61 replies to this topic

[Cato Phoenix]

One problem with 5v10 or 8v12 is that a lot of players will want to go for the awesome KDRs with their super shooty Timber Wolves rather than caring about if their team wins or not.

I almost just want them to be cosmetic.

[Capt Cole 117]

Clan players should have to fight by a strict set of ingame rules derived from their honor code. Its the price you pay for using clantech which really is superior if according to TT.

[FupDup]

IceSerpent, on 08 May 2013 - 12:17 PM, said:

You can't compare them like this - Clans don't have an option to use a weapon that generates less heat. On IS mech if ERPPC is too hot, I can just "downgrade" it to a regular one. On a Clan mech if CERPPC is too hot, I can't use a PPC at all. Basically, IS has a bigger variety of weapons with different heat values (due to having both ER and regular weapons), which helps us to get around current balance issues. Clans don't have that kind of luxury, and if energy weapons are not viable everybody on the Clan side would switch to missile or ballistic boats, and what little variety we have now will be ancient history.

You're right about the lack of variety, although the underlying point I'm making is that Clan ER weapons aren't parallel to IS standard lazors. My crystal ball predicts the CERML being the bread-and-butter weapon of the MWO Clanner arsenal, with the CERSL seeing some occasional action on smaller chassis and the CERLL collecting dust. I'm guessing that the cookie-cutter Clan mech will mount maybe 3-6 CERML and use the extra tonnage on ballistics and/or missiles.

As for the CERPPC, keep in mind that they don't have to mount as many to reach the same damage output as an IS mech...they only need half as many for the same damage and will end up with the same heat compared to IS PPC (compared to IS ERPPC, they generate less heat for the same damage). That extra tonnage will probably go into heat-efficient weapons like missiles or ballistics.

Edited by FupDup, 08 May 2013 - 03:00 PM.

[Alpha087]

12 vs 10? Try 12 vs 8.

Although I can't imagine that they'll seriously attempt to do clan tech in a way that won't allow non-clanners to get their hands on the same gear in -some- way too. The amount of people complaining would just be too great. In which case, normal 12 vs 12s would work just fine.

[keith]

PGI has stated that ever server will be filled. so 12v12, meaning clan tech will be nerfed some how. first it gets pushed back, now it gonna be nerfed because they wish to keep their servers full because of bad management discussions. FYI we have to wait till fall to hear any info.

[Klaus]

Taemien, on 07 May 2013 - 02:05 PM, said:

I'm not a noob.

The other weapons are only OP against players who cannot adapt, and UP for those that don't know how to use them. Sorry I have no issues with those weapons either being used by or against me. I can even get results out of LRMs, though diminished in comparison.

If you have issues with any of them, either being used against you or issues using them, then simply get better.

Oh wow here we go again. My eyes rolled so hard.

No one cares about how 'skilled' you wanna pretend to be. If you think this the weapons in this game are balanced then you're taking some serious mind altering drugs. Every time I hear the word 'adapt' I laugh so damn hard.

When someone who is using PPC/gauss (me) is saying their OP compared to other weapons your entire argument of 'adaption' is invalidated. No one is 'QQing' no matter how much you'd like to think they are. This game's weapons are horrendously unbalanced.



Get over yourself.

[Major Derps]

I feel I'm missing something...good tech doesn't mean instant win. This isn't the real BT universe, so you won't have specialist pilots in these clan mechs by default (clan pilots specialised in honour duals anyway, not full scale war). Either way, I think if the IS was given access to clan tech in some way, it would keep the field relatively level.

And am I the only one to realise that (not all) clan mechs have enormous cockpit hit boxes? I'd take my atlas over any clan mech, every day of the week.

[buckfast]

it would be probs the easiest way to make clan mechs equal to IS mechs by the same way MW4 ect did as there a norm mech with a dif loadout and possibly making a omni point just a weapon slot that can take any weapon. even possibly adding clan engines ect but maybe making IS mechs capable of house it for e.g pay 500k like for endo to fit clan engines instead of normal XL's ect clan mechs would still be supirior for customisation and would probs be better spaced mechs ect but not be to overpowered compaired to IS mechs

[FlyingTurtle]

buckfast, on 08 May 2013 - 03:56 PM, said:

it would be probs the easiest way to make clan mechs equal to IS mechs by the same way MW4 ect did as there a norm mech with a dif loadout and possibly making a omni point just a weapon slot that can take any weapon. even possibly adding clan engines ect but maybe making IS mechs capable of house it for e.g pay 500k like for endo to fit clan engines instead of normal XL's ect clan mechs would still be supirior for customisation and would probs be better spaced mechs ect but not be to overpowered compaired to IS mechs

Probably the best run-on sentence ever...

Good idea though, just give me my Thor and Loki

[Custom3173]

Capt Cole 117, on 08 May 2013 - 02:11 PM, said:

Clan players should have to fight by a strict set of ingame rules derived from their honor code. Its the price you pay for using clantech which really is superior if according to TT.

The problem with methods like this is that it's un-implementable. How do you enforce the clan war rules? What happens when the rules are broken? Is there some magic "honor" number that gets adjusted for every match or does your mech just explode whenever you try to retreat from a fight? How does the game engine even decide that your methods aren't honorable? How do you prevent people from gaming the system? How do you avoid people who are pugging on the same team, and aren't communicating with each other, from accidentally targeting the same mech at the same time, or otherwise doing something that would look like a rules violation? Assuming that you put in the time and effort to work out all of these problems, now you have to try to "balance" these supposed drawbacks against the hard numbers, heat, rate of fire, speed, for every permutation of every clan mech. Just balancing the regular weapons is already a challenge. It sounds like a designer's worst nightmare.

To truly balance clan mechs you have a couple of disparate options that can be used alone or in conjunction with one another.
1) Alter values from the original TT rules so that they are more in line with existing MWO mechs.
2) Establish metagame rules that allow assymetric gameplay. The new dropship mode could offer an easy option that I'll elaborate on.
3) Add metagame factors that externally balance the use of clan mechs.

So option 1 is obviously not favored by either PGI or the community. It's the easiest method but it strips the clan mechs of their personality, so I'll move on.

Option 2 is more difficult if you're trying to balance two different teams against one another, but it's doable. So far PGI has said they don't plan on having teams with different numbers of players. I think that dropship mode offers an easy solution though. If you allow players multiple respawns then suddenly you can attach a battlevalue or something similar to different mechs and their builds. You can bring your two timberwolves to the fight but I'm going to get a raven, two hunchbacks, a jagermech, and my Ilya.

Even better, attach an individual ELO score to each of a player's mechs (will take some doing since players can change loadouts, but I'm guessing most settle into a few favorite builds over time) now you can allow a set amount of ELO to drop every match, and PGI is freed from having to to create their own battle values for each item and mech. The players' own effectiveness in each of their mechs will determine how they are balanced against each other.

Option three is essentially a metagame-wide version of repair/rearm. PGI has already said that the old system won't be coming back but I could see it working well as a balancing mechanism if it were tweaked a bit. I would first implement it as a "drop cost" instead to remove the problems with people gaming the system. Make it cost money to move your mech to a planet, say 5% of the mechs value, and make it cost another 2-4% to drop it into a match. "Tax" systems like this will balance the incentive for players to field only the mechs that net them the most damage or get the most kills. Payouts should be balanced so that players roughly get the same money per match that they did before. This would work well with the elo system I described above to ensure a good variety of mechs showing up in each match.

Sorry for the wall of text, I like game design.

[Monky]

The only way to do it is to reduce the firing rate compared to IS weapons. Keep them as technically better, but counter it with equalized DPS due to lower fire rate

for instance; clan ER Large laser - better than a normal ER Large laser in every other way way, but somewhat longer recharge to prevent it from being ridiculous.

[IceSerpent]

FupDup, on 08 May 2013 - 02:49 PM, said:

As for the CERPPC, keep in mind that they don't have to mount as many to reach the same damage output as an IS mech...they only need half as many for the same damage and will end up with the same heat compared to IS PPC (compared to IS ERPPC, they generate less heat for the same damage). That extra tonnage will probably go into heat-efficient weapons like missiles or ballistics.

You are correct about heat when you compare just weapons, but there's more to it than just mounting PPCs. How do you make a PPC boat? You adjust the number of heatsinks, engine, ES structure / FF armor in such a way that gives you the best heat dissipation for your deisred number of guns. On an omni you can not make that adjustment so easily - you are stuck with XL engine and ES structure + FF armor. So, you have spare tonnage, but may not necessarily be able to use it for extra weapons due to crit / hardpoint restrictions. And if there are no hardpoint restrictions and we get those MW4 omni-hardpoints that folks keep suggesting...let's just say I have very fond memories of a Dire Wolf packing triple ultra AC20s...

[FupDup]

IceSerpent, on 08 May 2013 - 06:31 PM, said:

You are correct about heat when you compare just weapons, but there's more to it than just mounting PPCs. How do you make a PPC boat? You adjust the number of heatsinks, engine, ES structure / FF armor in such a way that gives you the best heat dissipation for your deisred number of guns. On an omni you can not make that adjustment so easily - you are stuck with XL engine and ES structure + FF armor. So, you have spare tonnage, but may not necessarily be able to use it for extra weapons due to crit / hardpoint restrictions. And if there are no hardpoint restrictions and we get those MW4 omni-hardpoints that folks keep suggesting...let's just say I have very fond memories of a Dire Wolf packing triple ultra AC20s...

Clan weapons do in many cases take up fewer crits by 1 or 2, though.

A UAC-Zilla Dire Wolf would be horrendously obnoxious here in MWO, although I never saw that config while playing MW4 (just Black Knights and Executioners for the most part with CERPPC, CGR, and JJ).



PS: On the bright side, the Clan UAC/2 will be capable of beautiful dakka unlike anything we've ever seen before. MWO's current formula for UAC's is a slightly faster cooldown for single shot mode (UAC/5 is 1.1s and AC/5 is 1.7s), and double-fire mode makes it even faster. Current AC/2 is 0.5s, meaning that a UAC/2 in doubletap mode will be faster than 0.25s...oh my god the dakka will be glorious. It will be possible to replicate a 6 AC/2 Jagermech with just 2 or 3 UAC/2. It's going to have over 8 DPS in doubletap mode (because current AC/2 in single-fire is 4 DPS). NEVA ENOUGH DAKKA!!!


EDIT: I did some calculations. To get the % of RoF increase in single-fire mode between UAC/5 and standard AC/5, I took 1.1 / 1.7 = 0.647. If applied to the AC/2, this makes for 0.5 x 0.647 = 0.324 reload time for single-fire mode UAC/2. When divided by 2 for doubletap mode, the result is 0.162. The damage of a UAC/2 divided by this equals 12.36 DPS if PGI uses the same formula they did for the UAC/5 (single-fire mode for UAC/2 will be 6.18 DPS, still pretty good). Now of course DPS isn't really that great in our current poptart meta, but HOLY MOTHER OF GOD 12.36 DPS! That's greater than even a UAC/5 in doubletap mode.



EDIT AGAIN: The UAC/20 would be 7.72 DPS single-fire and 15.45 for doubletap. So. Much. Dakka. ERMERGERD. Now imagine that Holy Trinity UAC/20 Daishi again...

Edited by FupDup, 08 May 2013 - 07:32 PM.

[Ice Viper]

How about the following idea & shoot a hole in it if you don't like it:
IS mechs remain fully customizeable (spelling) as it they are now.
Clan mechs can be customized but you have to grind out the xp to do so for each specific component and each mech. Want to customize heat sinks? Fine but you not only have to purchase them (double price cbills/jade falcon droppings maybe?) but you have to unlock the box to do so and its very expensive to do so. This keeps the stock Clan mechs out there and if you want to mod a different Timberwolf or whatever (i'm a 3025 guy) you have to grind that puppy out like you do with the stuff we do now for each IS chassis.
Cons: yeah you'll get someone who does nothing but metagame til he gets a Madcat with XL engine, double heat sinks etc but he has to pay $$ to get them fixed while stocks and IS mechs don't. That shows a better supply chain for the IS guys and the modular ability for stock Clans.
Yes, i realize the act of having to grind to end content isn't ideal but for different SRM's for different folks.

PS: PGI if you use my idea can i get a $25 mil c-bill finders fee & a permanent hula girl in any mech i buy??

[Daelynkat]

Just a thought to the omni mechs adaptability. At least if the random map dropping remains relatively the same. Allow the Clanners to hot swap just before commencement of the map, in the startup phase, at least for same tonnage variants. Represent the omnis ability to be quickly adapted.

"Oh, long open map, swap in my long range variant" click. While IS have to keep the mechs they originally qued up with.

Or with the CW out, omnis get a chance to change same tonnage mechs for their variants while IS must keep the mech they chose before map vote. So clan gets to see the map and have 30 seconds to swap in an equivelant tonnage omni, or saved variant of their same mech.

[IceSerpent]

FupDup, on 08 May 2013 - 06:59 PM, said:

PS: On the bright side, the Clan UAC/2 will be capable of beautiful dakka unlike anything we've ever seen before. MWO's current formula for UAC's is a slightly faster cooldown for single shot mode (UAC/5 is 1.1s and AC/5 is 1.7s), and double-fire mode makes it even faster. Current AC/2 is 0.5s, meaning that a UAC/2 in doubletap mode will be faster than 0.25s...oh my god the dakka will be glorious. It will be possible to replicate a 6 AC/2 Jagermech with just 2 or 3 UAC/2. It's going to have over 8 DPS in doubletap mode (because current AC/2 in single-fire is 4 DPS). NEVA ENOUGH DAKKA!!!

Unlike anything we've seen before, huh?

[FupDup]

IceSerpent, on 08 May 2013 - 07:33 PM, said:

Unlike anything we've seen before, huh?

With my calculations from above, that makes 12.36 DPS doubletap x 9 cannons = 111.24 DPS. The king of the dakka throne has been crowned!

DAKKA FOR THE DAKKA GOD! DAKKA FOR THE DAKKA THRONE!




...Just hope to Kerensky that your gunz don't jam before a second has elapsed...

Edited by FupDup, 09 May 2013 - 04:21 AM.

[VanillaG]

Monky, on 08 May 2013 - 06:09 PM, said:

The only way to do it is to reduce the firing rate compared to IS weapons. Keep them as technically better, but counter it with equalized DPS due to lower fire rate

for instance; clan ER Large laser - better than a normal ER Large laser in every other way way, but somewhat longer recharge to prevent it from being ridiculous.

When you look at the stats for the clan weapons, the ones that are different are only better by 20% with a few exceptions. The devs have enough variables to give the clan weapons a 20% advantage without having to resort to using the straight TT values.

For example, you could keep damage equal between Clan and IS lasers but lower the beam duration for clan lasers. That way the clan lasers are just better at focusing the damage compared to IS lasers. Making them recharge slightly faster would give them a slightly higher DPS. Doing it that way, the skill of the pilot will determine the actual damage inflicted instead of the actual damage value of the laser.

[FupDup]

VanillaG, on 08 May 2013 - 07:58 PM, said:

When you look at the stats for the clan weapons, the ones that are different are only better by 20% with a few exceptions. The devs have enough variables to give the clan weapons a 20% advantage without having to resort to using the straight TT values.

For example, you could keep damage equal between Clan and IS lasers but lower the beam duration for clan lasers. That way the clan lasers are just better at focusing the damage compared to IS lasers. Making them recharge slightly faster would give them a slightly higher DPS. Doing it that way, the skill of the pilot will determine the actual damage inflicted instead of the actual damage value of the laser.

Being able to focus damage makes them easier to use and thus actually reduces the skill when compared to IS lasers...shouldn't it be the other way around? Faster firing also gives more room for error (slow refire means you gotta place your shots well or you're screwed).

How about let's do the opposite: Clan ER Lasers get full TT damage and heat, but a nice longer beam duration. This means that the Clanner would need to have the skill to keep the beam in a single place longer. If he wasn't good enough, the damage would spread all over the place and thus he would lose his advantage. That adds an element of risk-versus reward instead of reward-versus-reward.

It's also closer to TT, because beam durations don't exist in TT (therefore no violations are committed) but heat and damage do (people might freak out about not getting their precious damage buffs).

Edited by FupDup, 08 May 2013 - 08:17 PM.

[The Bad Charlie]

oh such a long time i didn't use this video... Thanks, OP!