219 replies to this topic

[Latorque]

I'm actually kind of happy that i've never delved into any franchise deep enough to get riled up over departure from lore - although i'm able to understand it. Yet, i always felt that compromise was inevitable for a working game in transition from tabletop (or a pen-and-paper RPG for that matter) to any kind of gaming platform.

Out of curiosity: adhering strictly to lore would reduce the playerbase to a fraction of it's current numbers. I started out late; but even then the original trial mechs (SHS, horrible loadouts, lights equipped with STD engines) proved to be extremely frustrating when going up against fully decked-out owned mechs of other players. Now; going up against far superior Omnimechs and getting your a** kicked every single time you are one-on-one might be enjoyable if you're deep in the fluff of BT and feel that the last match was pretty much the experience you'd love to reenact from that universe.

Anyway; rinse and repeat that about 30 times... and it becomes far less enjoyable, lore or not. Now for someone who doesn't give a damn about the rich background but is here for the big stompy robots - a player deserving a spot like every other - this is no fun at all from the first second.

It MIGHT be for a short time, if there were any kind of engaging backstory within the game, but with the current lack of anything resembling a metagame one would only remember going up against undefeatable enemies time and time again in some kind of deathmatch-scenario.

So, either PGI ramps up the metagame something fierce - which seems a little difficult by now - or they make Clan Omnimechs balanced with some kind of twist i guess.

[ssm]

GalaxyBluestar, on 05 December 2013 - 03:30 AM, said:

surprised nobody dropped this in. this and a 9-10 vs 12 might mean clanners don't get nerfed to what's the point level.

[nice graphic comparing sizes of IS and Clan Mechs - ssm]

This don't mean squat. "Oversized = Worse" arguments were only viable until Shadow Hawk release.

Edited by ssm, 05 December 2013 - 03:42 AM.

[Morderian]

well i think we all somewhere know that they were going away from fluff in term of clantech afterall its hard to balance it when all pilots are 0/0 elite pilots (pinpoint acc, no pilotrolls etc.), the questions for me is how far they are going i think there are certain things they can do and things that are an good option to do:

first things that they shouldnt do:

1: changing tonnage or slots of the clantech, this is in my opinion not ok it would ruin clan standard mechs if you make weaopns heavier or Endo or FF costing more slots many clanmechs would become unplayable in their Stock config (or rather impossible to build)

2: mixtech: also not a good idea IS mechs should not be able to use clanwepons and vice versa, cause you can correct the disadvantages of the other side with mix tech clanmechs may become colder, IS mechs get even more firepower (now you dont have an Jäger with 2 Ac20 that are now 2 UAC20 or even deadlier things) also clans dont have standard equipment there weapons are hightech (from there comes the price of 30 million cbills) they should not run around with an lowtech ac20

3: make clanmechs like innner sphere mechs with hardpoints and stuff, this wont be a good idea clans usually have more weapons in there mechs so they have a lot of hardpoints and are open for more abuse then any we have seen now(especially with mixtech), best option would be to let them pay with there omnitonnage for everything the want to have bigger then standard (like more armor bigger engine etc.) and min everything to the already installed things that are not omniinstalled (lime weapons extra heatsinks and whatever else that is not hardwired) actually you could also allow them to make premade loadouts that you can change in the ready screen to fit the map to lessen the disadvantage of the omnitonnage that IS mechs dont have (they can fit anything how they want be it engine heatsinks or whatever)


things they can do:

1: change rate of fire, damage, jamchance depending on weapon of course: this is the primary thing to balance the clans make the preformance of the guns similar to their IS counterpart, so you have both sides on equal standing but they are still somehow unique

2: allow everybody to have clanstuff (actually that will happen afterall PGI wants the money from the players)

3. make extra rewards for players when they follow clan honor rules in comabt against or in clanmechs, like more cbills more faction standing etc.

4: make smaller gamemodes: like 5vs5 , 1vs1, Trials etc. to allow players to have a better lore experience with the clanmechs
(also would allow smaller groups of players to have more of the game afterall not everybody is eager for 12vs12 battles some prefer smaller scale combat and may lure more people due to having more options for their gaming experience)

[Snitchkilla]

[color="#000000"]Jordan Weisman,(the creator of battle tech) has stated many times that he only made the clans weapons more powerful in table top because "it was the only way to represent the superior training of the clans and the fact that they were born and raised to be mech warrior and that none of the video games every too this fact in to account". so there it is from the man himself so if jordan weisman doesn't have a problem with clan tech being balanced then why should we ? oh i know cuz this player base is made up of an over abundant of cry babies .for real every time i turn around it is some new QQ fest over whatever new feature pgi releases . man at this rate i can see why pgi might "ignore" their "core players" . most of these players are rude, demanding,and consumer entitled. and on top of that i wonder how many of these people really understand what it takes to create a game like this ,most prob think they "could do it better" but yet they dont have a video game company ... why not they can do it better,RIGHT? oh yeah that would require real work and you can create a game by crying on the forums . if it was up to most of these people we would be playing MW4 and wishing for a new mechwarrior .[/color][color="#000000"]LESS QQ MORE PEW PEW!!!! [/color]

[Karl Streiger]

Snitchkilla, on 05 December 2013 - 03:52 AM, said:

[color=#000000]Jordan Weisman,(the creator of battle tech) has stated many times that he only made the clans weapons more powerful in table top because "it was the only way to represent the superior training of the clans and the fact that they were born and raised to be mech warrior and that none of the video games every too this fact in to account". so there it is from the man himself so if jordan weisman doesn't have a problem with clan tech being balanced then why should we ? oh i know cuz this player base is made up of an over abundant of cry babies .for real every time i turn around it is some new QQ fest over whatever new feature pgi releases . man at this rate i can see why pgi might "ignore" their "core players" . most of these players are rude, demanding,and consumer entitled. and on top of that i wonder how many of these people really understand what it takes to create a game like this ,most prob think they "could do it better" but yet they dont have a video game company ... why not they can do it better,RIGHT? oh yeah that would require real work and you can create a game by crying on the forums . if it was up to most of these people we would be playing MW4 and wishing for a new mechwarrior .[/color][color=#000000]LESS QQ MORE PEW PEW!!!! [/color]

And I have read something about that Jordan Weisman did said - that Clan Weapons shouldn't have such extreme range.
But as a kind of abstraction - its understandable that the damage values of Clan Weapons were also reflecting the ability of Clan Warriors to aim better.
For example the IS-Warrior is happy when his PPC hit the enemy Mech - while the Clan Warrior is able to hit that heat sink at the front of that enemy mech - causing more damage. Although energy output for both weapons is the same.

Now on the long run...what if current weapons - > become Clan Weapons -> and all IS - weapons become a kind of DoT weapons - with a small dispersion (not much - a 1m to 2,000m at best)
Reason is simple - we can not simulate breed for war pilots - so shoting and dealing high damage must become simpler for clans - and why i can't imagine how shooting and hitting targets can be made simpler - it has to become harder for IS players

That about the constructive part of your post:
the QQ about QQ part is usually a red flag for me -> because we have mechanics and numbers in game that were never supposed to work within a mouse aim FPS.
You know water boils at 100° Celsius or 100° Fahrenheit or 100 Kelvin

Edited by Karl Streiger, 05 December 2013 - 04:12 AM.

[Lucian Nostra]

my first fear for clantech is that its going to come in balanced vs IS tech (which is fine) by they are still gonna saddle omnimechs with all the downfalls of being omnis (no changing armor or critical placement or swaping engines) but none of the benefits (better weapons and customization). IS mechs are already far to customizable vs fluff with many of the upgrades we do instantly requiring extensive amounts of time or flat out needing to rebuild the mech in a factory to do so.

my second fear is what Randall Bill (think that was his name) said about his vision of clans being all short ranged dervishes because he didn't like the feel of them out ranging the IS. that's just flat out counter fluff to many clans tactics such as Clan Nova Cat that pride themselves on their marksmanship at long ranges

[Victor Morson]

Karl Streiger, on 05 December 2013 - 04:10 AM, said:

Jordan Weisman

Jordan Weisman also screwed up many things at FASA.
Jordan Weisman screwed up the Microsoft deal.
Jordan Weisman was responsible for Dark Ages.

I really don't put much stock in what he says because he happens to have been one of the guys behind the original BattleTech. He wasn't alone and much of the lore was created by the writers. That he didn't pay. Knowingly.

[ssm]

Victor Morson, on 05 December 2013 - 04:51 AM, said:

Jordan Weisman also screwed up many things at FASA.
Jordan Weisman screwed up the Microsoft deal.
Jordan Weisman was responsible for Dark Ages.

I really don't put much stock in what he says because he happens to have been one of the guys behind the original BattleTech. He wasn't alone and much of the lore was created by the writers. That he didn't pay. Knowingly.

Yep, but this means only that somebody, sometime, somewhere didn't rein writers imagination enough to consider implications of putting something so OP as Clans into the lore.

Clans were (as far as most of the accounts from the time of their release say) bad for TT. Since then, we kinda got used to them, (at least in TT) but it doesn't invalidate the fact that they were too OP for TT game, and that works even worse in fps game enviroment.

For me, PGI nerfing clan tech is more of a errata than outright breaking lore.

You propose using BV to balance IS vs Clans as they did in MW: LL. But this can be done only by outright elimination of mechlab (as in case of MW: LL) and forcing people to use stock variants. And that means, for like 90% of current mech variants - no dhs, no endo, ammo in torsoes etc.

Even 5 vs 12 wouldn't cut it.

[William T Riker]

So this is now going to be a game loosely based on Mechwarrior? I'll wait for the next series in the franchise. Hopefully I'm not waiting 10 more years =/.

[ssm]

William T Riker, on 05 December 2013 - 06:26 AM, said:

So this is now going to be a game loosely based on Mechwarrior? I'll wait for the next series in the franchise. Hopefully I'm not waiting 10 more years =/.

Well, you can have either balanced game or game "based on Mechwarrior"

[William T Riker]

ssm, on 05 December 2013 - 06:32 AM, said:

Well, you can have either balanced game or game "based on Mechwarrior"

I'd rather have a game based on Mechwarrior like MW 1-4, Living Legends, Mechcommander, etc. That's why I came here in the first place.

[smokefield]

i dont think that majority is against some form of balance between IS and clan tech...what ppl are agains is totally nerfing the clan tech. There are a lot of ideas around here from where PGI can choose and see what its best...and I mean A LOT

[ssm]

William T Riker, on 05 December 2013 - 06:43 AM, said:

I'd rather have a game based on Mechwarrior like MW 1-4, Living Legends, Mechcommander, etc. That's why I came here in the first place.

Living Legends had latter timeline & no customisation, MW4 had mixtech, Mechcommander, stats-wise had even less in common with BT than MWO.

[William T Riker]

ssm, on 05 December 2013 - 06:58 AM, said:

Living Legends had latter timeline & no customisation, MW4 had mixtech, Mechcommander, stats-wise had even less in common with BT than MWO.

They were all more fun than MWO though. This game has potential but the talent at the top is putting all our cash through their noses or something.

[Reno Blade]

While the TT Clans had more damage, more range, less space, less weight only balanced by a bit more heat,...
If we keep space and weight locked, we can change damage, range and heat.
Looking for a balance, the weapons could do more damage, but have less range and more heat than IS counterparts, or more range, but less damage and more heat.
I would take this route instead of 2 advantage vs 1 downside (damage, range, heat).

Example:
TableTop CERPPC: 15heat, 15dmg, 690meter (23hexfields range, 30m each), (locked 2 slots, 6 tons.)
MWO ISERPPC: 15heat, 10dmg, 660m range (3 slots, 7 tons.)
MWO IS__PPC: 10heat, 10dmg, 540m range (3 slots, 7 tons.)
MWO CERPPC v1: 20heat, 14dmg, 600m range (locked 2 slots, 6 tons.)
MWO CERPPC v2: 16heat, 11dmg, 630m range (locked 2 slots, 6 tons.)
MWO CERPPC v3: 15heat, 10dmg, 690m range (locked 2 slots, 6 tons.) (most likely)

Edited by Reno Blade, 05 December 2013 - 07:23 AM.

[MnDragon]

The issue with bringing Clan tech in at TT numbers is that in a game which is essentially 1 v 1 in groups of 12, the clan mech will win every time. What will happen is that once players realize that the only way to win is to own clan technology, they will purchase said technology. Soon, it will be Clanwarrior Online, with only clan mechs in battle and all of our IS mechs collecting dust in our mech bays. Then you will see exactly what you are complaining about: MechWarrior game loosely based on Battletech. It doesn't matter about BV, it doesn't matter if its Company vs Star or Binary...Human nature is to be competitive and to own the biggest toys. If Clan mechs are the biggest toys, then we will use those almost exclusively and there will be no more IS.

[Thorn Hallis]

Karl Streiger, on 05 December 2013 - 01:01 AM, said:

2 binarys and 2 companys - its hardly existent

Depends. If both companys are fitted with Level 1 tech they'll get smoked by one binary.

William T Riker, on 05 December 2013 - 07:07 AM, said:

They were all more fun than MWO though. This game has potential but the talent at the top is putting all our cash through their noses or something.

Edited by Thorn Hallis, 05 December 2013 - 07:15 AM.

[Karl Streiger]

Thorn Hallis, on 05 December 2013 - 07:13 AM, said:

Depends. If both companys are fitted with Level 1 tech they'll get smoked by one binary.

two company with level 1 tech are smoked by one company with star league tech either. (although it depends on the IS-1 Mechs...some of them can deliver the hell of a fight (Banshee 3S or the Ost-family)

[Bront]

Clantech being separate but mostly balanced is likely the best scenario for a game. Remember, in TT, Clans were also balanced by an honor system that's really unenforceable in this game, and by their bidding system where they bid who needed the least troops to take a particular battle or war, which also isn't a great balancer in game because, 95% of the players are going to want to play with the cooler tech (and don't say "but I don't", you're in the minority then).

Now, how they balance it? We know they won't change the stock tonnages or crit spaces for weapons, so clan weapons will still be lighter and smaller. So chances are they'll probably have to nerf damage a bit, and probably leave heat mostly the same (Clan weapons generate more heat because their HS can deal with them, but this game doesn't deal with HS normally, so it will be a bigger issue).

SiliconLife, on 04 December 2013 - 04:58 PM, said:

Why not just keep Clan tech OP but allow all mech chassis to equip the tech? This is the way it's always been in old games. Absolutely no balancing issue here.

Then no one runs IS gear, and all you're doing is hurting the new players who will start with now even more inferior mechs.

[Rizzwind]

Jak Darren, on 04 December 2013 - 12:29 PM, said:

Yes, you can.

Elo + mech battlevalue + drop sizes.

Simple answer: full company of IS mechs vs one star or binary of Clan Omnimechs, depending on weight, of course.

Will not work in a FPS with pinpoint shooting.