

Why Nerf The Clans In Mwo At All?
#261
Posted 16 December 2013 - 12:34 PM
#262
Posted 16 December 2013 - 12:37 PM
#263
Posted 16 December 2013 - 03:21 PM
Joseph Mallan, on 16 December 2013 - 05:51 AM, said:
I take off an AC20 and I have to put on another Ballistic. An Omni takes off an AC20 and can replace it with a ERPPC and a LRM15!
Not according to Paul's planned outline. You can swap hardpoint allocations to another configuration, not to whatever you like. So it's basically the same as IS variant choice at the moment, only I can have the left arm from one variant, and the right from another. That's absolutely worth loosing all other customisation and being forced to use balsa-wood to armour my suicidally-slow 'technological marvel' of a mech.
Also worth noting that you cannot change the armour or engine. At all. Not 'it's capped at the stock'. It is the stock. That means the only thing you can vary is loadout and heatsinks. So there's going to be one, maybe two, possible fits for each Clan mech. Tops. And I don't mean effective fits. I mean 'doesn't leave empty tonnage' fits. So you can't even drop armour to fit a pair of AC/20s a'la the Jaeger.
Void Angel, on 16 December 2013 - 12:26 PM, said:
10v12 and having the only stat variation be weight/crits (and access to ER meds/smalls etc). That would make Clan vs IS battles more or less even.
And mercenaries who have both sets of tech are easy to solve. Don't allow it. A team is Inner Sphere, or it's Clan. Totally seperate tech pools, currencies, etc.
Edited by Gaan Cathal, 16 December 2013 - 03:24 PM.
#264
Posted 16 December 2013 - 03:23 PM
Blacksoul1987, on 16 December 2013 - 12:34 PM, said:
Even that wouldn't get the message across. But that is exactly what will happen if clan purists get their way.
Lets face it. There is no point in debating with clan tech purists. You can reason as much as you like, but in the end they don't listen to actually logic not because they have counter arguments, but because quite simply, they choose not to listen. It is a textbook case of willful ignorance.
#265
Posted 16 December 2013 - 04:21 PM
DI3T3R, on 09 December 2013 - 05:12 AM, said:
Then, one day Clan-Mechs get introduced. They are faster, more flexible, more durable, have more firepower. Real killers. Everybody will want to have one, so their use has to be restricted or discouraged in some way.
But why do this with nerfing them? The Clans always fight outnumbered, why not go the extreme in this one?
10vs12? Why not 5vs12 or 5vs16 or 10vs18?
If people want to play Clanners, why not make them fight hordes upon hordes of inferior and dishonorable enemies until it's no longer funny?
A Cluster against a Regimental Combat Team? Outnumbered in Mechs 1:2 and outnumbered overall 1:18?
Why not?
Let's take a look at that right there,
Faster maybe, their XL engines aren't a hindrance like IS XLs are, so they were in everything.
More flexible, only in the fact they could switch out pods from one variant into another, but the pods and what they contained were fixed, if we go by lore, literature and Tech manuals.
More durable, that's ones a maybe too, they carried less armor, than comparative IS mechs, but their weapons and equipment had less crit ticks to hit, so you could plug away at them and not take out anything important. so they could stay in the fight longer and be an asset in it.
More firepower, this is only truly undeniable yes. Their weapons were lighter shot farther and generated less heat. Hell, they have lights that had 8 lasers for cripes sake.They have LRMs you could shoot like SRMs, medium lasers that shot at as far as IS large lasers, the firepower list goes on.
So truly the only thing up for debate is what to do about firepower. and that will be argued from one end to the other till we see the release in June... if it's not delayed, and we're still here playing.
p.s. forgot to add all the other improved equipment that the clans bring with them, improved gyros, image enhancement, etc. But along with that, forgot to add that a lot of the clan mechs don't even have torso twist, though that will probably be forgotten for "Game Balance"
Edited by Wabbit Swaya, 16 December 2013 - 05:09 PM.
#266
Posted 16 December 2013 - 05:17 PM
#267
Posted 16 December 2013 - 06:27 PM
pbiggz, on 16 December 2013 - 05:17 PM, said:
Yes i too love the artwork, though not a clan fan, I have to admit, they did a fantastic job given those "wooden" mech some realistic mobility, and still retain some of the look and feel of the original concept.
#268
Posted 17 December 2013 - 08:02 AM
pbiggz, on 16 December 2013 - 03:23 PM, said:
Even that wouldn't get the message across. But that is exactly what will happen if clan purists get their way.
Lets face it. There is no point in debating with clan tech purists. You can reason as much as you like, but in the end they don't listen to actually logic not because they have counter arguments, but because quite simply, they choose not to listen. It is a textbook case of willful ignorance.
Coolest thing to watch would be Clan players waiting for hours for enough IS players to join to "outnumber" them.
#269
Posted 17 December 2013 - 08:51 AM
Clan tech was meant to be a higher priced better alternative to IS tech The higher-rank players are supposed to have it and IS tech starts newbies out till they can buy Clan tech.
#270
Posted 17 December 2013 - 08:54 AM
DavidHurricane, on 17 December 2013 - 08:51 AM, said:
Clan tech was meant to be a higher priced better alternative to IS tech The higher-rank players are supposed to have it and IS tech starts newbies out till they can buy Clan tech.
You mean new player experience should be based on being owned repeatedly by higher-ranked players not by merit of skill, but access to better tech?
That should fix everything.
#271
Posted 17 December 2013 - 09:11 AM
Gaan Cathal, on 16 December 2013 - 03:21 PM, said:
Not according to Paul's planned outline. You can swap hardpoint allocations to another configuration, not to whatever you like. So it's basically the same as IS variant choice at the moment, only I can have the left arm from one variant, and the right from another. That's absolutely worth loosing all other customisation and being forced to use balsa-wood to armour my suicidally-slow 'technological marvel' of a mech.
Also worth noting that you cannot change the armour or engine. At all. Not 'it's capped at the stock'. It is the stock. That means the only thing you can vary is loadout and heatsinks. So there's going to be one, maybe two, possible fits for each Clan mech. Tops. And I don't mean effective fits. I mean 'doesn't leave empty tonnage' fits. So you can't even drop armour to fit a pair of AC/20s a'la the Jaeger.
I do agree to teh limiting of the Engine/Armor/Structure, but the rest is plain stupid! Sorry Clanners, you are getting Nerfed even before you get to field your might!

#272
Posted 17 December 2013 - 09:19 AM
ssm, on 17 December 2013 - 08:54 AM, said:
That should fix everything.
No that is not what I meant. The only nerf needs to be a ridiculously high price (due to the fact that it is totally new t the IS a they only have salvage at this point). The price should gradually go down as clan tech becomes easier for 'companies' to 'manufacture'.
Edited by DavidHurricane, 17 December 2013 - 09:20 AM.
#273
Posted 17 December 2013 - 09:27 AM
ssm, on 17 December 2013 - 08:54 AM, said:
That should fix everything.
#274
Posted 17 December 2013 - 09:43 AM
Gaan Cathal, on 16 December 2013 - 03:21 PM, said:
And mercenaries who have both sets of tech are easy to solve. Don't allow it. A team is Inner Sphere, or it's Clan. Totally seperate tech pools, currencies, etc.
First, no it wouldn't. Having missile launchers that weigh half of their IS equivalent, AC/20s that can fit in any arm or torso, and XLs that are not vulnerable to side-coring are worth a lot more than the proposed numerical advantage would allow. Nor is 10v12 really a good idea in the first place, once you really think about it - you can have two more teammates of varying quality, in exchange for 20% of your own personal combat power. Such a deal...
Second, you're still arguing for Clan technology to be nerfed and rebalanced - I'm not really sure what your point is, here.
And finally, my point seems to have whizzed by unremarked: why would you magically forbid mercenaries, whose hallmark is flexibility, from using captured Clan technology? Salvage is a part of life in the Inner Sphere, but Clan tech isn't salvageable? This is exactly the wrong way to treat lore; you're picking one convention (part of the Clan's insane tech advantage) that doesn't fit with the game format, and using it as a reason to trash multiple other conventions that are compatible. This is exactly backwards.
#275
Posted 17 December 2013 - 10:19 AM
Void Angel, on 17 December 2013 - 09:43 AM, said:
I wonder how many Merc units have had access during the early months of the invasion to working Clan tech, considering that the Clans easily rolled over a good chunk of FRR, DC and LC.. So unless you are part of the Wolf's Dragoons or a Combine or FedCom elite unite you should not have access to Clan tech at all.
I totally agree that salvage is an important part of the merc life but there has been no salvage (excluding a c-bill bonus) for 2 years..
#276
Posted 17 December 2013 - 10:35 AM
CyclonerM, on 17 December 2013 - 10:19 AM, said:
I totally agree that salvage is an important part of the merc life but there has been no salvage (excluding a c-bill bonus) for 2 years..
The reason you don't recall many Merc names having Clan equipment is cause they Died! The Dragoons had Clan Tech cause they were Clans. Friends and allies of the Dragoons earned some tech through Loyalty (Kell Hounds)
#277
Posted 17 December 2013 - 11:24 AM
Joseph Mallan, on 17 December 2013 - 10:35 AM, said:
This is exactly why i think Clan 'Mechs should be restricted to certain factions/levels/ranks .
And nothing close to mixtech please.
#278
Posted 17 December 2013 - 04:24 PM
CyclonerM, on 17 December 2013 - 10:19 AM, said:
I totally agree that salvage is an important part of the merc life but there has been no salvage (excluding a c-bill bonus) for 2 years..
CyclonerM, on 17 December 2013 - 11:24 AM, said:
And nothing close to mixtech please.
That's just plain wrong. Think about it. You're asking for the creation of a "tier" system where IS tech is totally totally inferior, and everyone's goal is to play the Clans. That doesn't make sense from a standpoint of game balance or slavish adherence to lore. The only people who will willingly populate your proposed non-Clan factions are the die-hard LARPers who want to treat this game as some kind of BattleTech Historical Re-enactment Society. Everyone else will be the dregs and newbies. You will have several outcomes:
- If all factions can use Clan supertech, then IS technology is wasted c-bills and time, useful only for gaining the good stuff; if only some factions can use Clan technology, then those factions will be the only factions worth playing in the long run - you might go get points in the lesser factions if their bonus is good, but you're going to focus on your Clan supertechnology sugar-daddy faction.
- If Clans are allowed to fight Inner Sphere, this creates a huge barrier to entry for new players. They've just gotten past the newbie grind where everyone has better 'mech stables and more experience. Now they get to go through it again, as still more experienced players start to beat the living tar out of them with a Clan-tech easymode hammer.
- If Clan and non-clan are segregated in matches, you're splitting the player base and creating two separate balance pools. This is resource-intensive, for no real purpose. Oh, and it breaks the lore you want to use as an excuse to re-enact the Clan invasion by turning MWO into a roleplaying supplement rather than its own game.
Edited by Void Angel, 17 December 2013 - 04:27 PM.
#279
Posted 17 December 2013 - 04:41 PM
who cares if you never use your IS mechs anymore right?
If you paid MC for any IS stuff so far, PGI has what they want ( Cynical me I know).
So if the whinging Gen X masses who are poor little babies who never every played a hard game in their lives (seriously if you weren't around whne PC games first started, you have never played a game on on hard mode IMO)
#280
Posted 17 December 2013 - 04:45 PM
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users