40 replies to this topic

[Xeren KelDar]

Scalien, on 06 September 2013 - 03:05 PM, said:

I'd agree with you except for the way this game deals with engine crits..... it doesn't. Engine hits are all or nothing.

If PGI put in the engine crits- where the engine starts putting out heat on the first hit, more on the second then dies on the third, sure, it would be easy to say clan XL count as two engine hits when the side torsos blow.

With out that mechanic there is no reason except the loss of only 4 structure slots. That would make clan XLs the most no brainer tech to go for in the game.

Personally I think clan engines will be only a slightly lighter standard engine, not as light as XL but as safe as standard. Or a lighter XL with the same vulnerability to side torso pops.

I agree as far as engine crits go. The other negative to increasing crits or increasing the weight of the Clan XL is the disparity of the stock loadouts. While the crits may not be as big an issue (if you increased it to IS version let's say), increasing the weight most certainly would cause problems. Turning a Clan Xl into a Light fusion engine basically adds 10 tons to the Mad Cat. Where would that weight come from?

I think weapon ranges and damage are still going to be their balancing point while they leave crits/weights intact as they have been.

[Lagfest]

Methinks the clan balancer is going to be that they should generate more heat. And the clan DHS wont be as redactidly OP as they are in TT.

IS DHS: 3 slots, 1 ton, 1.4 cooling
C DHS: 2 Slots 1 ton 1.4 to 1.6 cooling.

IS L Las: 7 heat, 7 dmg, X range
C L Las: 8 Heat, 8 Dmg x+100 Range

Just a random thought at 3am

[Jestun]

Gameplay & balance > lore.

A super strong side and a weak side may be good for fiction, but when it comes to players playing each side of the conflict for entertainment it's a horrible idea.

Sadly there's too many other things wrong for this to matter to me, but I'd prefer it balanced than canon.

Edited by Jestun, 07 September 2013 - 02:58 AM.

[Fitzbattleaxe]

Jestun, on 07 September 2013 - 02:58 AM, said:

Gameplay & balance > lore.

A super strong side and a weak side may be good for fiction, but when it comes to players playing each side of the conflict for entertainment it's a horrible idea.

Sadly there's too many other things wrong for this to matter to me, but I'd prefer it balanced than canon.

It should be balanced, but not by nerfing the tech. Because then what's the point? Asymmetrical gameplay is fun. The clan pilot should get to feel the overwhelming power of their mech, and the inner sphere pilot should get to feel the great sense of accomplishment that comes from shouting "die clanner!" at their screen as they take out the enemy timberwolf through superior skill and, to keep teams balanced overall, superior numbers.

I've been playing this game for awhile now, and despite the occasional new mechs and new maps, the the actual gameplay hasn't changed in any meaningful way since closed beta. Just the same death matches, over and over and over. Clans offer the opportunity to shake things up a bit, but if they're just going to be the same as any old IS mech, just with a slightly different mechlab and a slightly cooler looking model, then I'm going to have trouble finding reasons to keep playing this game. Nostalgia can only carry you so far.

Edited by Fitzbattleaxe, 07 September 2013 - 06:33 PM.

[Johnny Z]

Fitzbattleaxe, on 07 September 2013 - 06:33 PM, said:

[size=4]
It should be balanced, but not by nerfing the tech. Because then what's the point? Asymmetrical gameplay is fun. The clan pilot should get to feel the overwhelming power of their mech, and the inner sphere pilot should get to feel the great sense of accomplishment that comes from shouting "die clanner!" at their screen as they take out the enemy timberwolf through superior skill and, to keep teams balanced overall, superior numbers.

I've been playing this game for awhile now, and despite the occasional new mechs and new maps, the the actual gameplay hasn't changed in any meaningful way since closed beta. Just the same death matches, over and over and over. Clans offer the opportunity to shake things up a bit, but if they're just going to be the same as any old IS mech, just with a slightly different mechlab and a slightly cooler looking model, then I'm going to have trouble finding reasons to keep playing this game. Nostalgia can only carry you so far.

Bye. You wont find the kind of inbalance you are wishing for in any online game, or any game anywhere, and for good reason, because it is wack. And I really, really hope you wont find that kind of inbalance in Mechwarrior.

[Fitzbattleaxe]

Johnny Z, on 07 September 2013 - 06:59 PM, said:

Bye.

So because my opinion differs from yours, I'm supposed to leave? You sir, are a moron.

Quote

You wont find the kind of inbalance you are wishing for in any online game, or any game anywhere, and for good reason, because it is wack. And I really, really hope you wont find that kind of inbalance in Mechwarrior.

Things don't have to be symmetrical to balanced. That's just the easiest form of balance. It's also a bit boring. Just about every single-player FPS ever made has the kind of balance I'm looking for, for instance; you've got one super powerful entity controlled by the player, and they face off against hoards of comparatively week opponents. And then occasionally there will be a boss battle where the player fights someone way more powerful than themselves, but is backed up by allies.

Edited by Fitzbattleaxe, 07 September 2013 - 09:20 PM.

[Johnny Z]

Fitzbattleaxe, on 07 September 2013 - 09:19 PM, said:

So because my opinion differs from yours, I'm supposed to leave? You sir, are a moron.

Didn't mean it that way. You were saying that you might have a hard time continueing to play so i was being polite and saying bye.

Although I would not mind temporary faction vrs faction inbalance in numbers on a grand scale in the faction wars, possibly involving planet seiges for instance, the thought of any faction getting stronger units across the board than any other factions is
to say the least unfair. Something I would hope MW like every other game would try to avoid.

[Morang]

Johnny Z, on 08 September 2013 - 01:59 AM, said:

Although I would not mind temporary faction vrs faction inbalance in numbers on a grand scale in the faction wars, possibly involving planet seiges for instance, the thought of any faction getting stronger units across the board than any other factions is to say the least unfair. Something I would hope MW like every other game would try to avoid.

Think of Zerg vs Protoss.

[Theodor Kling]

Wolfways, on 06 September 2013 - 10:35 AM, said:

As much as i like the look of the Mad Dog (or the Stone Rhino, but that's not likely to get in the game ) if it hasn't got LRM20's, LPL's, and MPL's it's not a Mad Dog.

Hej it's an omni And a mad Dog A is a shiny city fighter with those 6*SRM6, the ER-PPC and an LB-X AC5.

But Clans NEED to be OP. Else they are not worth fighting.
And let's face it: Part of clan superiority is already lost. Every IS mech we already have acts like it had an invisible, weightless, C3, and a Clan Targeting Computer as well.

[Wolfways]

Theodor Kling, on 08 September 2013 - 03:01 AM, said:

Hej it's an omni And a mad Dog A is a shiny city fighter with those 6*SRM6, the ER-PPC and an LB-X AC5.

But Clans NEED to be OP. Else they are not worth fighting.
And let's face it: Part of clan superiority is already lost. Every IS mech we already have acts like it had an invisible, weightless, C3, and a Clan Targeting Computer as well.

I just prefer the prime weapons loadout.
I love pulse lasers and LRM's. It's just a pity i think they are the worst weapons in MWO.

[C E Dwyer]

Novakaine, on 06 September 2013 - 07:52 AM, said:

Ya seriously think there are going to Clans.
Maybe after they port this over to console.
Which my bet is what thier working on now.
No UI2.0
No CW.
No Lobbies
No Clans.
Yes sir i'm pissed about now.
By the way.
There are no Clans.
The Clans do not exist.
The Clans are a myth.
You have been warned.
Fedcom Milsec.

This in a nutshell

[Gaan Cathal]

Johnny Z, on 07 September 2013 - 06:59 PM, said:

Bye. You wont find the kind of inbalance you are wishing for in any online game, or any game anywhere, and for good reason, because it is wack. And I really, really hope you wont find that kind of inbalance in Mechwarrior.

What? Asymmetric balance is all over the place. Starcraft (infact, almost any serious strategy game) abounds with it, and there's numerous examples in the FPS genre as well (Red Orchestra/Rising Storm comes to mind as an extreme example).


As for Clan balancing. I fully expect to see 'full teams' for the Clans being ten mechs (i.e. two Stars), meaning they'll start with the considerable disadvantage of being down 2 mechs. They're also, for all their extra firepower, no tougher than Inner Sphere designs. With that said, the lightweight equipment does make quite a difference in firepower (especially since they all run what amounts to non-explosive XLs), and their range is generally superior (pulses excepted). It certainly would neither surprise, nor annoy, me if damage/ROF values were normalised to IS values, leaving the lower tonnage to be their advantage, balanced by the slight numerical inferiority.

What actually concerns me about Clans are a couple of mechanics we can already see on the IS side. Namely SSRMs and UACs. Currently the SSRM2 is...well, overpowered for it's tonnage, but acceptable within the meta. That'll change fast when Clanners start spitting out volleys of 4-6SSRM6 at 2.5 damage. They stand a good chance of making IS lights/mediums almost unplayable and will in all probability brutalise higher weight classes quite happily. Secondly the UAC mechanic, as current, effectively makes the UAC5 a fast-firing AC10 with more range and a jam chance. That means we're looking at a UAC20 spitting out 40 damage pinpoint, on it's own. That's an 80 damage alpha from a pair, before backup weapons. Pinpoint. UACs need a base mechanic change to allow a second shot, with jam chance, at Cooldown/2s from firing. I.e. put a marker halfway down the recycle bar, between that point and recycle you -can- fire, with a jam chance (and obviously a recycle restart). That'd give them potentially double the DPS with jam chance, but not double the alpha.

[CyclonerM]

Well ,it would not be so terrible to downgrade a stock Timberwolf.. something like LRM 10 or 15 instead of LRM20 and a pair of laser removed?

[Gaan Cathal]

CyclonerM, on 08 September 2013 - 04:46 AM, said:

Well ,it would not be so terrible to downgrade a stock Timberwolf.. something like LRM 10 or 15 instead of LRM20 and a pair of laser removed?

Given that stock builds are enough of a sacred cow to prevent sensible balance changes like reducing the tonnage on pulse lasers, I'd be very surprised if they nerf down the stock Clan builds with IS tech.

[Gralzeim]

Or, they could just say "to hell with the timeline" and give us IS Omnimechs and later-tier IS tech to compete. Like Rotary Autocannons, alternate autocannon ammunition, and so on.

Otherwise they're going to have to balance the Clans by nerfing something about their mechs and/or tech (be it heat, range, rate of fire, damage, etc...we know they aren't likely to fudge with weight/slots though because they wouldn't want to invalidate canon builds). 10v12 isn't enough of a difference, when you factor in how big of a difference player skill makes. Sure, the Clan team would be down two, but each of their ten mechs likely has 25%-50% more firepower (or more) than each IS mech. Especially after customization.

[Johnny Z]

Well this topic sounds like the 3pv crowd wants to get into faction balance. Another game crusher if the factions have no semblance of balance, like 3rd person view ruins the mech simulation game.

[Morang]

Johnny Z, on 08 September 2013 - 06:49 PM, said:

Well this topic sounds like the 3pv crowd wants to get into faction balance. Another game crusher if the factions have no semblance of balance, like 3rd person view ruins the mech simulation game.

It's other way round. 3PV crowd is mostly casual, while people who want clanners to be OP at very least know something about the BT Universe. I am both radical anti-3PV activist and a proponent of OP clanners balanced against the IS by numbers.

You never answered when you have been given known examples of asymmetrical balance, switching instead to general accusation by tying OP clans with 3PV... and being almost as wrong as you can be in this.

[Sug]

Lagfest, on 07 September 2013 - 01:21 AM, said:

Methinks the clan balancer is going to be that they should generate more heat. And the clan DHS wont be as redactidly OP as they are in TT.

They already do generate more heat. And yes their DHS probably won't be "double" either.

[His Own Stupidity]

Combine the 10v12 mechanic with tonnage limits and you'll probably have a workable system.

Clanners get more bang for their buck (per ton), but have to cope with underbidding their drop weight/numbers, and their honour rules.

It's unlikely that any of the TT honour rules will (or conceivably can, realistically) be implemented, but a combination of a 10 'Mech limit and a total drop weight of 80%-85% of the equivalent IS force would take into account most of the relative imbalance between IS and Clan forces for the game modes we currently have.

Clan 'Mechs should typically be more powerful than IS ones of equivalent tonnage, but their forces' disadvantages should be lack of numbers, lower total drop weight, and inability to 'focus fire', however that can be represented. .

[Gaan Cathal]

His Own Stupidity, on 08 September 2013 - 11:17 PM, said:

Clan 'Mechs should typically be more powerful than IS ones of equivalent tonnage, but their forces' disadvantages should be lack of numbers, lower total drop weight, and inability to 'focus fire', however that can be represented. .

It doesn't have to be represented (unless we see CvC I guess) since under Clan honour rules as soon as two IS mechs shoot the same Clan mech, the ritualistic gloves come off and they're free to focus as much as they like.