1978 replies to this topic

[Tralador]

My plan is simple and posted elsewhere, but not radical. Clans are OP, they stay that way, no system changes and you mod them just like IS mechs. Inner sphere pure mechs get respawns, 2-3, and earn 4x cbills for clan kills. Clan tech on your mech invalidates both of these advantages. Sure you daishi can maul an atlas. How about 2-3 in sequence? Now you don't have to change drops, you don't have to screw with weapons, IS and Clan see the numerical superiority in play, and there is a choice, do I take the most powerful beast mech I can build, or do I take a mech 70% as strong and attrition him down for more money?

[Name140704]

Zensei said:

I have been here since closed Beta, if you look closely under my name and affiliation you will see.

Nothing.

If you look closely at how many real dollars I have spent since December 2012, you will see.

Nothing.

PGI taught me well and they taught me early, and I was listening.

Expect nothing.

By next April I will have prob close to 300 million C-Bill for any clan mechs, and I will have spent.

Nothing

This guy makes me feel so stupid right now. Post of the day

[Riptor]

Tralador, on 14 December 2013 - 06:26 PM, said:

My plan is simple and posted elsewhere, but not radical. Clans are OP, they stay that way, no system changes and you mod them just like IS mechs. Inner sphere pure mechs get respawns, 2-3, and earn 4x cbills for clan kills. Clan tech on your mech invalidates both of these advantages. Sure you daishi can maul an atlas. How about 2-3 in sequence? Now you don't have to change drops, you don't have to screw with weapons, IS and Clan see the numerical superiority in play, and there is a choice, do I take the most powerful beast mech I can build, or do I take a mech 70% as strong and attrition him down for more money?

Problem here is that fully customisable Battlemechs are more powerfull then omni mechs where all you can change are the weapons.

Given a Daishie is more powerfull then an atlas. But a uller or puma has nothing on a fully upgraded jenner. The equation doesnt work with all weight classes and surely not even only based on weight classes because some mechs like the hellbringer have such paper thin armor that they get trashed just by coughing at them.

[Kanis Maximus]

ipox, on 14 December 2013 - 04:37 PM, said:

BattleValue(2.0) and Star (5 Clan 'Mechs) vs Company (12 IS 'Mechs) is the only way. Instead of trying to reinvent the wheel with Tonnage limits, use BV and numbers. The BV system includes calculations for "better pilots" (cf. Elo), so use that also on some scale you can tweak to reasonability.

Do not mess with Clan tech tonnage and space allocation. Do not mess with Clan tech damage significantly. Beam duration? Really? So in your fluff, Clan engineers have spent 300 years making weapons WORSE than when they started with Star League tech? Let them be unbelievably better. It SHOULD take 2+ IS 'Mechs' working together to take down one Clan front-line OmniMech/pilot. IS tech is all about "working together" (cf. C³). Use that. Don't ruin the IP with unnecessary tweaks.

BV > all

This is my first MWO "brown soup" forum post ever. It is also likely my last just because I don't want to get dragged in. For the record, on FAITH ALONE at this point, as a Legendary Founder, Overlord Phoenix, Sabre Reinforcment, and now Warhawk package purchaser (and 1-2 significant MC-only purchases along the way), I very much want you to succeed. Good luck.

On a wing and a prayer, I suppose...

*Edit*

I should also say that I bought the package because I love the Warhawk/Masakari above all others -- but that I'm Davion as my tag suggests (plus some Merc/FRR leanings) and will likely not prioritise Clan 'Mech play for anything other than fun and occasional nuance.

PGI listen to this guy. Good customer, good feedback. What more do you need?
Use the BV system as a foundation and tweak as required.

BV of sorts + asymmetric matches (5 clan vs 8 IS, 10 clan vs 16 IS) = WIN

[Tabrias07]

Everything about this is terrible. Simply terrible.

[Rashhaverak]

It's interesting that with the limits on what can be modified on a clan mech, it may be that the IS mechs are actually more customizable than the clan mechs are.

Sure, you can change hardpoints from one type to the other, but having crit slots locked into ferro, endo, engine, heatsink, and possibly others will limit what room remains, and what will fit. In addition to the inherent weight limits that will be placed by having to stick with specific armor and engine configurations.

Still, I think the ideas being proposed are sound. If I have a concern, it is with adding the weight on certain weapons... since that may very much limit some builds.

[Autobot9000]

In all honesty: In Terms of transparency PGI is doing a good job, they do inform people very well ahead of the timeline of deployment. But then the pricing is outrageous, I find the whole free to play idea with these few-people-pay-us-insanely-rest-for-free asocial and disgusting. Who wants to play a game should pay and thats about it. Full payment (e.g. fifty (!) not two-hundred (!) bucks and full content for everyone mandatory). This **** is not just enraging me, it's enraging everyone, its basically saying: You'll never ever get the full content of the game ever, because if you want it you'd hvae to sell us your kidney. How ******** does a company hvae to be not to deliver content to paying customers?

But to keep this on topic: What has been released is a terrible approach to clans. Lots of these things already look strongly as patchwork, that is needed for purely technical reasons. There are numerous, I would claim infinite ways how clans and IS mechs can be designed without going to retardism mode. If you look at this as a "solution" I wouldn't even accept that as a temporary - we are still playing with it - thing. It shows, PGI actually has no fricking clue howto do the "not imba / still here" thing. The easiest solution would have been to account for strong tech by dropping 1 star of clan mechs vs two lances of IS mechs or whatever ratio seems appropriate after implementation and make the IS mechs interesting with community warfare! If you can earn points and achievements and gain ranks with your faction it doesn't matter if the opposition has better gear as long as the team drop vs team drop scenario is balanced. The design preview is total ****, discourages every true fan from ever, ever, ever even considering to buy a clan pack.

[Airborne Thunder]

BlackPhoenix01, on 14 December 2013 - 06:17 PM, said:

Great job PGI! Keep it up… Don't let the trolls and rage monkeys improperly reflect on the silent majority of the people that love what you have done so far and are looking forward to 'tomorrow' for the stuff being discussed for further release.

Oh, I get it. Sarcasm. Nice

[Red5angel]

sounds like its a good start. I think ultimately it's going to be impossible to make something better and still avoid an arms race. Competitive meta will always gravitate towards min/max. That's the unfortunate aspect of battletech that is hard to translate to a video game environment, in the universes reality, mechwarriors couldn't tinker with their mechs a whole lot for a lot of different reasons, money, technical support, salvage etc... but as it's part of the video game experience it's difficult to have a complete technological paradigm shift like the clans and not basically ruin it for the stuff previous.

[Aim64C]

Riptor, on 14 December 2013 - 06:25 PM, said:

Have people still not gotten it?

This is not about balancing "clan mechs"

These mechs are not clan exclusive!

Every IS pilot will be able to buy these. Nowhere does it state that you have to join the clans or can only use these mechs if youre part of the clanner faction.

Sorry Clan players.. your exclusive toys arent exclusive no more. Ever ******* with enough MC or cbills will be able to have a timberwolf or Daishie

So any of this zelbriggen nonsense or talk about IS vs Clan is absofuckinguseless.

This is balancing Battle vs omnimechs

Not clan vs IS

Crazy enough these clan mechs have nothing to do with the clans!

There has not been any expounding on the concept of Community Warfare.

Though I find it absolutely disgusting that you expect the game to fail to develop any kind of community warfare aspects (such as, you know, the clans -invading- the inner sphere) - and seem to be quite content with that. Honestly, my blood calls for a Trail of Annihilation. Though hunting down the blood lines of a stravag surrat are endlessly entertaining ventures. Half of the children alive today were actually conceived by another male than their stated father... an interesting little tid-bit on your backwards freeborn ways.

The problem with your suggestion is quite simple - you do not envision a game beyond mindless drops into something resembling a Solaris Arena.

The problem with that idea is explained, here:

GDC Vault - F2P the Wrong Way: Age of Empires Online

Age of Empires: Online kept releasing civilization after civilization. New content failed to deliver new players, and existing players were being monetized at their limit. With no end-of-game solution, with no plan to develop more depth to the game and more elements to attract players that had either left or were never interested - the game quickly started operating at a loss and could no longer continue to produce retail content at a profit.

Good games are not necessarily evenly balanced games. They are games that give you a satisfaction playing them. The goal shouldn't be to balance the Clans. It should be to ensure the experience of playing the IS brings satisfaction - whether fighting against the IS or against the Clans. Further, the experience of playing the Clans should also bring satisfaction.

Balancing for a "fair fight" is not necessarily going to make a satisfying game experience.

[Pariah Devalis]

I like the SSRM approach, honestly. I hate the LRM approach, however. Two reasons for this:

• Messes with stock build... buildability?
  
• Makes no sense whatsoever that a missile would have decreased damage inside of a minimum range

What I would propose for the Clan LRMs are the following three things:

• Give it a fixed minimum range of 90 meters, giving it a smaller minimum than the IS LRM but still providing a good reason to take SSRMs over LRMs as there is a deadspot that a smart pilot can exploit
  
• Flatten the Clan LRM trajectory so that it is less effective as an indirect fire weapon system
  
• Ripple-fire the Clan LRMs in waves of 5 so that AMS equipped mechs can dramatically reduce the damage output of a Clan LRM launcher allowing some sort of counterplay

These three modifications to the current LRM mechanism may be all that is needed without going down the undesireable route of messing with tonnage or instituting an illogical approach to the minimum range issues, while curbing the roflstomp of CLRM-20 fire somewhat.

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 14 December 2013 - 06:42 PM.

[xhrit]

Mead, on 14 December 2013 - 02:56 PM, said:

You PGI guys should have implemented BV or BV2 into your matching system from the start, and then a lot of these issues would have been a complete non-starter.

Why was a perfectly workable balance system totally ignored?

I am pretty disappointed in this new system.

Clan tech is supposed to be better then IS tech. IS tech is Tier 1 gear. LosTech is Tier 2 gear. And clan tech is T3 gear.

That progression model should be tied into the gameplay / matchmaker, i.e. stock / T1 mechs should be restricted to tier 1 pvp matches. Mechs that get placed in matches against higher tiers by matchmaker could get a buff to make up for it.

Also, restrict access to higher tier gear. Give players a level based on total exp earned. and unlock different tiers of gear depending on what level the player is.

(LostTech is level 25+, clan tech is level 50)

Yeah that will mean that players can never been trueborn, everyone is freebirth. But it would add a progression model that would be fairly noob friendly, and allow all the tech to actually have a place in game without being nerfed to the point of uselessness.

[Airborne Thunder]

I think they made Clan Mechs like IS Mechs to so that we would have to grind 3 versions of them (or us MC to exchange XP) to unlock Modules. If you didn't have to grind 3 different variants, how would PGI get money from you? Grind + Premium Time = Money. PGI wants money. Plus if there were only 1 version of the same Mech (an Omnimech) how could they try to sell you a Hero version of it with a different hard point layout?

Edited by Airborne Thunder, 14 December 2013 - 08:50 PM.

[Tralador]

Riptor, on 14 December 2013 - 06:29 PM, said:

Problem here is that fully customisable Battlemechs are more powerfull then omni mechs where all you can change are the weapons.

Given a Daishie is more powerfull then an atlas. But a uller or puma has nothing on a fully upgraded jenner. The equation doesnt work with all weight classes and surely not even only based on weight classes because some mechs like the hellbringer have such paper thin armor that they get trashed just by coughing at them.

True, but again, if you clan tech you lose your respawns and money, and you don't say clanners can't change their armor. Regardless, breaking stock mechs or artificially making clanners suck is a slap in the face to the IP, the players, and means you literally might as well rewrite the lore, and call it 'the clans showed up, died like idiots to artillery and got told to ****.' Yes, I love Clan lore and demand more from this vital part of the universe or I will not support this company with my money or time .

[Aim64C]

Pariah Devalis, on 14 December 2013 - 06:40 PM, said:

I like the SSRM approach, honestly. I hate the LRM approach, however. Two reasons for this:

• Messes with stock build... buildability?
  
• Makes no sense whatsoever that a missile would have decreased damage inside of a minimum range

What I would propose for the Clan LRMs are the following three things:

• Give it a fixed minimum range of 90 meters, giving it a smaller minimum than the IS LRM but still providing a good reason to take SSRMs over LRMs as there is a deadspot that a smart pilot can exploit
  
• Flatten the Clan LRM trajectory so that it is less effective as an indirect fire weapon system
  
• Ripple-fire the Clan LRMs in waves of 5 so that AMS equipped mechs can dramatically reduce the damage output of a Clan LRM launcher allowing some sort of counterplay

These three modifications to the current LRM mechanism may be all that is needed without going down the undesireable route of messing with tonnage or instituting an illogical approach to the minimum range issues, while curbing the roflstomp of CLRM-20 fire somewhat.

Because LRMs need to be nerfed even more?

Honestly, the people who suggest LRMs are an actually viable weapon haven't got much of a clue.

Sure - if half your team loads up on the damned things and saturates the skies with missiles - they're effective against PUGs.

But they're pretty much useless from an individual standpoint. Even if hit detection issues were resolved with them - they are still horribly inadequate weapon systems compared to the alternatives (spending the extra tonnage on just about any other weapon system - even the LBX is better).

[Kodiak Jorgensson]

not really a fan of the weight reduction for LRM's, why not try bringing the I.S equivilents closer to clan standards?

[Scratx]

Kodiak Jorgensson, on 14 December 2013 - 06:46 PM, said:

not really a fan of the weight reduction for LRM's, why not try bringing the I.S equivilents closer to clan standards?

You mean weight increase, right?

[Riptor]

Aim64C, on 14 December 2013 - 06:39 PM, said:

There has not been any expounding on the concept of Community Warfare.

Though I find it absolutely disgusting that you expect the game to fail to develop any kind of community warfare aspects (such as, you know, the clans -invading- the inner sphere) - and seem to be quite content with that. Honestly, my blood calls for a Trail of Annihilation. Though hunting down the blood lines of a stravag surrat are endlessly entertaining ventures. Half of the children alive today were actually conceived by another male than their stated father... an interesting little tid-bit on your backwards freeborn ways.

The problem with your suggestion is quite simple - you do not envision a game beyond mindless drops into something resembling a Solaris Arena.

The problem with that idea is explained, here:

GDC Vault - F2P the Wrong Way: Age of Empires Online

Age of Empires: Online kept releasing civilization after civilization. New content failed to deliver new players, and existing players were being monetized at their limit. With no end-of-game solution, with no plan to develop more depth to the game and more elements to attract players that had either left or were never interested - the game quickly started operating at a loss and could no longer continue to produce retail content at a profit.

Good games are not necessarily evenly balanced games. They are games that give you a satisfaction playing them. The goal shouldn't be to balance the Clans. It should be to ensure the experience of playing the IS brings satisfaction - whether fighting against the IS or against the Clans. Further, the experience of playing the Clans should also bring satisfaction.

Balancing for a "fair fight" is not necessarily going to make a satisfying game experience.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

I can theoretically buy these mechs RIGHT NOW without having to pledge any allegiance. (allthought ill only get them half a year in the future...)

I will get these mechs delivered to me no matter if i stay IS or go clan.

There is NOTHING thats going to stop me as an IS pilot to use the mechs i bought with real money to fight for the IS

YOU on the other hand are so delusional to expect them to change the deal after people have allready bought it? That they will come out and say:

"Sorry bro but since you want to stay IS you cant actually use your 240 dollars worth of clan mechs... youll have to join the clans. Whats that? Your Overlord pack? Sorry cant use it anymore once you join the clans"

Grow the hell up and leave your little fantasy RPG world you build up.. its time you clanners wake the hell up. Your beloved clan and omni mechs are nothing exclusive anymore.

Edited by Riptor, 14 December 2013 - 06:52 PM.

[Sprouticus]

Pariah Devalis, on 14 December 2013 - 06:40 PM, said:

What I would propose for the Clan LRMs are the following three things:

• Give it a fixed minimum range of 90 meters, giving it a smaller minimum than the IS LRM but still providing a good reason to take SSRMs over LRMs as there is a deadspot that a smart pilot can exploit
  
• Flatten the Clan LRM trajectory so that it is less effective as an indirect fire weapon system
  
• Ripple-fire the Clan LRMs in waves of 5 so that AMS equipped mechs can dramatically reduce the damage output of a Clan LRM launcher allowing some sort of counterplay

These three modifications to the current LRM mechanism may be all that is needed without going down the undesireable route of messing with tonnage or instituting an illogical approach to the minimum range issues, while curbing the roflstomp of CLRM-20 fire somewhat.

90m is still bad IMO. Frankly I think the min range should stay at 180. 150 tops.
I like the change in arc. Good idea

I proposed 2 changes above:

1) make the omni pods on have 5 tubes, which would make them shoot 5 at a tim,e just as you indicated. The AMS effect is a good point.
2) make clan LRM's lose lock immediately if the pilot loses LoS.(no indirect fire). Also make it so they cannot get lock from indirect LoS from another mech.



This brings up another easy clan limit that meets canon and simulates clan limits in BT:

Modify the radar system so that you SEE an enemy if an ally has LoS, but you cannot target him. (no streak pre targeting, no LRM targeting)

[Marcus Tanner]

On the subject of omnimechs, I think we have a problem. The rules in the TT clearly state that omnimechs are not harder to customize in any way, shape or form. They are *strictly* better in terms of customization. There are no compromises. The benefit being that it's easier to swap out weapons.

As it stands, it cannot possibly get easier to swap out weapons in your inventory in MWO. There are narrow (irrelevant) benefits to being an omnimech, and no costs at all. I think the right choice for now is to just forget about it. Being an omnimech isn't a factor in this environment, just the same way that it isn't a factor in TT tournament play. That's okay in my books.

One thing that you *could* do is institute a nominal cost to customization. Say, 500 c-bills per ton removed or added (or look up some TT values, whatever). Do that for most mechs, then waive that cost for omni-podded equipment. There you have it. Omnimechs. Now, I suspect that there are reasons for ignoring customization costs, so I don't expect this to happen, but none of the proposals I've heard elsewhere capture the feel of increased customizability without compromising the grinding system or making them paradoxically less-customizable.

The way MWO is now, max armor and speed are overpowered. This means that mechs unable to pick up bigger engines or get their armor up to par are fit for nothing but the trashbin. I suppose in theory you could jack up the mech quirks until these poor silly mechs are ridiculously agile, but that's not something that the dev team seems willing to do.