Jump to content

Why Nerf The Clans In Mwo At All?


625 replies to this topic

#461 CyclonerM

    Tina's Warrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • 5,685 posts
  • LocationA 2nd Wolf Guards Grenadiers JumpShip

Posted 22 January 2014 - 05:32 AM

View PostNatasha Kerensky, on 21 January 2014 - 08:15 PM, said:


They could slow down the rate at which mechs die by MAKING THEM STOP RELOADING SO FAST. They completely broke the damage vs reload time vs range vs heat mechanic by making for example PPCs reload so ******** fast.


In MW4 the ERPPC reload time was 8 secs.. :D

#462 Latorque

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 292 posts

Posted 22 January 2014 - 06:27 AM

The stars vs. lances - idea opens a gigantic can of worms in terms of balancing. Being outnumbered is one of the few mechanics that works in real life just as well as in games - it ends in disaster for the numerically inferior.
In MWO matches, there is a chance when it's maybe 2-3 for your team. as soon as this drops to 3-5, it's pretty much over most of the time. Most of what we see are landslide victories or defeats, and the matches that end with about 8-12 tend to be the most satisfying; since both sides had a serious fight on their hands. Roflstomps are fun for the stompers a short time (unless they are lovely human beings, then it's indefinite), for the stompees... not so much.

So, either the Clans would have to be incredibly overpowered (add the fact that they most likely won't be piloted by genetically enhanced superwarriors and slap this on the necessary overpowering), or they get constantly run over by the - according to the little lore i know - far inferior IS mech who has brought more buddies.

If there had been any introduction to the clans, some kind of immersion to the upcoming invasion, even casual players might find some fun for a while in going to their deaths against an unstoppable enemy.

Maybe in a better parallel universe we might have an introduction working by going up against a well - made AI exclusively piloting clan mechs in the two weeks after their introduction, accompanied by vague news and cool CGI footage of the advance of the invaders; but since here the invasion boils down to "BUY MORE MECHS!"; there is little to reward every player; dedicated BT-fan or casual-giant-robot-stomper (both have the same right to play, and i very much expect PGI to cater to both).

Opting for the cost of clan equipment on top of that is a dangerous path by itself. If the cost is in regard to MC, it's pure pay2win. If it's in Cbills; it's pretty easy to drive off loads of players who don't have the time or lack any incentive (see immersion) to go up against the sudden influx of Uber-mechs piloted by veterans with loads of C-Bills on their hands. The latter might be comparable to the original uselessness of non-Champion Trialmechs going up against the fully tricked-out chassis of those who had started earlier.
I remember this well, and i don't remember it kindly. :D

Edited by Latorque, 22 January 2014 - 06:31 AM.


#463 CyclonerM

    Tina's Warrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • 5,685 posts
  • LocationA 2nd Wolf Guards Grenadiers JumpShip

Posted 22 January 2014 - 06:36 AM

View PostLatorque, on 22 January 2014 - 06:27 AM, said:

dedicated BT-fan or casual-giant-robot-stomper (both have the same right to play, and i very much expect PGI to cater to both).




If you ask me i think casual-giant-robot-stomper have the right to play if they do not start complain about how "hard" and "complicated" this game is and thus leading to PGI making it even more an arcade shooter.

Well, not everyone is interested in fiction, lore and "fluff" (sure if i was a new MWO player i may have been interested in expanding my knowledge of the great universe it is supposed to be based on and basically it is what revived my interest in MechWarrior) but they should at least respect those who love to RP or are just interested in the novels and respect the heritage of this game. I mean, if this game is not what they would have expected by a Call of Duty game do not cry, go playing a game more fitting for your tastes and let PGI make this game a better simulation.

Example? Goons abuse knockdowns and they are definitely removed. Players complain about R&R (which is present in EVERY F2P game and for a good reason) and they removed it forever..

Edited by CyclonerM, 22 January 2014 - 06:37 AM.


#464 Prezimonto

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 2,017 posts
  • LocationKufstein FRR

Posted 22 January 2014 - 06:41 AM

The simple answer is that it's the lazy solution.

It's less work for them to nerf clan tech into a weird side variety of IS tech, and allow them to mix with little to no control, than it would be to implement anything else that attempts to balance clan vs. the IS.

Wouldn't it be cool, if all trial mechs for a while were Clan... and if you drop as a clanner you play as a clanner against IS or even other clans... but no mixed teams.... at least to start.

As an IS player, if you win a match agains the clan, some pieces of clan tech are put up for auction to the players that won by your faction. Rarely, a clan mech skeleton. Leave the only way to incorporate the OP clan tech into IS drops as a long drawn out, expensive process... heck, put a timer on dropping in clan tech (takes a LOT longer to repair and recondition for IS).

So play as a clan in clan mechs all you want. Play as an IS in IS mechs all you want... but now you have serious end game for pulling clan tech into the IS side through game play. Heck, put a conversion rate between cbills and mc... so if someone wants to bid with mc (actual money) instead of in game cash they can... but they still have to play to earn the right to bid on the item.

If this was done they could add battle value based on match metrics and pit fewer clan mechs vs. more IS mechs and it would work out fine. They're be people on both sides having a good time.. and the "weak" side has a serious end game reason to want to play.

Instead of coming up with a real system of checks and balances to preserve the setting along with gameplay, they're just going to nerf the clan into IS v1.2... it's quicker, cheaper, and suckers will still buy boatloads of them without even pondering the completely missed opportunity to add depth to the game.

Edited by Prezimonto, 22 January 2014 - 06:43 AM.


#465 gyrofalcon

    Rookie

  • The Nocturnal
  • The Nocturnal
  • 1 posts
  • LocationOregon

Posted 22 January 2014 - 06:58 AM

View Postpbiggz, on 09 December 2013 - 10:33 AM, said:



This is bad thing number one. You are encouraging exodus to clan tech, which trivializes IS tech.

Game designers dont make entire systems, and then introduce new systems thereby rendering the old ones inferior, stop glorifying overpowered gear.

Clan mechs and weapons WILL be nerfed. PGI has stated this and Randal Bills, the man who created the clans, supports it. Clan tech will however bring a DIFFERENT flavour to the field. Do you understand? Clan tech cannot be BETTER than IS tech, but it can be DIFFERENT.

Also if you try to balance by facing 10 clanners against 12 Inner Sphere, then what happens when mercenaries (who have access to tech via black market) buy clan tech and then field 12 clan tech mechs against 10 clanners or 12 inner sphere. You may as well throw your half baked system out the window at that point.


I have shot down these ****** little arguments countless times and will continue to do so until people stop clinging to their fantasies for easy win clan equipment.


that statement is extremely incorrect; did you ever play the table top game when Clan tech finally arrived? YOU HAD TO HAVE 2-4 IS mechs on a CLANNER; in fact it was almost completely impossible to take out clan techs by 1 IS. i won multiple tournaments (when they existed) and all the IS tech was completely inferior; a medium CLAN could take an atlas out in 3 turns.

and when i won; with other IS players; it was ultimate bragging rights because it took very good stradegy and knowledge of what you have and when not to engage; this game NEEDS clan tech to be that way; because this game is losing it's stradegy when you can strap on 6 ER Larges and char your enemies in a single alpha strike.

this game needs to have something that tips the gameplay. sorry; but this game is too fair now and, and the Gauss rifle was a prime example; they took the entire mechanics of that gun and just made it a slow firing AC, when encountered with table top mechs utilizing Gauss rifle; you had to stop and think what your plan is. because with 1 dumb move you'd be ******* toast.

this game needs that mechanic because all it is now is a first person shooter.

#466 Latorque

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 292 posts

Posted 22 January 2014 - 07:26 AM

View PostCyclonerM, on 22 January 2014 - 06:36 AM, said:


If you ask me i think casual-giant-robot-stomper have the right to play if they do not start complain about how "hard" and "complicated" this game is and thus leading to PGI making it even more an arcade shooter.

Well, not everyone is interested in fiction, lore and "fluff" (sure if i was a new MWO player i may have been interested in expanding my knowledge of the great universe it is supposed to be based on and basically it is what revived my interest in MechWarrior) but they should at least respect those who love to RP or are just interested in the novels and respect the heritage of this game. I mean, if this game is not what they would have expected by a Call of Duty game do not cry, go playing a game more fitting for your tastes and let PGI make this game a better simulation.

Example? Goons abuse knockdowns and they are definitely removed. Players complain about R&R (which is present in EVERY F2P game and for a good reason) and they removed it forever..


This may sound absurd; but the game caters to the fanbase as it is now. I've brought 8 players to MWO after starting myself; partially because i loved MW2 and especially MW3 in '99. I was never a TT man myself - but at least the vague memory of the meaning of tonnage, slots, XL-STD engines, E/B/M - hardpoints, heat sinks, LRMs, SRMs and SSRMs eased the pain of starting out in MWO a little; and it is painful in the current state (lack of tutorials and tips. Might improve with UI 2.0 i hope). I blew my cadet bonus on 2 or more moronic builds before i got the mechanics again; and i'm pretty sure at least six of those guys i've mentioned earlier would have left the game without a second thought if i hadn't explained the mechlab and some of the basic mechanics working in the matches themselves.

Those guys fall definitely fall in the "casual" - category, 2 have played the old MW-titles. Some of them play daily, some of them once a week or so. All of them are good players, grinding for new mechs, going solo or premade and normally being an asset to the team, 3 of those guys bought hero mechs.

Confront those guys with another unexplained mechanic stemming from the lore that drains the fun out of the game, and i expect they're gone pretty quick. In a matter of sense; they have "worked" for their current ability to pilot their own mech. In a match, i very much doubt there is a perceptible difference between them and a hardcore BT-grognard.

Put them in their solidly built IS-mechs, and let them charge against the clans as described above. I give them four hours; and after that they're gone. Maybe some will come back if they get wind of some changes in their favor.

I understand the fear of seeing a beloved franchise being drained from the fluff that defines it; but tbh i fear strict adherence to the lore a lot more - i've been in a few games that reduced their playerbase to an elitist minimum; there is little fun to be had.

Beyond that; casual gamers may be driven off by overcomplication, but from what i can see the fanbase screams their lungs out at pretty much any change the game makes (sometimes understandable, sometimes it seems insane). Both sides are fickle in their own way.

#467 Red-Line

    Rookie

  • 5 posts
  • LocationHHoD

Posted 22 January 2014 - 10:18 AM

View PostDeedsie, on 09 December 2013 - 10:34 AM, said:


To do that is blasphemy to him. He works for House Steiner.


If he is with Steiner and only uses 80% of his mech, does that mean he is politing an Victor instead of an Atlas?

#468 pbiggz

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 4,738 posts
  • LocationOutreach

Posted 22 January 2014 - 10:42 AM

View Postgyrofalcon, on 22 January 2014 - 06:58 AM, said:


that statement is extremely incorrect; did you ever play the table top game when Clan tech finally arrived? YOU HAD TO HAVE 2-4 IS mechs on a CLANNER; in fact it was almost completely impossible to take out clan techs by 1 IS. i won multiple tournaments (when they existed) and all the IS tech was completely inferior; a medium CLAN could take an atlas out in 3 turns.

and when i won; with other IS players; it was ultimate bragging rights because it took very good stradegy and knowledge of what you have and when not to engage; this game NEEDS clan tech to be that way; because this game is losing it's stradegy when you can strap on 6 ER Larges and char your enemies in a single alpha strike.

this game needs to have something that tips the gameplay. sorry; but this game is too fair now and, and the Gauss rifle was a prime example; they took the entire mechanics of that gun and just made it a slow firing AC, when encountered with table top mechs utilizing Gauss rifle; you had to stop and think what your plan is. because with 1 dumb move you'd be ******* toast.

this game needs that mechanic because all it is now is a first person shooter.


You just proved my point. If it takes 4 IS mechs to take down 1 clan mech, then people will want to play clans. Table top gaming concepts often DO NOT translate into action-simulator games. A dice-roll game doesn't play the same way, its as simple as that.

Also, work on your spelling. It goes a long way to making people respect your arguments, whether you are a complete {Dezgra} or not.

Edited by pbiggz, 22 January 2014 - 10:42 AM.


#469 CyclonerM

    Tina's Warrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • 5,685 posts
  • LocationA 2nd Wolf Guards Grenadiers JumpShip

Posted 22 January 2014 - 11:40 AM

View PostLatorque, on 22 January 2014 - 07:26 AM, said:


This may sound absurd; but the game caters to the fanbase as it is now. I've brought 8 players to MWO after starting myself; partially because i loved MW2 and especially MW3 in '99. I was never a TT man myself - but at least the vague memory of the meaning of tonnage, slots, XL-STD engines, E/B/M - hardpoints, heat sinks, LRMs, SRMs and SSRMs eased the pain of starting out in MWO a little; and it is painful in the current state (lack of tutorials and tips. Might improve with UI 2.0 i hope). I blew my cadet bonus on 2 or more moronic builds before i got the mechanics again; and i'm pretty sure at least six of those guys i've mentioned earlier would have left the game without a second thought if i hadn't explained the mechlab and some of the basic mechanics working in the matches themselves.

Those guys fall definitely fall in the "casual" - category, 2 have played the old MW-titles. Some of them play daily, some of them once a week or so. All of them are good players, grinding for new mechs, going solo or premade and normally being an asset to the team, 3 of those guys bought hero mechs.

Confront those guys with another unexplained mechanic stemming from the lore that drains the fun out of the game, and i expect they're gone pretty quick. In a matter of sense; they have "worked" for their current ability to pilot their own mech. In a match, i very much doubt there is a perceptible difference between them and a hardcore BT-grognard.

Put them in their solidly built IS-mechs, and let them charge against the clans as described above. I give them four hours; and after that they're gone. Maybe some will come back if they get wind of some changes in their favor.

I understand the fear of seeing a beloved franchise being drained from the fluff that defines it; but tbh i fear strict adherence to the lore a lot more - i've been in a few games that reduced their playerbase to an elitist minimum; there is little fun to be had.

Beyond that; casual gamers may be driven off by overcomplication, but from what i can see the fanbase screams their lungs out at pretty much any change the game makes (sometimes understandable, sometimes it seems insane). Both sides are fickle in their own way.

They stated clearly they want to cater a broader playerbase. Sure, the lack of tutorial does not help them but 3PV was meant to ease new players' first approach to the game (while many of the veterans and competitive players did not want it).

Sure, someone who has played a MechWarrior game before MWO may not be totally confused by weapon groups, mechlab, etc.. But. And this is a big but.. I have no idea which games you are referring to but my ideal MW game should be focused on a small élite of passionated veterans (or green players ) who can appreciate the depth of this universe.

The Clan sub-forums and MW:LL in my opinion are perfect examples of little islands populated mostly by passionated players and many veterans of decades of BattleTech. I have experienced that when unwelcome outsiders (trolls, goons,plain ignorants) come to annoy us, both these communities are an example of harmony: pleasant lore talk , help between Clan units, fun builds , crazy events like Harasser races in the "MarioKart" map (MW:LL), some upcoming events,even random duels (MWO thanks to the Nova Cats) and the closest thing to friendship possible on the internet, regardless of age or country.

Honestly, when i post in these sections or in the MWLL forums i really feel part of an elite.

There is a reason BattleTech has still many 40-50-60+ years-old men who never forgot their passion for this universe.

Those who do not care or do not understand it can very well play plenty of other games with no such deep background. Everyone has his tastes about games :ph34r:

EDIT: Not only the vets of the boardgame are the welcome in the "elite": i would like to point out that my first MW game was MW2 when i was 7 years old or such and i discovered the whole universe later with MWO and MW4 :)

Edited by CyclonerM, 22 January 2014 - 11:41 AM.


#470 Latorque

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 292 posts

Posted 23 January 2014 - 04:33 AM

View PostCyclonerM, on 22 January 2014 - 11:40 AM, said:

They stated clearly they want to cater a broader playerbase. Sure, the lack of tutorial does not help them but 3PV was meant to ease new players' first approach to the game (while many of the veterans and competitive players did not want it).


I'm still not quite sure where to put PGI as a developer. Judging from my experience in other games; they've done a tremendous job partially; in other areas i'm getting a little anxious. Regarding the lack of tutorials, they just completely shot themselves in the foot. Tutorials would have been a must even in regard to returning players from older titles.

View PostCyclonerM, on 22 January 2014 - 11:40 AM, said:

I have no idea which games you are referring to but my ideal MW game should be focused on a small élite of passionated veterans (or green players ) who can appreciate the depth of this universe.


ah - okay :D . I wasn't thinking as much of an ideal game; more in the direction of a functioning mixture of sustainability and game mechanics satisfying a broad range of player's demands (i.e. accessibility vs. simulationism). I have to admit; the communities you mentioned never worked for me; but that is completely subjective ;) . I fear isolationism more than permeability, although both have their shortcomings.

This is partially stemming from the theory that games should be "easy to learn, difficult to master". Interestingly enough; i've seen this working more often in "arcadey" - titles than in hardcore simulators; it is very rare in general though.

From my limited knowledge of the current MMO market, PGI needs to cater to a broader audience to keep going. There are few titles competing in the "Big Stompy Robots" - niche right now; i guess we can effectively reduce it to Hawken. Since we are all here; posting and / or playing, the old guard of the MW-Titles of the 90ies seeks something in MW:O.

When i say i like the lore or i love the old titles; i mainly refer to the limited timeline/history- details i know and the mechdesign (which, by the way is one of the strong points of MWO. Massive improvement there thanks to A. Iglesias). Otherwise; the game must just feel right. Maybe my immersion in the universe is shallow enough for that to be quite easy, but i don't consider the lore sacrosanct. I may have been there with Star Wars in my younger days; but this has been run into the ground so hard it blasted out the other side of the earth :D .

Problem is: the more hardcore the fanbase gets (or the more changes to the game are considered sacrilege); the less appealing it becomes to outsiders. Should i become a Trekkie i.e.; i would make my exit as soon as i cought a whiff of being jugded by a group of Oldschoolers - why should i consider their stance on the game or the universe as superior to mine? I'd consider them a bunch of hidebound clowns clamping down on something that could be a lot of fun; shutting me out because my idea of fun might slightly differ from theirs.

If the "applicant" is a screeching ADHD - ridden 12 year old or a choleric manchild of 40 (just examples, you get the picture :unsure: ); well... time might heal that wound. But potentially driving off new blood that might actually invigorate (this is a long shot; but maybe even leading to more simulationist-MW titles thanks to a larger and market-relevant playerbase?) in any way by making them run the gauntlet... i dunno.

Well; i guess i'll stay an IS-man one way or the other :D ; but this was very interesting! Thanks! :D

Edited by Latorque, 23 January 2014 - 04:34 AM.


#471 wanderer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Civil Servant
  • Civil Servant
  • 11,152 posts
  • LocationStomping around in a giant robot, of course.

Posted 23 January 2014 - 05:50 AM

Quote

that statement is extremely incorrect; did you ever play the table top game when Clan tech finally arrived? YOU HAD TO HAVE 2-4 IS mechs on a CLANNER; in fact it was almost completely impossible to take out clan techs by 1 IS. i won multiple tournaments (when they existed) and all the IS tech was completely inferior; a medium CLAN could take an atlas out in 3 turns.


Which was on the mark for 3025-tech designs and no idea how to deal with a Clanner (and frequently, underestimating the opponent simply by equating Clan tonnage to IS tonnage).

By the time 3050-era tech was common, the difference narrowed to 5:8 or so. By the Jihad era, 5:6 or 5:7 Clan: IS as the technology improved- and by 3145, you're frequently seeing mixed-tech production models that effectively merge the best of both tech trees.

If PGI had the stones to put in Clan tech, the balancer would be numbers. IS would be 12v12, Clan vs IS would be 10v16/5v8, Clan vs. Clan 10v10.

Yes, this would be mean that team play is even more critical to Clan players, and Clan PUGs would be even more fragile than IS ones, even with the higher firepower-per-player, since it takes less damage per Clan team to disable part of it. This would be a GOOD thing. Clans should play significantly different than IS, and a meta that starts with Clan-in-name-only gear will only result in "Clans" that can casually use Inner Sphere chassis and barely lose any effectiveness in the process...because that's what we'll have. Clanners that function precisely like IS units, with the same numbers and all the flavor of rancid vanilla pudding.

This result would be unacceptable. If I'm fighting a Clan force I want to fight Clanners, not reskins. If I'm fighting as Clan, I want to pilot a real Clan 'Mech, not a wannabe.

Edit example time:

Let's take anything BUT Skirmish for those odds of...oh, 10v16.

You have 2 Stars of 5 'Mechs. The IS has 4 lances of 4 'Mechs.

Conquest? You're going to be hopping because the IS can contest more points with organized, effective forces than you, unless you can cut away and whittle down that superior numbers.

Assault? The IS can come at you 12v10 and STILL has a lance to cap base if you don't defend in depth.

Both of these scenarios become challenging ones even WITH a 'Mech group armed with superior Clan tech.

Edited by wanderer, 23 January 2014 - 05:58 AM.


#472 CyclonerM

    Tina's Warrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • 5,685 posts
  • LocationA 2nd Wolf Guards Grenadiers JumpShip

Posted 23 January 2014 - 06:15 AM

I always like to discuss in a civil manner about this things i feel very important for MWO :D

Yes new blood might invigorate the franchise but could as well "diluite" it, making it less interesting to those who are truly interested in it and/or supported it for decades.

It is true that the more a game is focused on a small fanbase the less appalling is to outsiders and i really hope they will find a balance.

In the meanwhile, i can still play MW:LL, more simulation, more focused on a small playerbase and even more difficult to learn (i am still not very good indeed after months of occasionally playing).

View Postwanderer, on 23 January 2014 - 05:50 AM, said:


Which was on the mark for 3025-tech designs and no idea how to deal with a Clanner (and frequently, underestimating the opponent simply by equating Clan tonnage to IS tonnage).

By the time 3050-era tech was common, the difference narrowed to 5:8 or so. By the Jihad era, 5:6 or 5:7 Clan: IS as the technology improved- and by 3145, you're frequently seeing mixed-tech production models that effectively merge the best of both tech trees.

If PGI had the stones to put in Clan tech, the balancer would be numbers. IS would be 12v12, Clan vs IS would be 10v16/5v8, Clan vs. Clan 10v10.

Yes, this would be mean that team play is even more critical to Clan players, and Clan PUGs would be even more fragile than IS ones, even with the higher firepower-per-player, since it takes less damage per Clan team to disable part of it. This would be a GOOD thing. Clans should play significantly different than IS, and a meta that starts with Clan-in-name-only gear will only result in "Clans" that can casually use Inner Sphere chassis and barely lose any effectiveness in the process...because that's what we'll have. Clanners that function precisely like IS units, with the same numbers and all the flavor of rancid vanilla pudding.

This result would be unacceptable. If I'm fighting a Clan force I want to fight Clanners, not reskins. If I'm fighting as Clan, I want to pilot a real Clan 'Mech, not a wannabe.

Edit example time:

Let's take anything BUT Skirmish for those odds of...oh, 10v16.

You have 2 Stars of 5 'Mechs. The IS has 4 lances of 4 'Mechs.

Conquest? You're going to be hopping because the IS can contest more points with organized, effective forces than you, unless you can cut away and whittle down that superior numbers.

Assault? The IS can come at you 12v10 and STILL has a lance to cap base if you don't defend in depth.

Both of these scenarios become challenging ones even WITH a 'Mech group armed with superior Clan tech.


I could not agree more! I would say however 10vs12 is enough, almost every 'Mech, aside from Trials, have Star League-era tech (and you said the difference narrowed then).

Edited by CyclonerM, 23 January 2014 - 06:17 AM.


#473 JacksonHauler

    Rookie

  • Big Brother
  • Big Brother
  • 1 posts

Posted 23 January 2014 - 08:37 AM

I think a balancing method to make it fair and allow the clan Omnimechs to have superior tech would be to have weaker back armor and XL engines as a standard on all clan Omnimechs which would encourage IS users to use superior tactics in order to take them down.

#474 pbiggz

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 4,738 posts
  • LocationOutreach

Posted 23 January 2014 - 09:01 AM

If you are still arguing in favour of 10v16 or whatever that nonsense is, please read this post, because i've deconstructed that argument too many times.

View Postpbiggz, on 18 January 2014 - 11:19 AM, said:


In a perfect world, with a perfect spread of players it would work, it would be fantastic, I WANT TO BELIEVE, but experience tells me that is a paradise that does not exist. Here is why:

I call up an example, the world of warcraft server: Illidan. http://wow.realmpop....us-illidan.html

Illidan has 13996 Alliance players.

Illidan has 216403 Horde players.

Thats roughly 6% alliance vs 93% horde.
The best servers are split 50/50, but how many new players are going to go alliance on a server where it is now more rare to see alliance players then it is to see rare-spawn world bosses.

Additionally, Illidan is a PVP server, meaning you cannot "toggle off" PVP, you are always attackable by the opposite faction. This makes leveling a horde character a dream, because that 6% of alliance players rarely poses a threat if ever, but makes leveling an alliance character a nightmare, as that 93% of horde players generally likes to hover above low-level areas and "gank noobs", i.e. kill low level players for fun, just to run them off the server, or make them turn horde.

IF, clans are OP enough that it takes a reinforced company just to take down 1 binary, how many players will stay inner sphere?

IF new players starting out as Inner Sphere drop into a game and get picked off from across the map by a triple-ppc omni-mech (clan ppcs weigh less than IS and do nearly as much damage as IS gauss rifles), how long do you think it will take until that player either gives up, or goes clan?

Either you will scare off all your inner sphere players, or you will make all but the most loyal core go clan. That leads to an imbalance, which leads to failing queues, which leads to a dysfunctional game where all that exists are the clans fighting a handful of the same IS pilots who desperately cling to their factions while the bulk of players sit in the back as clans, unable to find queues or fighting among themselves.

Alternatively, if clan tech is available to IS players, how long do you think it will take before people realize their Atlai are easily outmatched by triple-clan UAC20 direwolves? How long do you think it will take before people realize 85 ton stalkers are outgunned and outranged by 75 ton timberwolves? How long do you think it will take before people realize Clan ERPPCs do nearly as much damage as IS gauss rifles?

How long would it take before nearly every single IS mech on the field is replaced by a clan omnimech?

How long would it take before new players in cheap IS mechs are flattened by omnimechs, only to realize the lightest omnimechs alone cost as much as IS heavy mechs?

How long would new players stay when they realize they have a choice of futile grinding to get even a light omnimech, or buying MC.


THIS, is the folly of un-nerfed clan tech. Either it causes an arms race and a virtually impossible grind for new players, or it causes a mass exodus to the clan factions, which also constitutes an arms race to get superior tech.

THIS is why PGI HAS to nerf it. This isn't some personal feud I have with people who want the game to follow TT-values religiously because "whats the point of clans otherwise". This is a genuine concern that those calls to keep clan tech un-nerfed come from a genuine mis-understanding of how a TT game can and cant translate into a real-time action simulator/fps.


But fear not, I have a different solution, one that keeps clan and IS tech distinct, without giving any overt advantages!

Older CW posts from the devs called for certain mechs to be either exclusively available or discounted to specific factions. For example, house kurita, and anyone in it's favour, will find that an Atlas AS7-K is far cheaper to buy, but if someone in favour with only say... the Federated Suns... will find that an Atlas AS7-K is either available at a massively inflated price, or not available at all! Mercenaries will apparently have access to some sort of black market, where they will have to pay full price for mechs, but will have otherwise exclusive hardware available to them as well.

Following that, Clans, which are supposed to be handled as NPC factions like the other successor states, will have certain hardware available to them at either heavily discounted costs, or exclusively, even among the different clans themselves!For example, the Dire Wolf omnimech is produced exclusively by Clan Smoke Jaguar and Clan Wolf. Any other appearance of the direwolf in other clans was supposedly the result of trades, or that equipment being taken as isorla (taken as a prize from a loser in a trial). Following this, we can assume that certain mechs such as the warhawk (an exclusively smoke jaguar design) and the aforementioned direwolf will only be available to their respective producers, or will be available to the other clans at inflated prices, or through trials (which would be totally cool). This tech would also be on the black market for mercenaries, but at inflated prices.

This system of differentiating tech and making it more readily available to specific factions relies on a three things. Meta balance, clan tech "nerf", and numerically equal drops.

A: the overall meta game has to shift significantly. If there were a "Fifth succession war" sans-clan, the Fedcom and cappellans would be the only ones left, because highlanders, victors, and cataphracts with autocannons and ppcs are the kings of the meta. If meta game is balanced (perhaps with cone of fire and heat tweaks as well as tweaks to weapon mechanics such as Mechwarrior 3-styled autocannons rather than single-shot autocannons with front loaded pinpoint damage) then other mechs such as the dragon, and atlas come back from obscurity with a vengance, and sweet sweet brawling becomes viable again. (yes I am a brawler at heart).

B: Clan tech will have to be "nerfed". The word nerf has become a dirty word however, so I will replace it with "fixed".
As it stands, omnimechs have draw backs, but clan weaponry does not. Proposed fixes by paul are interesting, but just the tip of the ice berg. In a perfect world a comprehensive rework of both clan and IS tech (with the above mentions of cone of fire, etc) would be in order, but since we can assume PGI wont do that, lets talk about what we have. We have weapons that are better than IS weapons in every way. The easy solution is to make them do the same damage as IS weapons, but that is boring, so lets give them a different flavour.

Clan lasers could have a slightly longer range, or perhaps a more gradual damage fall-off after their "max range" as opposed to the near instant drop to zero IS laser damage has at its max range. On the flip side, Clan lasers could deal their full damage, but in a longer burn time. This means the pilot has to deal with more heat, as the laser remains active for longer, and has to practice careful aim to keep the laser trained on the target, as well as expose himself from cover for a longer period of time. PPCs on the flip-side, have not been mentioned by paul. I would suggest a rework of ppcs similar to my autocannon idea. Have the ppc deal damage as a stream, rather than a front loaded projectile. In this manner, an IS ppc that deals 10 damage could deal perhaps 8 up front, with each "section" of the stream dealing 1 extra damage until max damage is dealt, while the clan ERPPC would deal its 15 damage as 10 up front, with a longer "stream" dealing up to it's maximum, OR, 7 up front with a stream the same "size" as the IS ppc, but dealing more damage per "section". This would take the emphasis off front loaded pinpoint damage, preserve the effectiveness of each weapon as well as make sure the sheer power of clan weaponry can be exploited only with superb skill, rather than making it a clear cut choice that "clan tech is better".

In the past I also argued mixed weapons, I now argue pure tech because the weight savings of clan weaponry would make IS weapons, even with a nerf, inferior. The best way to balance the weight savings of clan weaponry is with the restrictions of omnimechs. In this manner, IS mechs become more optimized, but on average they carry less fire power, while Clan mechs are less optimized and more "cookie-cutter" but carry more firepower.

C: Numerically, drops would have to remain 12v12, or whatever. CW should have more diverse game modes and perhaps scenario play? (that would also be cool). So pure clan v clan drops would be 5v5 or 10v10, while specific scenarios might have 2 clan mechs with elemental support drop against an equal IS force with vehicle support. Overall, if the above changes are implemented properly, then 10v16 simply becomes superfluous. However, un-nerfed, or un-fixed, if you try to balance clan tech with a 10v16 drop, you are not fixing the problem, you're simply side-stepping it, and that solution wont last forever.

THESE are the elements of game design we have to think about, not a pure "lets leave clan tech OP" or "lets nerf the **** out of clan tech" argument, but a discussion of "how can we make them different from one another, so that while neither techbase has an advantage, they play fundamentally differently and keep the game diverse and interesting.


#475 rgreat

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Bold
  • The Bold
  • 851 posts
  • LocationMoscow

Posted 23 January 2014 - 09:22 AM

This thread is full of blind people.

#476 Ghost-Wolf

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Star Captain
  • Star Captain
  • 27 posts

Posted 23 January 2014 - 09:38 AM

If the LRM weighs 1/2 of the IS Variant then restrict the Missle OmniPods. Whats the Problem? If you shoot f.e. a LRM 20 with a 2-Missile Tube you will see. Or you can split the Weapon Pods for Missiles in SRM and LRM. The Proposal with the Clan Min. Range is a good Idea.

If one can´t change the Armor you will see, that Omnis without max Armor won´t be played and the ones with will be. (who will for instance play a Hellbringer if it comes).

Any Updates on Pods for Jump Jets and ECM and Targeting Computer? :-P

#477 Napoleon_Blownapart

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 1,173 posts

Posted 23 January 2014 - 10:20 AM

View PostDeath Storm, on 09 December 2013 - 05:33 AM, said:

Well Guys this what happens when the crying players start whining to the devs it gets NERFED !!, I agree with you about clan tech why should it be nerfed in some way it kinda take the point away from buying Clan tech. This whole nerf this nerf that is ruining the game !


do you understand they are still in concept?they cant nerf what isnt finished and tested?they are trying to balance them with IS in conception.so no player has cried yet except maybe you...

#478 Grey Death Storm

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Angel
  • The Angel
  • 290 posts

Posted 23 January 2014 - 10:33 AM

View PostGorantir, on 23 January 2014 - 10:20 AM, said:


do you understand they are still in concept?they cant nerf what isnt finished and tested?they are trying to balance them with IS in conception.so no player has cried yet except maybe you...


I Hate burst your bubble that conversation was 2 months ago and your talking about it now interesting?, and your Argument make no sense what so ever, so please stop trying contradict what i say with utter rubbish.

Edited by Death Storm, 23 January 2014 - 04:36 PM.


#479 CyclonerM

    Tina's Warrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • 5,685 posts
  • LocationA 2nd Wolf Guards Grenadiers JumpShip

Posted 23 January 2014 - 11:13 AM

View PostJoachim Wolf, on 23 January 2014 - 09:38 AM, said:

If the LRM weighs 1/2 of the IS Variant then restrict the Missle OmniPods. Whats the Problem? If you shoot f.e. a LRM 20 with a 2-Missile Tube you will see. Or you can split the Weapon Pods for Missiles in SRM and LRM. The Proposal with the Clan Min. Range is a good Idea.

Maybe it is a good idea.. But i still canot believe in 31st Century missiles charge until they get full power :D

Quote

If one can´t change the Armor you will see, that Omnis without max Armor won´t be played and the ones with will be. (who will for instance play a Hellbringer if it comes).




I would. I am going to try to get all the OmniMechs, or at least those i always loved. This means a mastered Timberwolf, then Kit Fox, Stormcrow and maybe Summoner.

@Pbiggz: i know team numbers changes may be superflous but i do not want them (only) for balance reason, but for lore and immersion purpose.

No, do not tell me lore must be sacrificed in favor of balance. What are the Clans going to be without a bidding system, a standard organization in Stars and at very least some less players on their team to reflect bidding? :huh:

#480 pbiggz

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 4,738 posts
  • LocationOutreach

Posted 23 January 2014 - 11:24 AM

View PostCyclonerM, on 23 January 2014 - 11:13 AM, said:

Maybe it is a good idea.. But i still canot believe in 31st Century missiles charge until they get full power :D


I would. I am going to try to get all the OmniMechs, or at least those i always loved. This means a mastered Timberwolf, then Kit Fox, Stormcrow and maybe Summoner.

@Pbiggz: i know team numbers changes may be superflous but i do not want them (only) for balance reason, but for lore and immersion purpose.

No, do not tell me lore must be sacrificed in favor of balance. What are the Clans going to be without a bidding system, a standard organization in Stars and at very least some less players on their team to reflect bidding? :huh:


There are better ways of doing it, mostly through game modes or scenario play. For example: clan players could engage in the infamous trial of refusal between the jaguars and the wolves to stop the clan invasion in 3048, that would use all sorts of clan organization, 10v10 matches etc. Or a scenario centering around some sort of capellan raid into fedcom territory, where the caps would use typical military structure while the fedcom would be using combined arms RCTs.

These are the sorts of things we need to think about, not a sweeping change to all regular matches. Typical pug matches need to be balanced.


With regards to lightly armored omni mechs, I'm hoping a shift in the meta will make them appear more. It mostly requires a shift away from pinpoint alpha meta.





10 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 10 guests, 0 anonymous users