209 replies to this topic

[Odanan]

Pariah Devalis, on 28 October 2013 - 08:32 AM, said:

Nobody wants them declawed but nobody wants to totally bork the game's balance. Even in Table Top the Clans screwed things over severely, and Clan players got a bad rep just because many swapped to stroke their inner munchkins. I said it before, and I will say it again: The game's balance is more important than sticking to a two decade old mistake. Just because it has been the way it has is not anywhere near a good enough reason to maintain it.

Every game we had, people went and took Clan tech whenever possible.

MW2? Clan Tech or Mechs. MW3? Clan weapons on both Clan and IS mechs. MW4? Outside of stupid things like the Bombast or RACs, nobody outside of puretech leagues EVER willingly ran with IS tech on their mechs, and would make IS mechs filled with more Clan tech than IS. Time and again, it was shown people by and large will choose to find ways to take the "better" equipment. I cannot entirely blame them since that is the nature of power creep; creep yourself or die.

That is a problem. Furthermore, the expectation that this problem be continued is an even bigger, more systemic one.

The focus should be (and from what I can tell from the devs is) making Clan tech different, but not outright superior in every conceivable way. Even if the Clan weapons were using flat out IS stats, the Clan tech is already better, since it must be lighter and must be smaller in order to fit cannon mechs.

How much more of an advantage do you want, exactly? I asked that before. Nobody answered.

Those games (MW2, MW3 and MW4) didn't have a resonable matchmaking, or divided team into IS-only and Clan-only. That's why the Clan tech ruled supreme.

You can balance the match by the number of players and/or tonnage in each team (IS and Clan).

People tell the Clans ruined the TT. I don't know how the frack you guys pitted Clans vs. IS mechs in TT, but it's clearly the wrong way.

Heck, even IS level 1 mechs were unbalanced in TT. The mechs with more medium lasers and PPCs (and less AC/2s and AC/5s - or simply without any ammo-weapon) were always better.

[Odanan]

Nehkrosis, on 28 October 2013 - 08:38 AM, said:

Do you think that they (PGI) could just go the route of making us HAVE to play clan-like and leave the tech fairly untouched?

I think they won't - but they should.

Jeez, I feel like I walked to a religious discussion in this thread. People have the truth figured out and won't even try to see another way.

[Odanan]

Imperial X, on 31 October 2013 - 09:03 AM, said:

My unfocused sarcasm as you call it, has a point. You claim that clan tech remaining at its core values will destroy game balance. Yet game balance is far from ok at this point. Sure its better than it used to be but I'd still be very hesitant to call this game balanced.

In this particular case, it has to happen. My biggest issue is that IS weapons are in no way balanced. If they were, we wouldn't need ghost heat. We wouldn't need the horrible mechanic added to the Gauss Rifle. While these mechanics almost eliminated certain problems within the game, such as boating and Gauss, PCC builds, it didn't balance anything. Certain mechs suffer horribly because of these mechanics. Such as the Awesome. 3 PPCs is supposed to be a stock build. One that is a REAL build in lore. Yet because of ghost heat, doesn't even work because it runs too hot. Pulse lasers are useless because they also run too hot and have shorter range.

The easiest way that I can foresee that PGI will attempt to balance clan tech, is with heat. Heat is broken. You can't balance something with a broken mechanic. Also, certain clan mechs are going to suffer horribly under the current ingame conditions. Regardless of how they balance tech. The warhawk for instance. One of its stock builds is 4 ERPPCs. How exactly is that going to work out ? It isn't. That mech is basically doomed. Just like the awesome is doomed into a state where very few people play it.

Please don't confuse being in a better place with balance because its not the same thing.

This. ^

Before trying to "balance" the Clans (that's a bad joke), they should be able to balance the IS weapons and chassis.

[Sug]

pbiggz, on 28 October 2013 - 08:42 AM, said:

impossible. Too many variables and players wont like being forced into zellbrigen

1. There's not that many variables. If they can give us cbills for spotting and penalties for tking then they can work out some kind of bonus/penalty system for honorable combat.

2. Too bad. Go play IS.

[Odanan]

So, you really want to nerf the Clan weapons, right. So let's talk about this.

I will follow the premise you can't change the weight and the critical size of Clan weapons (Clan weapons weight less and occupy less criticals than the IS counterparts). Otherwise, all Clan builds will be invalid. Everyone is OK with that?

It leaves us with the following weapon stats:

1- Range (Clan weapons have better range. Heck, even LRM's don't have minimal range)
2- Damage (Clan weapons usually do more damage)
3- Rate of Fire (Clan weapons have the same RoF)
4- Heat (Clan weapon usually produce a little more heat)

What would you change and how much, to "balance" Clan weapons?

PS: have in mind that there are the following Clan weapons: UAC/10, UAC/20, SSRM4 and SSRM6.

Now you found the "balance", let's talk about Target Computer, Clan Double Heat Sinks, Clan XL Engines, Clan Endo Steel and Clan Ferro Fibrous. If you geniuses have a solution for the last 3 ones, without changing the critical size and weight (so you do not break the existing Clan mech builds), I won't argue anymore against your indisputable "nerf the Clans" truth.

Edited by Odanan, 14 November 2013 - 03:51 PM.

[dal10]

ferro-fibrous is easy, drop its additional armor per ton down to inner sphere levels. so the clan mechs are less heavily armored. will make them glass cannons.

have clan XL engines only get 1.4 double heat sinks instead of the true doubles inner sphere designs have due to their more constricted confines denoting less heat efficiency. clan mechs tend to have a lot more heatsinks anyway, will stop the heatsink boat and have them truly feel the higher risk/rewards of their higher firepower.

not physically possible to nerf endo.

but these would balance out them slightly.

UAC twenty can be ammo nerfed. drop the ammo per ton to 4 rounds. that plus make it so the second shot counts towards ghost heat for all UAC models. would help limit effectiveness.

all clan ER weapons would need 1-2 additional heat on firing, only way to make up for their significantly increased damage and range. maybe as much as 3-4 for the ER ppc.

no real way to introduce the target comp into the game unless you have auto-aim. I give up on this game entirely if they try that.

SSRM 6, limit ECM and bap on clan mechs, potentially disallow them entirely. increase hellbringer's armor by 1 ton if you have to.

clan double heatsinks are just kinda OP. really want to balance those out turn all IS to true doubles and leave the clan ones at 1.4 watch clans melt due to lack of overheat on IS mechs.

best i got.

edit:had clan sinks at 2.4 op so badly...

Edited by dal10, 14 November 2013 - 04:12 PM.

[Pariah Devalis]

dal10, on 14 November 2013 - 04:07 PM, said:

ferro-fibrous is easy, drop its additional armor per ton down to inner sphere levels. so the clan mechs are less heavily armored. will make them glass cannons.

have clan XL engines only get 1.4 double heat sinks instead of the true doubles inner sphere designs have due to their more constricted confines denoting less heat efficiency. clan mechs tend to have a lot more heatsinks anyway, will stop the heatsink boat and have them truly feel the higher risk/rewards of their higher firepower.

not physically possible to nerf endo.

but these would balance out them slightly.

UAC twenty can be ammo nerfed. drop the ammo per ton to 4 rounds. that plus make it so the second shot counts towards ghost heat for all UAC models. would help limit effectiveness.

all clan ER weapons would need 1-2 additional heat on firing, only way to make up for their significantly increased damage and range. maybe as much as 3-4 for the ER ppc.

no real way to introduce the target comp into the game unless you have auto-aim. I give up on this game entirely if they try that.

SSRM 6, limit ECM and bap on clan mechs, potentially disallow them entirely. increase hellbringer's armor by 1 ton if you have to.

clan double heatsinks are just kinda OP. really want to balance those out turn all IS to true doubles and leave the clan ones at 1.4 watch clans melt due to lack of overheat on IS mechs.

best i got.

edit:had clan sinks at 2.4 op so badly...

Alternatively, where appropriate that is:

ERLasers already run hot. Adding more heat on top of that is a lazy balance mechanic that, quite honestly, in a world of 1.4 DHS is not required. You can go with a direct damage reduction to IS damage levels but decrease beam duration as I suggested before. You miss, you screwed the pooch. You hit, far more of the damage the beam spits out hits what you actually wanted to hit on a target that is likely trying to make you smear that damage. Built in risk and reward.

ERPPC are already way too hot for what they do. It is already physically impossible for the Warhawk Prime to be anything other than dead weight on arrival. Either keep the heat at 15, let the damage be 15, and make it a 6 second cooldown (which is still going to be impossible to quad-shot), or bring the heat of all, both IS and Clan ERPPC to 14, the happy medium between 15 which is too hot and 13 which was too cold that PGI totally and completely forgot about using, and make Clan ERPPC do 13 damage with a 5 second recharge. Slight damage nerf to the Clan ERPPC, but still better per shot than IS ERPPC, while keeping the actual DPS of the weapons more or less on the same level.

I challenge your "no way to introduce target comp" statement with a blindingly simple solution:
Targeting computer equipped mechs have their weapons automatically converge at the distance their currently selected enemy mech is at, reguardless of the distance to the terrain under the reticule. Example situation would be leading a spider who is 150 meters in front of you, but your reticule is on a hill 300 meters away. With the Targeting computer, your weapons will not converge at 300 like they do now, but at 150 where the spider actually is. Having to properly lead the target is still up to the pilot, but it gives a slight advantage to leading shots by allowing a tighter weapon clustering.

SSRM6? Make ALL SSRM, both clan and IS, 2. Or else buff SRM to 2.5. I heavily lean towards making it 2.0 for both Clan and IS. There is zero, zero reason why a guided munition is doing more damage than an unguided version of the same exact weapon system. I have a big problem with that.

Clan LRMs? Give them a 90 meter minimum range and a flatter trajectory. No indirect firing with your Clan LRMs, in exchange for a much reduced minimum range. Turns it into more of a direct fire weapon system which fits the Clans perfectly.

ECM should be limited, somehow, however, but a lot of Clan mechs have access to ECM in their common variants. I somehow expect PGI to go the route of making the Omni's just fixed hardpoint variants like they treat IS mechs. If so, problem solved. X variant of Y mech has ECM. Z variant of Y mech does not.


And as for wanting to nerf the clans? It is not about want. It is about accepting the reality that PGI has stated, themselves, in no unclear terms. They have stated they will be "nerfing" the Clans compared to what they were. Instead of railing against it, we can actually be somewhat productive and find ways to "nerf" the Clans while keeping their uniqueness about them. AKA: Go with the flow or GeeTeeEffOh.

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 14 November 2013 - 04:33 PM.

[Rovertoo]

I think it would be very interesting if Clan weapons were all duration weapons. So their lasers, while doing more damage/weigh less/be magical they have a longer duration, so damage is spread around. Same goes with all (maybe just most) of their other weapons, with ACs acting like the 'burst fire' cannons that have been suggested and their missiles, perhaps, leading out of tubes in a similar fashion to this. ?

Edited by Rovertoo, 14 November 2013 - 04:43 PM.

[80sGlamRockSensation David Bowie]

Is someone in this thread arguing for keeping Clan OP at TT levels?

[Odanan]

dal10, on 14 November 2013 - 04:07 PM, said:

ferro-fibrous is easy, drop its additional armor per ton down to inner sphere levels. so the clan mechs are less heavily armored. will make them glass cannons.

have clan XL engines only get 1.4 double heat sinks instead of the true doubles inner sphere designs have due to their more constricted confines denoting less heat efficiency. clan mechs tend to have a lot more heatsinks anyway, will stop the heatsink boat and have them truly feel the higher risk/rewards of their higher firepower.

not physically possible to nerf endo.

but these would balance out them slightly.

UAC twenty can be ammo nerfed. drop the ammo per ton to 4 rounds. that plus make it so the second shot counts towards ghost heat for all UAC models. would help limit effectiveness.

all clan ER weapons would need 1-2 additional heat on firing, only way to make up for their significantly increased damage and range. maybe as much as 3-4 for the ER ppc.

no real way to introduce the target comp into the game unless you have auto-aim. I give up on this game entirely if they try that.

SSRM 6, limit ECM and bap on clan mechs, potentially disallow them entirely. increase hellbringer's armor by 1 ton if you have to.

clan double heatsinks are just kinda OP. really want to balance those out turn all IS to true doubles and leave the clan ones at 1.4 watch clans melt due to lack of overheat on IS mechs.

best i got.

edit:had clan sinks at 2.4 op so badly...

Clan Ferro Fibrous occupy only 7 criticals (against 14 for the IS). The only way to keep them at the same level is to reduce their protection to half the IS'.

Clan Endo Steel are impossible to balance. If you make them free less weight, you invalidate many Clan mechs' builds. If you increase their size, idem.

Clan XL Engines would still be much better, even if dissipating less. (think a Clan mech armed only with low heat weapons, like the Gauss)

UAC would still be much better, even with less shots/ton, because you can fix that by... adding more ammo.

Target Computer needs to be in the game: it's part of some stock builds.

Increasing the heat of some weapons is not a good solution, IMHO, because heat is already broken and you could remedy that with more DHS.

So... as far as I know, the only way is to seriously nerf the damage of Clan weapons. Something at least 50% less damage.
Are you diehard Clanners still happy to play with Clan mechs like that?

PS: still, some Clan tech would still be much better than the IS counterpart.

[Odanan]

mwhighlander, on 14 November 2013 - 04:42 PM, said:

Is someone in this thread arguing for keeping Clan OP at TT levels?

I do.

And I suggest simply balancing Clan tech with matchmaking.

If you fail to understand how that would work, please search for my other posts explaining exactly how. I won't repeat myself once more.

[dal10]

Odanan, on 14 November 2013 - 04:51 PM, said:

Clan Ferro Fibrous occupy only 7 criticals (against 14 for the IS). The only way to keep them at the same level is to reduce their protection to half the IS'.

Clan Endo Steel are impossible to balance. If you make them free less weight, you invalidate many Clan mechs' builds. If you increase their size, idem.

Clan XL Engines would still be much better, even if dissipating less. (think a Clan mech armed only with low heat weapons, like the Gauss)

UAC would still be much better, even with less shots/ton, because you can fix that by... adding more ammo.

Target Computer needs to be in the game: it's part of some stock builds.

Increasing the heat of some weapons is not a good solution, IMHO, because heat is already broken and you could remedy that with more DHS.

So... as far as I know, the only way is to seriously nerf the damage of Clan weapons. Something at least 50% less damage.
Are you diehard Clanners still happy to play with Clan mechs like that?

PS: still, some Clan tech would still be much better than the IS counterpart.

clan ferro-fibrous armor would still be better ton for ton than IS ferro fibrous. but since omni-mech armor tonnage is locked, you would end up with clans losing 5-8% of their overall armor.

they might be better, but since i don't think you can fully nerf clan tech to match the inner sphere without invalidating their existence as a whole, closing the gap is about the best you can do. Also, if i can limit the clans to only using gauss, then they don't know how to pilot. this will stop them abusing their high range high heat weapons. (seriously clan ER lasers have ridiculous ranges) basically since i don't want to mess with range or damage i am nerfing via heat. The clans will have to mount extremely large amounts of double heat sinks in order to sink their weapons, therefore reducing their overall firepower to more manageable levels.

for the UAC i am forcing it to bring more ammo thereby reducing its overall tonnage advantage over an inner sphere mech. basically if a IS uac 20 requires 3 tons of ammo minimum to be effective then the clan uac 20 requires 4. considering that it has a 3 ton advantage i have now reduced that advantage to 2 tons.

basically my whole thought is to force the clans to not be able to devote 30-40 tons of weaponry without massive consequences.

[Odanan]

dal10, on 14 November 2013 - 05:16 PM, said:

clan ferro-fibrous armor would still be better ton for ton than IS ferro fibrous. but since omni-mech armor tonnage is locked, you would end up with clans losing 5-8% of their overall armor.

they might be better, but since i don't think you can fully nerf clan tech to match the inner sphere without invalidating their existence as a whole, closing the gap is about the best you can do. Also, if i can limit the clans to only using gauss, then they don't know how to pilot. this will stop them abusing their high range high heat weapons. (seriously clan ER lasers have ridiculous ranges) basically since i don't want to mess with range or damage i am nerfing via heat. The clans will have to mount extremely large amounts of double heat sinks in order to sink their weapons, therefore reducing their overall firepower to more manageable levels.

for the UAC i am forcing it to bring more ammo thereby reducing its overall tonnage advantage over an inner sphere mech. basically if a IS uac 20 requires 3 tons of ammo minimum to be effective then the clan uac 20 requires 4. considering that it has a 3 ton advantage i have now reduced that advantage to 2 tons.

basically my whole thought is to force the clans to not be able to devote 30-40 tons of weaponry without massive consequences.

So, you want to completely deface Clans even if they continue to be better? What's the point? In a game like this you can't give advantage to a player just because he is playing as a Clanner.

Wouldn't it be better to keep (mainly) their weapons and equipment stats and do something different, like asymmetrical warfare?
16 IS mech vs. 10 Clan mechs isn't a fair fight to you?

[Sepulchritude]

Clan Weapons can be better, if they're more 'skill' dependant.

Make the gauss lighter. It just takes another half second to charge, over the IS one.
Make the lasers longer ranged and do a little more damage, and more heat. Make the beam duration LONGER, so they need to hold it on target longer.
Make the LRMs no min range and lighter. The lock-on takes longer, and the trajectory is flatter.
Make L-AMS. It'll generate heat as it nails missiles.
Make ACs Lighter, as well as Ultra and higher ACs. They'll Jam longer and harder when they jam, and have recoil that throws off aim.

Then you can have badass clan weapons, that only work well if you have badass pilots. And not even at all then, since each of these weapons are specialized.

Items like Engines, Endo, CDHS and other things can be Clan Mech only. And give the Clan Mech a matchmaking penalty, so if you balance by weight, a 65 ton clan mech costs as many 'points' as a 100 ton IS mech. And a Clan assault equates to 160 tons of IS, or something.

[Odanan]

Sepulchritude, on 14 November 2013 - 05:54 PM, said:

Clan Weapons can be better, if they're more 'skill' dependant.

Make the gauss lighter. It just takes another half second to charge, over the IS one.
Make the lasers longer ranged and do a little more damage, and more heat. Make the beam duration LONGER, so they need to hold it on target longer.
Make the LRMs no min range and lighter. The lock-on takes longer, and the trajectory is flatter.
Make L-AMS. It'll generate heat as it nails missiles.
Make ACs Lighter, as well as Ultra and higher ACs. They'll Jam longer and harder when they jam, and have recoil that throws off aim.

Then you can have badass clan weapons, that only work well if you have badass pilots. And not even at all then, since each of these weapons are specialized.

Items like Engines, Endo, CDHS and other things can be Clan Mech only. And give the Clan Mech a matchmaking penalty, so if you balance by weight, a 65 ton clan mech costs as many 'points' as a 100 ton IS mech. And a Clan assault equates to 160 tons of IS, or something.

Odanan, on 14 November 2013 - 05:28 PM, said:

So, you want to completely deface Clans even if they continue to be better? What's the point? In a game like this you can't give advantage to a player just because he is playing as a Clanner.

Wouldn't it be better to keep (mainly) their weapons and equipment stats and do something different, like asymmetrical warfare?
16 IS mech vs. 10 Clan mechs isn't a fair fight to you?

[80sGlamRockSensation David Bowie]

Odanan, on 14 November 2013 - 04:56 PM, said:

[/size]
I do.

And I suggest simply balancing Clan tech with matchmaking.

If you fail to understand how that would work, please search for my other posts explaining exactly how. I won't repeat myself once more.

Are you one of those people that think 10v12 is a good idea, by chance?

[Odanan]

10 vs 16.

[Strum Wealh]

Odanan, on 15 November 2013 - 02:47 AM, said:

10 vs 16.

Why do you think it would be 10 vs 16?

Inner Sphere military structure is based on a base-4 system (4 'Mechs in a "Lance", and it goes from there) while Clan military structure is based on a base-5 system (5 'Mechs in a "Star", and it goes up from there).
And, for the sake of completeness, ComStar/WoB military structure uses a base-6 system, where the equivalent of the Lance/Star is the 6-'Mech "Level II".

That MWO's current IS vs IS matches are set up in a 12 vs 12 format is not an accident - an IS 'Mech "Company" is the next standard organizational unit up from a single Lance, and is composed of three Lances of four 'Mechs apiece, or a total of 12 'Mechs.
The Clan equivalents are the "Binary" (two stars of five 'Mechs apiece, or a total of 10 'Mechs) and the "Trinary" (three stars of five 'Mechs apiece, or a total of 15 'Mechs).
Though, the next level up from the ComStar/WoB Level II is the "Level III", which is composed of six Level IIs (or 36 'Mechs); for the sake of game balance and performance, I would imagine that PGI would opt to move ComStar/WoB units (should they ever be implemented in-game) as 12-'Mech "Demi-Companies" of dual Level IIs.

So, the thinking goes:

• IS vs IS = 1 Company vs 1 Company = 12 vs 12
  
• IS vs Clan = 1 Company vs 1 Binary = 12 vs 10
  
• IS vs ComStar/WoB = 1 Company vs 1 Demi-Company = 12 vs 12
  
• Clan vs Clan = 1 Binary vs 1 Binary = 10 vs 10
  
• Clan vs ComStar/WoB = 1 Binary vs 1 Demi-Company = 10 vs 12
  
• ComStar vs WoB = 1 Demi-Company vs 1 Demi-Company = 12 vs 12

Though, one could also make the argument that the Clans could use Trinaries rather than Binaries (which would make IS vs Clan and Comstar/WoB vs Clan matches into 12 vs 15 rather than 12 vs 10 - giving Clan teams a +3 numerical advantage rather than a -2 numerical disadvantage, where the latter was traditionally intended to serve as an offset to their technological superiority), or that PGI might make their rendition of the Clans (and possibly their rendition of ComStar/WoB forces, as well) use the standard IS military structure (because "that is what the Star League used - and if it's good enough for the SLDF, it is good enough for the Children of Kerensky") rather than the canonical base-5 system.

Which do you think is most likely?

Edited by Strum Wealh, 15 November 2013 - 03:45 AM.

[Karl Streiger]

The number vs number ratio would hardly work in MWO.
Look you are able to "min/max" your omni Mechs. For example the hellbringer has extreme potential that could be bolstered by FF and ES.
A full min/maxed Hellbringer Prime is a match for 2 5S Thunderbolt. a double clap of its ER-PPCs should burn a hole into the armor - not to mention that you still have more as enough capabilitys mounting missiles and ballistics.

Next to that - the lion share of IS Mechs should be mediums...regarding the fire power of Clan Mechs - mediums hardly have the chance of snowflake in hell - > when hit by ER-PPCs or Large ER-Lasers.
Don't even mention the UAC 10 or UAC 20.

The only disadvantage for Clan Mechs:
you have to mix your weapon loads...for maximal optimum.
But at least no one knows how PGI will develop clan weapons

Edited by Karl Streiger, 15 November 2013 - 06:16 AM.

[CyclonerM]

Pariah Devalis, on 14 November 2013 - 04:26 PM, said:

ERLasers already run hot. Adding more heat on top of that is a lazy balance mechanic that, quite honestly, in a world of 1.4 DHS is not required. You can go with a direct damage reduction to IS damage levels but decrease beam duration as I suggested before. You miss, you screwed the pooch. You hit, far more of the damage the beam spits out hits what you actually wanted to hit on a target that is likely trying to make you smear that damage. Built in risk and reward.

I approve this.

Quote

I challenge your "no way to introduce target comp" statement with a blindingly simple solution:
Targeting computer equipped mechs have their weapons automatically converge at the distance their currently selected enemy mech is at, reguardless of the distance to the terrain under the reticule. Example situation would be leading a spider who is 150 meters in front of you, but your reticule is on a hill 300 meters away. With the Targeting computer, your weapons will not converge at 300 like they do now, but at 150 where the spider actually is. Having to properly lead the target is still up to the pilot, but it gives a slight advantage to leading shots by allowing a tighter weapon clustering.

I also approve this if this advantage turns out to be slight enough to not make people cty about it.

Quote

SSRM6? Make ALL SSRM, both clan and IS, 2. Or else buff SRM to 2.5. I heavily lean towards making it 2.0 for both Clan and IS. There is zero, zero reason why a guided munition is doing more damage than an unguided version of the same exact weapon system. I have a big problem with that.

Guidance systems take weight and space. Less space for the actual explosive charge = less damage, quiaff?

Quote

Clan LRMs? Give them a 90 meter minimum range and a flatter trajectory. No indirect firing with your Clan LRMs, in exchange for a much reduced minimum range. Turns it into more of a direct fire weapon system which fits the Clans perfectly.

I would give them no minimum range AND flat trajectory. This will make them better direct fire weapons and useful for self-defence, while much less effective against targets behind cover.