56 replies to this topic

[TOGSolid]

Jestun, on 25 June 2013 - 01:53 AM, said:

But... it's not the only way to balance them. The figures for clan mechs are not hard-coded into the game engine and unable to be changed, it's a simple lore vs. gameplay issue.

The lore does provide a balancing mechanic for them though. People are scared of Omnimechs almost entirely because of MW4 where you could do whatever the hell you wanted to them with no penalty. If they came with this:

Quote

The best way to deal with clan mechs is to limit them the same way they're limited in TT (yes, TT, sometimes it has the best ways to handle things yanno). Make Omnimechs only have their Omnislots if you keep the internals stock. If you want to swap your internals or any other specifically hardwired systems out, then you lose your omnislots and the Clan mechs become just like IS mechs. Either your mech has flexible weapon hardpoints or flexible internals. Choose, but choose wisely.

Then they will not be an issue as long as the fixed hardpoints aren't too wacky.

[Inkarnus]

dude i dont get it in no way to speak about the
clans here they are far away
and still they should finish other stuff
then even about thinking
of integrating them
in our unstable
meta

[Victor Morson]

I love asymmetrical teams. Bring it on.

[Black Templar]

clans mechs also come with several disadvantages: most of them run XL engines, endo-steel and ferro armor. thats means they will be very limited in terms of customization. also their omnimech concept forbids engine swaps since only the arms and legs can be switched out easily. again, clan balancing could be tested out on a PBE....but where is it???

[Curccu]

Why is that clan XL engine disadvantage?

[Leimrey]

I would be okay with testing it from a Clanner's point of view, but I suspect that the lore friendly numerical disadvantage (one star against two lances) would be crippling.

[Signal27]

Black Templar, on 25 June 2013 - 02:42 AM, said:

clans mechs also come with several disadvantages: most of them run XL engines, endo-steel and ferro armor. thats means they will be very limited in terms of customization. also their omnimech concept forbids engine swaps since only the arms and legs can be switched out easily. again, clan balancing could be tested out on a PBE....but where is it???

I thought clan mechs weren't able to switch out their engines while "in the field" - Inner Sphere mechs can't swap out their equipment while actively deployed either. The reason we can customize everything on our Inner Sphere mechs is because it is assumed we go to a fully equipped mech bay with technician support in between each fight. I would assume Clan mechs could do the same and thus are probably going to be full customized between each fight.

[Syllogy]

Pro Tip: Don't worry about Clan Tech until it gets here. You have no idea how it's going to work.

[Blackadder]

Balancing by overall numbers wont work. it would be essentially the same as what we see now, most people play assaults and heavies because there is to much incentive not to, while specific mechs are considered better due to how the weapons and game is currently set up. Adding clan mechs would just creates another level of that mentality in the player base, if they are put in the gamer as TT has them designed.

Unless the difference in matches was very harsh, players would just accept a 33% reduction in numbers, for an individual 50% boost to firepower across the board, which is what most clan mechs bring. If at first it was even a minority of the better players jumping to clan tech, the flood would soon follow. Without significant reworking of the clan tech across the board, or allowing IS mechs to use it as well, its going to be a balancing nightmare and a major problem.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Asymmetric drop sizes have been my assumption about Clan balance since day-1. The only caveat is that if they found a way to enforce zellbrigen it'd really help even things up, given how powerful focus fire is in MWO.

[Windsaw]

No.

4:8 or 6:12 would be the only way to balance the introduction of clan tech.

[Mycrus]

Windsaw, on 25 June 2013 - 05:31 AM, said:

No. 4:8 or 6:12 would be the only way to balance the introduction of clan tech.

except that clans roll in multiples of 5...

maybe use the westerosi seven pointed star instead of the normal 5s...

[Braggart]

you cant balance clan tech in a competitive game.

The entire part of being a competitive online game is that teams are even, and its about skill. Giving 1 team the weaponry to obliterate other mechs in seconds turns this into a joke of a game.

Clan tech needs to remain out of player hands. IF they want to add Clans, then it needs to be in a PVE environment, where players play IS vs Clans against uber powered waves of clan mechs.


pssst. Clan PPCS do more damage and Clan LRMS are half the weight, with no minimum range. 120 Lrms in you face from 90 meters is a guaranteed kill. And you thought the pult with 6srm6 was bad, now we have 6 lrm 20 versions, or 6 streak 6 pults.....................

Leave them out.

Edited by Braggart, 25 June 2013 - 06:53 AM.

[IceSerpent]

Valore, on 25 June 2013 - 12:57 AM, said:

Say if we ended up only being able to play IS vs Clan through by having 5 v 8 or 10 v 12 teams. [For those who are unaware, that's one Clan Star vs 2 IS Lances, or 2 Stars vs 3 Lances]

Would you find that appealing?

How do you intend to deal with IS pilots driving Clan mechs?

Quote

Another possible interesting twist is having solo drop only for Clans, while IS have no limitations.

This IMHO qualifies as the worst idea ever posted on these forums.

[Valore]

IceSerpent, on 25 June 2013 - 06:58 AM, said:

How do you intend to deal with IS pilots driving Clan mechs?

LOL. You're expecting community warfare. I'm thinking the odds of that coming out before Clan tech is 50/50 at best.

IceSerpent, on 25 June 2013 - 06:58 AM, said:

This IMHO qualifies as the worst idea ever posted on these forums.

I'm honoured More because we've had some fantastically terrible ideas that would put the German invasion of the USSR to shame on these forums, I'm thrilled you think this one beats them all

Edited by Valore, 25 June 2013 - 07:26 AM.

[AlmightyAeng]

OP,

It's a moot point. PGI has stated that they will NOT support asymmetrical game-modes with different numbers of the players.

The reason they gave was that they could support 24 players at once, and if they supported less per game, they'd have to pay for more servers, because it would mean more games split among the same playerbase.

So, they don't wanna pony up, not even an option.

[Hellcat420]

clans wont be that op since I.S. mechs are 95% omnimech.

[Valore]

Ghost Badger, on 25 June 2013 - 07:13 AM, said:

OP,

It's a moot point. PGI has stated that they will NOT support asymmetrical game-modes with different numbers of the players.

The reason they gave was that they could support 24 players at once, and if they supported less per game, they'd have to pay for more servers, because it would mean more games split among the same playerbase.

So, they don't wanna pony up, not even an option.

Which would be the pinnacle of irony, considering they think splitting us up between 3rd person and 1st person only matches is a brilliant idea

[Corvus Antaka]

imho giving the clans a 25% or 33% tonnage handicap is probably the way to go, but i wouldnt mind seeing 8v5 etc, would make for interesting matches.

[Zyllos]

While I think having uneven matches really makes the game unique, I think we will need to make it take a step further.

If we reviewed all the Clan weapon systems and somehow came up with a number saying that Clan technology is generally X% better than IS technology, you could modify the system along with individual player numbers.

IS 2x Lances vs. Clan 1x Binary (8v5)
IS Tonnage Limit per Player: 200t
Clan Tonnage Limit per Player: 200t

This would set the Clans to be 37.5% better than IS.

IS 3x Lances vs. Clan 2x Binary (12v10)
IS Tonnage Limit per Player: 200t
Clan Tonnage Limit per Player: 150t

This is based on the same balance, Clans being 37.5% better than IS.

What this does is that when Clans move into a larger battlefield, each Clan player has less tonnage to work with while only being slightly outnumbered. When on a smaller battlefield, each Clan player has more tonnage to work with while being more outnumbered.

Of course, this introduces a siutation where Clan players do not want to ever play 12v10 because they get to use less tonnage, thus is a much less advantage, seemingly. But the numbers show that the available tonnage across all players are still the same, Clans having to pay a 37.5% premium on their mechs.

This also assumed that their new tonnage limitations is based around the idea that tonnage limits are around the player and not the team. My reasonings behind thinking that might be true is that tonnage limits on a player basis does not force a player to play mechs they do not want to play but instead limits the player to the maximum available respawns based on their currently outfitted DropShip.

Edited by Zyllos, 25 June 2013 - 07:45 AM.