1978 replies to this topic

[Sprouticus]

Feedback on the feedback:

Wow, there is a LOT of anger here. Some of you folks need to take a step away from the game or something.

• Russ has already implied on twitter that weight balancing for clans will occur.
  
• The UI/CW complaints post folks don't realize that they are planning way ahead LIKE THEY SHOULD and including us in the conversation LIKE THEY SHOULD. Nothing in this affects the efforts in UI.CW (not saying those are not behind, just that they are not realted to this.
  
• The cost of the package in $10/mech. Not bad really. There is no benefit to buying the package early, so who CARES when they introduce it.
  
• The gold mechs are an uber luxury item. They cost PGI almost nothing to implement time wise. it is just something people with way too much money will buy. It doesn't impact most of us so who cares.

Not Feedback on the action post

Overall some good ideas, some bad. About what I would expect in a first draft.

• Lasers: Suggested changes work. Have no idea how you are going to balance PPC's and UAC's though. I think the suggestions of a DoT for PPC's is an option. Still not sure on UAC's though.
  
• SSRM's: even 2- per will not make these anything other than light killers. SSRM2's do a good job now. Cant imagine how it will be better
  
• LRM: Like almost everyone on here, I think changing weight is just silly. There are a couple of other ways to change LRM's that will have big impact.

• Make omni pod LRM's only have 5 launchers. This will severely reduce their impact.
  
• PREVENT clan LRM's from maintaining lock indirectly. If they are direct fire only, their impact on the game will be far less
  
• Limit ammo per ton

• UAC's : make them multiple projectiles, there is no other way to balance them. This is frankly long overdue.

As for the other stuff:

• I like the omni model. Very elegant way of doing it. There WILL probably be an optimal setup, but then again that would be with pure omni slots too.
  
• Limited armor is a good balance, although some mechs will be DOA. Perhaps instead you should allow VERY limited changes +/-20% ish.
  
• Almost all Clan omnimechs already have DHS/FF/ES by default. I am ok with making these static, but what if the arm of one config has different # of FF or ES slots than another, you may break some stuff. Not sure if that is a real issue though

Lastly, even with all of this you WILL need tonnage differential. It just has to happen.

[Void Angel]

I do fear that an inability to change armor tonnage (on bigger 'mechs) and engine rating (on lights) will create issues with balance on the battlefield and hair loss in the Mechlab trying to avoid leftover tonnage without just bringing excessive ammunition. A light 'mech that's too slow is going to get eaten alive, and a Heavy without maxxed armor could be easy meat. I'd suggest as an alternative a much smaller range of acceptable Engine Ratings and perhaps a proportional limitation on increasing (or decreasing) tonnages.

But since this is all very preliminary, I'm just going to give that meaningful feedback and forego incandescent rage and childish tantrums. =)

[Void Angel]

Mead, on 14 December 2013 - 05:35 PM, said:

It's pretty clear you have no idea how BV works or how long it's been proven by actual gameplay, so how about let the adults have the conversation and you can sit there and maybe learn something.


For a change.

Actual MWO gameplay? Your self-serving and arrogant assumption that I'm not able to understand how a point-based teambuilding system works aside, your assertion that BV has been "proven" to work in MWO because it's been used in tabletop is, well, infantile. As you are apparently immune to reason as well as irony, you have lost your privileges to speak to me. Goodbye. May you someday learn to think with your mind rather than your ego.
/unfollow
/ignore.

[DocBach]

Sprouticus, on 14 December 2013 - 05:38 PM, said:

• PREVENT clan LRM's from maintaining lock indirectly. If they are direct fire only, their impact on the game will be

I like this one a lot - since Clans don't like sharing kills and all, things like spotting for indirect fire would be "dishonorable."

[Sprouticus]

One additional thought.

They CAN implement some form of Zell by changing how XP/CB are awarded. Give less for assists, more CB for salvage, etc. That WILL impact how people play clanners/

[DocBach]

Sprouticus, on 14 December 2013 - 05:45 PM, said:

One additional thought.

They CAN implement some form of Zell by changing how XP/CB are awarded. Give less for assists, more CB for salvage, etc. That WILL impact how people play clanners/

Perhaps even penalties for damaging targets other team members are engaging, almost like if you TK'd.

[Jack Gallows]

Just sayin'

[Mead]

Void Angel, on 14 December 2013 - 05:42 PM, said:

Actual MWO gameplay? Your self-serving and arrogant assumption that I'm not able to understand how a point-based teambuilding system works aside, your assertion that BV has been "proven" to work in MWO because it's been used in tabletop is, well, infantile. As you are apparently immune to reason as well as irony, you have lost your privileges to speak to me. Goodbye. May you someday learn to think with your mind rather than your ego.
/unfollow
/ignore.

So the 'avoiding childish tantrums' lasted about two posts. Gotcha.

Just remember, you started it. If you can't handle insults, don't hand them out.

[Scratx]

Jack Gallows, on 14 December 2013 - 05:47 PM, said:

Just sayin'

Irrelevant to this thread and I'm actually kind of getting tired of seeing this. I'm pretty sure somebody already posted this earlier, too. Maybe even.... OH, first page! http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__2991066

Point's been made before.

[Tastian]

Will Clan and Innersphere tech be swappable on the mech chassis?

[shellashock]

Edweird, on 14 December 2013 - 04:32 PM, said:

Looks good to me.

Pretty much exactly what I expected them to do for the Clans. I simply can't agree with people citing various "rules" as reason to not accept any of these design ideas. BattleTech clan "rules" were never designed to make a direct interaction online game make sense.

Call me crazy but if they intend to keep Ghost Heat / Heat Scale as a measure of Clan balance, I'm really not that convinced that it was ever a bandaid.

Also, I hope they're compensating Alex Iglesias more than sufficiently for this artwork...
Those things couldn't possibly look better.

To me, the only reason why they would ever put in such a controversial system was for use in balancing the clans. It actually kind of fits if you think about it. If I am not mistaken, there are plenty of Clan boats that would utterly dominate if they were released exactly as they are in TT. The weapons weren't so much the problem as was the ability to fire them all at the same time. So ghost heat comes in to help limit and discourage those boats from alphaing while still allowing the boats to have all their weaponry.

This is just my opinion on it and I really don't know if this is correct, but it certainly seems that way to me.

[Aim64C]

Scratx, on 14 December 2013 - 05:36 PM, said:

Actually, the Dire Wolf doesn't even use Endosteel or Ferro-fibrous. It has 41 free criticals and 50.5 tons of pod-space. Yes, I can put in 3 gauss and still have enough room for ammunition and some energy weapons for those 15 built-in DHS to get cranking.

Now, whether I can actually find a side torso with a ballistic hardpoint is what will determine whether I can fit in that many gauss rifles...

Edit : Well, the B variant has 2x UAC2's per side torso, so that's settled!

You... don't understand, do you?

Where do you think those Heat Sinks are going to be placed?

That's right. In the way of your idea that you're going to move hard points around and have enough critical space -in that section- to install the component you'd most want.

Now, there aren't enough DHS floating around to keep you from that, alone... but PGI also stated that some weapons would be fixed per the standard build of the 'mech (and if they are going to alter weapon tonnages on LRMs - then they will more than consider the option of making medium lasers, or something, fixed so as to prevent you from getting them out of the way for a Gauss, AC20, whatever).

If they didn't release an IS version of an assault with the ability to mount 2 AC20s - why, pray tell, do you think they will allow the Clans to mount two Clan Ultra AC20s on a Clan assault?

You can't claim that the reason they have yet to do this is purely by accident.

[Riptor]

DocBach, on 14 December 2013 - 05:46 PM, said:

Perhaps even penalties for damaging targets other team members are engaging, almost like if you TK'd.

DocBach, on 14 December 2013 - 05:46 PM, said:

Perhaps even penalties for damaging targets other team members are engaging, almost like if you TK'd.

To bad that the clan rules also state that if a target that is engaged with another clanner also shoots you its a free for all.

Zellbriggen is a silly idea to begin with that only benefits the clans, the IS has absolutely no reason to engage in zellbriggen with clan mechs.

and guess what:

EVERYONE CAN BUY CLAN MECHS EVEN THE IS!

Do you people have any friggin idea what that means?

MIXED IS AND CLAN DROPS

Let this run through your heads.. we will have 12 mans consisting of both IS and clan mechs unless they implement a special que only for clan mechs and forbid you to drop aslong as your team doesnt consists entirely out of IS or clan mechs.

THESE CLAN MECHS ARE NOT TIED TO BEING A CLANNER!

[Marmon Rzohr]

PLEASE do not make armor amounts and distributions fixed. You must be aware that stock armor values are often so awful it's ridiculous....

Think about what can be seen from the game as it is now. No mech is overpowered because of it's armor distribution or amount. Mechs that are most powerful are the biggest with the acceptable hardpoints and JJs. Hitboxes are also a factor.

Limiting the armor amount customization will simply make some Omnimechs unusable.

[Perilthecat]

I am always amused and appalled by the amount of vitriol that comes out whenever "feedback" is requested. Seriously. What ever happened to acting like an adult? When did throwing tantrums about broken promises become effective?

Aaaaaanyways...

The changes seem pretty reasonable overall. I always expected that you'd have to go offroad to get Clan mechs out the door without breaking the game. The modular hardpoint system is fairly clever, and should keep people from just resorting to min/max boats (4 Gauss, 6 AC/5, or whatever).

I'm not up to speed on BT Lore regarding the (lack of) swap-ability of engines and armor, etc. It feels like the IS mechs actually have an advantage here, and it seems perfectly reasonable that Clan mechs would enjoy the same customization options as IS given time in a factory. It kinda takes the "omni" feel out of the omnimechs. I'm hoping that some of those restrictions disappear before the packages are injected in June.

Another poster pointed out that an advantage of omnimechs is that modules were hot-swappable in the field. Having a repair bay in-match probably wouldn't work, but perhaps restrictions could be placed on IS designs? If you want to customize your Atlas, you are forced to wait several matches until the modifications are complete. Kinda like in Mechwarrior 4 Mercs, where you had to wait a few missions while your damaged mechs were repaired. Just a thought.

That said, I'm sure these are already a bear to implement even without the outcry of rigid, poorly adaptable fanboys. Clan tech needs to deviate from canon if it is going to find a place in this game, it's best to just accept that. I sure wouldn't want to be the one having to tackle this grenade of a project, but I will gladly run around in the mechs.

Speaking of which, I bought the complete package within 2 minutes of seeing it on the front page. And I felt troubled by my actions as I parted with such a large sum of money. It feels like a worse deal than the Phoenix/Sabre packages. In terms of number of mechs and their accoutrements there seems to be a premium applied. It feels like they are taking advantage of the unavoidable reality that clanners will mostly pay whatever it takes no questions asked. I know I did. Luckily I'm not so beyond reason that I would pay $500 for a gold texture map on a mech I'll be able to get for free eventually. There is something unsettling about that kind of money-grab. I get the whole "we're a business" thing, but I can't imagine how many helpless people are going to run themselves broke on shiny pixels. Some people have the disposable income and they won't blink an eye. But there are a ton of people out there who are semi or fully addicted to MW and dangling this kind of thing in front of them is like dangling rocks in front of a crack head. It'll have a cost on people's lives, regardless of the "no one forced them" excuse. Just my opinion.

Not to mention that anyone riding in a gold plated mech is guaranteed to be the subject of mass ridicule.

[Void Angel]

Sprouticus, on 14 December 2013 - 05:45 PM, said:

One additional thought.

They CAN implement some form of Zell by changing how XP/CB are awarded. Give less for assists, more CB for salvage, etc. That WILL impact how people play clanners/

An interesting idea - but it won't work in competitive play. =(

[Redlor Fidelious]

Void Angel, on 14 December 2013 - 05:38 PM, said:

I do fear that an inability to change armor tonnage (on bigger 'mechs) and engine rating (on lights) will create issues with balance on the battlefield and hair loss in the Mechlab trying to avoid leftover tonnage without just bringing excessive ammunition.

There is almost always left-over tonnage. Filling out empty tonnage with ammunition is a good way to die from ammo explosions. It would be like filling the trunk of your car with gas cans just to fill up all that empty space.

[Riptor]

Void Angel, on 14 December 2013 - 05:57 PM, said:

An interesting idea - but it won't work in competitive play. =(

It wont work in normal play either. Also how do you want to enforce Zellbrigen with IS player owned clan mechs?

You guys have to finaly abadon the notion that clan mechs are also clan exclusive... they are not.

[Sprouticus]

Wraithguard, on 14 December 2013 - 05:36 PM, said:

Considering a lot of the clans used physical shielding or hood shielding on most of their weapons, why not allow for the noticeably higher damage on weapons, coupled with the moderate heat increase. Then, rather than increased spread over time, and allow the weapons to be more easily damaged by either a reduction of weapon hitpoints... or increase chance of disabling a weapon when the housing body part is hit.

I mean, clan mechs didn't have hardwired hardpoints, they were more hastily built/lower armor for the ability to produce them rapidly and for the modular ability of the omnimechs.

I like the reduce iHP. TAC's (which is what it would be if you allowed for hitting weapons directly) are not a goo idea IMO.

[Scratx]

Aim64C, on 14 December 2013 - 05:53 PM, said:

You... don't understand, do you?

Where do you think those Heat Sinks are going to be placed?

That's right. In the way of your idea that you're going to move hard points around and have enough critical space -in that section- to install the component you'd most want.

Now, there aren't enough DHS floating around to keep you from that, alone... but PGI also stated that some weapons would be fixed per the standard build of the 'mech (and if they are going to alter weapon tonnages on LRMs - then they will more than consider the option of making medium lasers, or something, fixed so as to prevent you from getting them out of the way for a Gauss, AC20, whatever).

If they didn't release an IS version of an assault with the ability to mount 2 AC20s - why, pray tell, do you think they will allow the Clans to mount two Clan Ultra AC20s on a Clan assault?

You can't claim that the reason they have yet to do this is purely by accident.

Some clan mechs actually have some weapons hardwired, so you're being a mite paranoid there and assuming the worst possible scenario. And since you latched on the Dire Wolf... without drastically changing the base chassis, no, they can't prevent dual UAC20, period, if they provide any side torso with ballistic hardpoints.

The easy solution for them is simply not provide those.

I don't think they'll be able to prevent us from having dual UAC20's, period. They'll have to actually do something to balance the damn thing so it doesn't brutally murder everything in 3 seconds, like, oh, a jenner.