks for the poll. Several big issues on here.

[Karr285]

Acid Phase, on 29 April 2013 - 11:18 AM, said:

The lack of hard point restriction is a major issue. Just because a mech has 6 energy hard points does not mean you should "boat" 6 PPCs. Want to know what I mean? Just refer back to the weapon allocation in MW4. It was brilliantly done.

Yea MW4 was awesome, 14 Medium laser mechs everywhere was brilliant

right track, probably a hybrid of both MWO + MW4 would be optimal

Edited by Karr285, 29 April 2013 - 04:12 PM.

[Carrioncrows]

I would vote to get rid of the Zoom function. Not be confused with "Zoom module"

Thus people fighting would be less capable of pinpoint long range accuracy without some other crazy mechanic like weapon convergence and spread.

It's still possible to make shots from that range but fights over all would move into a variety of range bands and involve more skill besides mousing over someone through a sniper scope as it is now.

[keith]

the whole game needs 1-2 patch of balance tweeking

[Karr285]

Carrioncrows, on 29 April 2013 - 04:15 PM, said:

I would vote to get rid of the Zoom function. Not be confused with "Zoom module"

Thus people fighting would be less capable of pinpoint long range accuracy without some other crazy mechanic like weapon convergence and spread.

It's still possible to make shots from that range but fights over all would move into a variety of range bands and involve more skill besides mousing over someone through a sniper scope as it is now.

I could live with this.

[Karr285]

Neverfar, on 29 April 2013 - 04:49 PM, said:

Hey, the 14 medium laser Mech had to close in to deal its damage. Are you offering a false equivalency here and saying that's equally as bad as our all-long-range bloat boats?

YUP no offence but id rather have 6 LL or 6 PPC stalkers then 14med laser mechs that free enough space to move at top speed... 14 med lasers 14 crits 14 tons 70 damage , 6 LL 12 crits 30 tons 54 damage , 6 ppc 42 tons 18 crits 60 damage. yea....

I dont even want Clan mechs until this crap is fixed just because they have mechs that boat 12 Mediums.....

Edited by Karr285, 29 April 2013 - 04:54 PM.

[Zylo]

I think matchmaker is the most serious balance problem, at least in small-group/solo games. When matchmaker imbalance is combined with weapon or mech balance issues it easily creates a situation that often ends in an 8-0 stomp or a cap rush with no damage done when the lighter team figures out they are ****** if they try to fight rather than cap, at least in assault mode. The opposite can be true in conquest where the lighter team has a significant advantage on some maps and can just run around to get the resource win.

Matchmaker needs to increase the Elo tolerance and get a closer match based on either weight class, tonnage or some from of BV.

[Asmudius Heng]

The MW4 system had it's issues with boating as well. Hardpoints with size limits would be the simplest compromise between the two.

And before anyone jumps down my throat. The stock weapon does not always need to determine the max size of said slot which will give more cusotmisation options not constrict too much.

Better weapons balance would still be needed for this though as some weapons are pretty poor, the medium pulse needs to be just as viable as the medlas for instance.

[Lefty Lucy]

Asmudius Heng, on 29 April 2013 - 05:49 PM, said:

The MW4 system had it's issues with boating as well. Hardpoints with size limits would be the simplest compromise between the two.

And before anyone jumps down my throat. The stock weapon does not always need to determine the max size of said slot which will give more cusotmisation options not constrict too much.

Better weapons balance would still be needed for this though as some weapons are pretty poor, the medium pulse needs to be just as viable as the medlas for instance.

Because it weighs twice as much and has shorter range, the med pulse should be *significantly better* than the med las.

[Asmudius Heng]

Lefty Lucy, on 29 April 2013 - 10:01 PM, said:

Because it weighs twice as much and has shorter range, the med pulse should be *significantly better* than the med las.

Indeed. I do not mind the shorter beam duration idea that puts pulse at a slightly different mechanic ... for me it is the range that makes them suck so damned hard for the weight more than the damage.

This means they cannot be lazy with weapons either and simply ignore the bad ones because people will simply boat the few most optimal weapons. Different mechanics, different roles that matter (make crit seeking worth a damn!!).

As such, wepaons withing whatever hardpoint size would have different roles enough to create a huge amount of variation even with mroe restrictive hardpoints.

[Lefty Lucy]

Asmudius Heng, on 29 April 2013 - 10:10 PM, said:

Indeed. I do not mind the shorter beam duration idea that puts pulse at a slightly different mechanic ... for me it is the range that makes them suck so damned hard for the weight more than the damage.

This means they cannot be lazy with weapons either and simply ignore the bad ones because people will simply boat the few most optimal weapons. Different mechanics, different roles that matter (make crit seeking worth a damn!!).

As such, wepaons withing whatever hardpoint size would have different roles enough to create a huge amount of variation even with mroe restrictive hardpoints.

Someone had the idea to make pulse lasers like machine guns with really high DPS. The DPS would be offset by high heat generation and the fact that having to maintain line of sight on the target is a huge disadvantage. This would make them premier brawling weapons.

I like ideas like this because I think that while achieving perfect balance is not realistic, if we at least have a lot of options for unique weapon mechanics then certain weapons will fit how some people like to play more than others which could potentially increase weapon variety.

[Iacov]

the pinpoint alpha strikes are horrible...that a laser is pinpoint is understandable...but every projectile (even the ppc's) can't be pinpoint at a longer range than long range missiles can even fly...

[DukeDublin]

All the bad gear needs to be evened out before any balance is established.

LBX's useful, MGs plausable, Small lasers viable, Flamers effective, AC5s better, single heatsinks optional, LRMs faster.

Suddenly there is diversity.

[One Medic Army]

DukeDublin, on 30 April 2013 - 12:09 AM, said:

All the bad gear needs to be evened out before any balance is established.

LBX's useful, MGs plausable, Small lasers viable, Flamers effective, AC5s better, single heatsinks optional, LRMs faster.

Suddenly there is diversity.

Small lasers will be viable when they remove the 150kph speed cap.
Most Jenner builds are pushing the limits of the chassis, if someone piloting one (like myself) wants to go faster they'll need to start downgrading Medium lasers to Smalls and removing heatsinks.

Small Pulses, however, are and will remain crud until they no longer suck so badly compared to the medium Laser which has the same weight.

Edited by One Medic Army, 30 April 2013 - 12:14 AM.

[Asmudius Heng]

Lefty Lucy, on 29 April 2013 - 11:23 PM, said:

Someone had the idea to make pulse lasers like machine guns with really high DPS. The DPS would be offset by high heat generation and the fact that having to maintain line of sight on the target is a huge disadvantage. This would make them premier brawling weapons.

I like ideas like this because I think that while achieving perfect balance is not realistic, if we at least have a lot of options for unique weapon mechanics then certain weapons will fit how some people like to play more than others which could potentially increase weapon variety.

An interesting proposal, now netcode is better and the shorter duration beam is good but not as good as before when lasers were still a bit hit n miss this might be worth looking at. Unless it is treading on the mechanics of another laser weapon from the future? Heavy lasers? Maybe they should be what pulse lasers are now mechanics wise ... anyway off topic *retreats from thread*

[Denolven]

I see only one major problem: useless game components. NARC is not bad, it's abysmal. Both the game makers and the gamers want a game where everything has some use, independant of what the metagame trendkiddies say. A game where half the content is dead means resources have been wasted. It also means we only get half a game worth playing.
This doesn't only apply to items, but also to more abstract things like user interface.

Edited by Denolven, 30 April 2013 - 02:56 AM.

[Kraven Kor]

I think the issues are tied to the matchmaker, maps, and game modes more than specific balance issues.

I think if we had more multi-objective, asymmetrical gameplay modes, designed to force teams to split up a bit and actually run as two lances instead of just blobbing up along the ridge, things might be better.

Timed, optional objectives would be nice for giving lights more of a "race for the prize" role in the early part of the match, while having more than one objective for the heavies to gun for would make for more varied matches and lower the occurrence sniper duels, or at least ensure fewer instances of focus fire or make focus fire harder to achieve or harder for as many mechs to focus on one as the map forces you to split up.

They really need to encourage us to divide up on the map - right now, you send four one way, and four another, you are most likely going to lose the first four that find all eight of the enemy.