625 replies to this topic

[CoffiNail]

DaiAku, on 16 December 2015 - 03:59 PM, said:

It still seems like the majority of people who agree with PGI nerfing clans fundamentally do not understand what asymmetric balance is.

Best of luck... I have just given in and play Clans as they are... No one but Clan loyalists care about the lore. The bulk of the player base are big stompy robot fans, not MechWarrior or Battletech. We will never see the aspect of asymmetrical warfare in mwo... Many of us have drilled it in to the earth to try and get something done, but at this time it is you either do not play mwo or you accept their balance and play the game... I have done the latter... Best of luck if you choose to continue to fight that battle, but pgi holds the cards and I do not think they are changing it.

[Fubbit]

This horse is dead!
Stop flogging it!

=)

[Korbyn McColl]

Honestly, this horse won't die until PGI finds a way to make Battletech/Mechwarrior fans feel like they've made some effort to bring the established universe into the game. Until the Clans enjoy technical superiority and IS enjoys numerical superiority, it will continue to be a sore point. =/

[Wolfways]

Devil Man, on 17 December 2015 - 09:05 AM, said:

Honestly, this horse won't die until PGI finds a way to make Battletech/Mechwarrior fans feel like they've made some effort to bring the established universe into the game. Until the Clans enjoy technical superiority and IS enjoys numerical superiority, it will continue to be a sore point. =/

Many players probably don't know anything about the lore, and pgi certainly don't care about it.

[pbiggz]

Wolfways, on 20 December 2015 - 02:54 PM, said:

Many players probably don't know anything about the lore, and pgi certainly don't care about it.

and they dont care what you think either, clans got over nerfed but people here argue that they shouldn't have ever been nerfed at all so you get no sympathy from me.

Also, gg thread necromancy OP.

Edited by pbiggz, 20 December 2015 - 09:48 PM.

[Tasker]

Devil Man, on 17 December 2015 - 09:05 AM, said:

Honestly, this horse won't die until PGI finds a way to make Battletech/Mechwarrior fans feel like they've made some effort

Local horse discovers one weird trick for immortality. The secret funeral homes do NOT want you to know!

[pbiggz]

Tasker, on 20 December 2015 - 10:29 PM, said:

Local horse discovers one weird trick for immortality. The secret funeral homes do NOT want you to know!

PRAISE THE COORDINATOR, NKVA HAS RETURNED!

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

pbiggz, on 20 December 2015 - 09:48 PM, said:

and they dont care what you think either, clans got over nerfed but people here argue that they shouldn't have ever been nerfed at all so you get no sympathy from me.

Also, gg thread necromancy OP.

He puts the 'romance' in 'necromance'

[Wolfways]

pbiggz, on 20 December 2015 - 09:48 PM, said:

and they dont care what you think either, clans got over nerfed but people here argue that they shouldn't have ever been nerfed at all so you get no sympathy from me.

Also, gg thread necromancy OP.

Umm...what? O.o

[Princeps Ibram Cain]

Dont know, mi DC still can **** one Dire Wolf in smart 1 vs 1 fight (being heavly wounded, but proud), so i dont care.

[Lord of Nothing]

The Clans were fine before the last major update. The biggest problem has been the pre made teams in CW on either side made you feel like the other faction was OP. Personally I play both but the continued "nerfs" to clan while the IS continue to get more and more buffs makes me feel like why bother to even play the clans? Seems like PGI has a set way they want the game to go and it's not the way of the clans, so they will keep nerfing and buffing till they get the outcome they desire.

[Gorgo7]

CW fix.

12 vs 12
Clan 180 tons three machines.
IS 240 tons four machines.
zero nerfs to clans.
reduced or removed buffs to IS.

Pug games remain the same...perhaps separation between Clan and IS.
ie. Clan vs. Clan, IS vs. IS

Game on!

[C E Dwyer]

Devil Man, on 17 December 2015 - 09:05 AM, said:

Honestly, this horse won't die until PGI finds a way to make Battletech/Mechwarrior fans feel like they've made some effort to bring the established universe into the game. Until the Clans enjoy technical superiority and IS enjoys numerical superiority, it will continue to be a sore point. =/

pretty much, and we know that won't happen because PGI said there were issues with asymmetric matches

[Uncle Totty]

Dawnstealer, on 15 December 2015 - 02:56 PM, said:

Finally - yes.

This is my response to most of the threads whining about the Clans. The Clans are SUPPOSED to be overpowered. It's just that, one-on-one, with a player controlling the action directly instead of random dice rolls, there's just not a good way to balance them.

10v12 or less would do it. If the Clan players would actually role-play correctly and fight one-on-one, and bid away most of their attack forces, I'd totally be game for making Clan mechs as incredible they were in lore...

but...

Show me the player that will nerf themselves, and I'll show you a fantasy.

So they have to do it in the weapon mechanics.

Here I am. (Now show me that fantasy.)

[wylade]

Battletech Lore is all well and good on the table top, or in a novel, because it creates dramatic tension and helps immerse the players in the world with it's own rules. The overwhelming power and force of the Clans is reinforced through continuous tales of horrific defeats experienced before the player has even sat down at the table.

Simply put, playing through the first few years of the Clan invasions would not be fun for anyone who values competition in their games. We all already know that story: IS get's blasted into the ground as they scramble to learn anything about the unknown invaders, and they lose a massive chunk of space. There is no balancing the game if it stays true to lore; Clans just win. Everyone in this thread seems to think they are Kai Allard, able to win a battle by destroying an entire group of vastly superior mechs with some quick thinking and faster hands, but you're not. You're just some nameless scrub who get's laze'd open in the first few minutes because having 3X more range on your lasers is ******* massive.

Asymmetrical balancing is terribly difficult in any game. Most games get around this by getting the two teams kinda close, and then forcing you to swap teams afterwards. This fix would totally work, if PGI tore out the entire faction system they built. I wouldn't want that though, pledging allegiance to a faction is hella fun.

TL,DR; I don't want to be picked off from almost outside sight range just to please some tabletop fanboys who can't handle the idea of a first person video game being different from a turn-based role-playing game

[Deathlike]

For the record... does anyone remember that TT was for the most part... 1 person's army vs 1 other person's army?

It's akin to Starcraft.. you do 1v1s... from any faction of your choice... but it's still one army vs the opponent's army.

In a multiplayer game, having multiple players on uneven teams in a FPS-like environment has not ever jived well.. EVER.

Ever play on a FPS server with uneven teams? See how long matches/games last (they don't - eventually people empty it quickly - and these servers are rare in the first place).

Edited by Deathlike, 01 January 2016 - 03:01 AM.

[RolfS]

PGI nerfed clan because PGI cant make a game with game balance that is fun. That clan mechs are reskined IS mechs means that the game is less fun. A computer game is a kind of fantasy and the nerfing of the clan destroyed that, especially the last patch was bad.

It is not difficult to balance clan vs IS as going by battletech TT one adder is of equal power to an Atlas.
Hence you choice is not a swapping your favorite Atlas with a dire wolf it is giving up your Atlas to play an Adder.

35 ton with clan or 100 ton IS your choice...

[Vanguard319]

Cathy, on 30 December 2015 - 12:51 PM, said:

pretty much, and we know that won't happen because PGI said there were issues with asymmetric matches

PGI said there were issues with bringing releasing the Warhammer and Marauder, We got those. (and the Rifleman and Archer to boot)
They said there were issues bringing AI oppenents to MWO, seems we're getting those.
They said there were issues adding mission objectives to the game, Apparently we are getting those.
They said that they would restore knockdowns when it's issues were resolved. 3+ years later and no word when we'll get those.

Haven't you figured out yet that if they were willing to put the work into it, aysemmetric balancing is certainly doable. Saying "there are issues" is just another way of saying "we don't have the interest or drive to do this".

[Odanan]

I was always in favor of asymmetric battles, like 10 Clanners (2 stars) vs. 12 Spheroids (1 company = 3 lances) BUT that would mean in public games we wouldn't be able to field mixed teams. That a compromise I would be willing to make.

[Fractis Zero]

Balancing the game is the best way in the financial end. Otherwise you bring in power creep. If PGI doesn't balance clans and IS we would have just ended up with matches where EVERYONE plays Timberwolves, Storm crows, Dire Wolves, and Artic Cheetahs. MW3 and 4 servers were just clan vs. Clan... fun stuff that.