79 replies to this topic

[Sym]

This balancing of Clan tech is garbage. Sorry just had to say that.

I just can not understand what is wrong with using BT universe rules. Nerfing weapons that were suppose to be BETTER is not the answer. I just dont agree with the direction that this game has gone which is why I got a refund from "Project Phoenix" and will not support the game with my money.
The simple fix to everything is set a BV (Battle Valve) to every item in the game just like in Battletech.
If you build a "Custom" mech, the mech lab would calculate a new BV for that mech.
In the BT universe the Clan mechs had a least 50% more BV than a Inner Sphere mech of the same tonnage.
So the Match Maker would build teams via BV so that you could use Clan tech as it was MEANT to be played but with the restrictions you are trying to achive.

So basicly in a 12 vs 12 game, if you had 12 Inner Sphere mechs of a set BV, you may only have 6-7 Clan mechs of the same BV.

[Joseph Mallan]

I agree Clanners need to have their edge, They were fearsome, they scared the average warrior so much many ran at the sight of them. That is the enemy I am here to fight,

BV is a mathematical formula that can be leaned and game, Plus how do we factor in the Pilots skill into the BV? There is a huge difference between Me in a Jenner and PEEFSmash.

[AlmightyAeng]

I could see them assigning a battlevalue to individuals chassis...but leave the configurations up to the individual.

I also find it amusing that so many people seem to be complaining about how they're "balancing" omnimechs.

"You can't mess with armor?!?! DOA!"
"Can't remove stuff that's on the base chassis...come on that's what makes Omnimechs OMNI!"

So...for kicks and giggles I went to Sarna.net and looked up "omni-mech." It cites the Techmanual.

"An OmniMech's structural components (its engine, internal structure, armor and any equipment installed on the base chassis of OmniMech) are "hard-wired" and cannot be modified outside of a total redesign of the 'Mech.^[26] While customization of these components is theoretically possible in the field, it is avoided as it hard-wires all the 'Mechs components and effectively transforms the OmniMech into a standard BattleMech."

Oh look, PGI is sticking precisely to lore on this one.

Edited by Ghost Badger, 19 December 2013 - 08:45 AM.

[Varent]

Joseph Mallan, on 19 December 2013 - 08:38 AM, said:

how do we factor in the Pilots skill into the BV?

This is the primary reason why you cannot use battle value.

Battle tech was a board game and designed with no pilot value in mind whatsoever. In addition to that the creators of battle tech came out later and admited they created an unbalanced system as well. (keep that in mind)

Putting a player in a mech with better weapons is going to give them an exponential advantage that cannot be quantified properly in this game.

As in any shooter there is always going to be players who are amazing crack shots and dedicate themselves to the game. Have enough on one team and it will be a tidal wave of overwhelming. Even if you try to balance it to something like 6 on 12 you will then have players of extreme sub-par value who will then get swamped by sheer numbers.

Trying to give one group a true tech advantage would be the worst thing this game could possibly do. Frankly when they said they were going to give the clans there own flavor but NOT make them overpowering, that was the moment I realized this game might actually survive. I was fully predicting it to die with the release of the clans if they released it on true battle value from battletech.

[Joseph Mallan]

Varent, on 19 December 2013 - 08:46 AM, said:

This is the primary reason why you cannot use battle value.

Battle tech was a board game and designed with no pilot value in mind whatsoever. In addition to that the creators of battle tech came out later and admited they created an unbalanced system as well. (keep that in mind)

Putting a player in a mech with better weapons is going to give them an exponential advantage that cannot be quantified properly in this game.

As in any shooter there is always going to be players who are amazing crack shots and dedicate themselves to the game. Have enough on one team and it will be a tidal wave of overwhelming. Even if you try to balance it to something like 6 on 12 you will then have players of extreme sub-par value who will then get swamped by sheer numbers.

Trying to give one group a true tech advantage would be the worst thing this game could possibly do. Frankly when they said they were going to give the clans there own flavor but NOT make them overpowering, that was the moment I realized this game might actually survive. I was fully predicting it to die with the release of the clans if they released it on true battle value from battletech.

The difference between you and I is, I was looking forward to it.I was looking forward t seeing if I could upset the canon like myself and my players have done over the last 20+ years.

[Malzel]

MWO is an alternate universe reboot of the BT franchise. In this universe, the Clans are not unstoppable monsters, and the IS has a real shot at holding off the clan invasions. (Otherwise they wouldn't have made the FRR a playable faction.)

Thus, a "separate but equal" doctrine is precisely what needs to happen, and there is no "simple" answer. Any balancing is going to have to be comprehensive and far-reaching because of how superior the Clans were. Old school BT fans may not like that, but they need to stop expecting MWO to be "Battletech Table Top: The Video Game".

[Joseph Mallan]

Malzel, on 19 December 2013 - 08:57 AM, said:

MWO is an alternate universe reboot of the BT franchise. In this universe, the Clans are not unstoppable monsters, and the IS has a real shot at holding off the clan invasions. (Otherwise they wouldn't have made the FRR a playable faction.)

Thus, a "separate but equal" doctrine is precisely what needs to happen, and there is no "simple" answer. Any balancing is going to have to be comprehensive and far-reaching because of how superior the Clans were. Old school BT fans may not like that, but they need to stop expecting MWO to be "Battletech Table Top: The Video Game".

I may need to go be sick then. The spine has gone out of gamers I see.

[Hillslam]

I hear what you're saying Joseph. And I too like a challenge.

But Battletech <> MWO


Battletech had no concept of the pilot. The paying players were hovering over the battlefield often moving several mechs under their control. So if one player had 6 uber pieces vs the other player having 12 inferior pieces, no big deal.

In MWO each unit is a paying and playing person. If you balance at the "sky hovering" level then you in fact do not balance it for one entire group of paying and playing people.

I for one am not interested in running out with 12 other IS pilot grunts to go up against 4 supermechs.
1 - my tallies will suck
2 - winning will almost always involve death sacrificing of someone
3 - cbill revenue will be lower (without refactoring)
4 - damage based XP results will be lower (without refactoring)

Fighting off swarms of inferior enemies and feeling like a superman is a prime ingredient in almost all videogames. Even if you die you feel like a hero.
Works great for PvE

But VERY FEW people want to be the inferior junk-driving chump in PvP. I'll die to a tough AI Boss. I'm not paying money to go up and lose to some mouth breathing fat gloat nerd in Utah who's only reason for winning is uber tech.

"Hey guys - we're going to fight the Dragon Corp in a skirmish. We need a bunch of you to come in and die easily so we have a chance of winning".....*crickets*

Edited by Hillslam, 19 December 2013 - 09:18 AM.

[Varent]

Malzel, on 19 December 2013 - 08:57 AM, said:

MWO is an alternate universe reboot of the BT franchise. In this universe, the Clans are not unstoppable monsters, and the IS has a real shot at holding off the clan invasions. (Otherwise they wouldn't have made the FRR a playable faction.)

Thus, a "separate but equal" doctrine is precisely what needs to happen, and there is no "simple" answer. Any balancing is going to have to be comprehensive and far-reaching because of how superior the Clans were. Old school BT fans may not like that, but they need to stop expecting MWO to be "Battletech Table Top: The Video Game".

I couldnt have said it better myself.

I am a hardcore battletech fan, grew up on it, lived it, loved it. Its time to set that down and move on. It was a system that was based on a board game. There is a reason clan tech was always overwhelming in EVERY SINGLE video game that came out with it. Its nice they are finally realizing this and trying to balance it for a true modern shooter.

That said, to all those hardcore battletech fans. If your a true fan, realize the context and story is what makes the game. Weapon systems are just balancing and mechanics. If your playing the game for overpowered technology then your playing for the wrong reasons.

Hillslam, on 19 December 2013 - 09:09 AM, said:

I hear what you're saying Joseph. And I too like a challenge.

But MWO!=Battletech.


Battletech had no concept of the pilot. The paying players were hovering over the battlefield often moving several mechs under their control. So if one player had 6 uber pieces vs the other player having 12 inferior pieces, no big deal.

In MWO each unit is a paying and playing person. If you balance at the "sky hovering" level then you in fact do not balance it for one entire group of paying and playing people.

I for one am not interested in running out with 12 other IS pilot grunts to go up against 4 supermechs.
1 - my tallies will suck
2 - winning will almost always involve death sacrificing of someone
3 - cbill revenue will be lower (without refactoring)
4 - damage based XP results will be lower (without refactoring)

Fighting off swarms of inferior enemies and feeling like a superman is a prime ingredient in almost all videogames.
Works great for PvE

But VERY FEW people want to be the inferior junk-driving chump in PvP.

"Hey guys - we're going to fight the Dragon Corp in a skirmish. We need a bunch of you to come in and die easily so we have a chance of winning".....*crickets*

*claps*

[Imperius]

Only works in single player. The majority will always choose the path of least resistance. The game could never be successful for the if designed for the minority.

[Malzel]

Joseph Mallan, on 19 December 2013 - 09:06 AM, said:

I may need to go be sick then. The spine has gone out of gamers I see.

I like you, Joseph, and I usually agree with a lot of things you say, but I think you're a niche gamer. You're someone who's played in the BT universe since it was new, and you're here just for the thrill and the nostalgia. You run "balanced" builds, and you put ammo in dangerous locations because that's "part of the risk", and you're okay with things like UAC/20s because they're "supposed to be scary". I respect all of that, and I'm glad someone has fun playing sub-optimally.

But most people don't play like you do. Most people don't have your "Life's unfair, deal with it" attitude. It's not that we lack a spine or fear a challenge, it's that we come to play a game, and we expect that game to be "fair" on all sides so that if we are more "skilled", we will win. If I am more skilled, but I lose to a less skilled opponent because his side's weapons are just better, then the game is not competitive. That's frustrating and pointless for us, because we're not here to re-live our old BT days like you are. So again, while I appreciate your candor and willingness to play for an "inferior" side in the spirit of BT lore, that will discourage anyone who is not an original BT fan from playing this game, and that will ultimately cause the game to fail.

Edited by Malzel, 19 December 2013 - 09:37 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Hillslam, on 19 December 2013 - 09:09 AM, said:

I hear what you're saying Joseph. And I too like a challenge.

But Battletech <> MWO


Battletech had no concept of the pilot. The paying players were hovering over the battlefield often moving several mechs under their control. So if one player had 6 uber pieces vs the other player having 12 inferior pieces, no big deal.

In MWO each unit is a paying and playing person. If you balance at the "sky hovering" level then you in fact do not balance it for one entire group of paying and playing people.

I for one am not interested in running out with 12 other IS pilot grunts to go up against 4 supermechs.
1 - my tallies will suck
2 - winning will almost always involve death sacrificing of someone
3 - cbill revenue will be lower (without refactoring)
4 - damage based XP results will be lower (without refactoring)

Fighting off swarms of inferior enemies and feeling like a superman is a prime ingredient in almost all videogames. Even if you die you feel like a hero.
Works great for PvE

But VERY FEW people want to be the inferior junk-driving chump in PvP. I'll die to a tough AI Boss. I'm not paying money to go up and lose to some mouth breathing fat gloat nerd in Utah who's only reason for winning is uber tech.

"Hey guys - we're going to fight the Dragon Corp in a skirmish. We need a bunch of you to come in and die easily so we have a chance of winning".....*crickets*

1. i don't sweat scoreboards
2. I proudly volunteer to die for the better good of my team!
3. We are fighting for the survival of our House. Money is no object r important at my level.
4. Again a sacrifice worth making... I have lots of XP stored on multiple chassis.

Depends on what you call Junk. Spiders, Dragons & Kintaros were Junk in my circles. As were Quickdraws and Jagers! Don't even get me started on Cicadas! We only have a meager few 'Mechs that are not TT Scrap 'Mechs.

[Joseph Mallan]

Malzel, on 19 December 2013 - 09:27 AM, said:

It's not a lack of spine or fear of challenge, I think I'm just younger than you are and have played competitive, multiplayer games my whole life, so I value balance more. If a game is not balanced, players either gravitate to the overpowered options, or they leave the game in frustration, and we don't want either of those to happen.

I like you, Joseph, and I usually agree with a lot of things you say, but I think you're a niche gamer. You're someone who's played in the BT universe since it was new, and you're here just for the thrill and the nostalgia. You run "balanced" builds, and you put ammo in dangerous locations because that's "part of the risk", and you're okay with things like UAC/20s because they're "supposed to be scary". I respect all of that, and I'm glad someone has fun playing sub-optimally.

But most people don't play like you do. Most people don't have your "Life's unfair, deal with it" attitude. We come to play a game, and we expect that game to be "fair" on all sides so that if we are more "skilled", we will win. If I am more skilled, but I lose to a less skilled opponent because his side's weapons are just better, then the game is not competitive, and that's frustrating and pointless for us, because we're not here to re-live our old BT days like you are. So again, while I appreciate your candor and willingness to be inferior in the spirit of BT lore, that will discourage anyone who is not an original BT fan from playing this game, and that will ultimately cause the game to fail.

This is my first Competitive Multiplay game, So reevaluate please where you think I am coming from.

My attitude isn't "Life's unfair, deal with it"

My Attitude is "Life's unfair, kick it in the teeth till it knows you are here for the long haul!

I was at best a average wrestler in Middle School, But I took my losses with a grain of salt every day. Then One day I slammed the State-class wrestler to the mat. Then I did the same with his friend (also a state-class wrestler). Same thing for playing Baseball. I never gave up cause I stunk. In Martial art classes I actively sought the better fighters got my but kicked hundreds of times. Never quit. Now I can hold my own against low/ mid level black belts as a green belt!

Folks around here think they are competitive, I live competitive in everything I do. Doesn't matter if I am not the best, I will give you everything I got, and come back for more. You may beat me but you won't break me.

Weapons make a difference and how you use them even more. Every Meta build I have learned how to beat. depending on the pilot I win win or lose. That is how it should be. I don't roll over and expect the game to Always be fair. I expect it to kick my but as much as I kick its.

The game and franchise has been around for 30ish years... Seems that it doesn't die t my eyes.

Dumbing down the game will not make it better, just more profitable. So if you want profit keep trying to make the fair and balanced. I'll keep looking for the OP Meta to overcome.

You don't need MOST people to play like me. You only need enough of us.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 19 December 2013 - 09:52 AM.

[Sandpit]

The only way to accomplish this is to do what many online games have resorted to. Have a separate hardcore mode.

[Joseph Mallan]

Sandpit, on 19 December 2013 - 10:02 AM, said:

The only way to accomplish this is to do what many online games have resorted to. Have a separate hardcore mode.

That could work!

[dario03]

Joseph Mallan, on 19 December 2013 - 09:51 AM, said:

Dumbing down the game will not make it better, just more profitable. So if you want profit keep trying to make the fair and balanced. I'll keep looking for the OP Meta to overcome.

You don't need MOST people to play like me. You only need enough of us.

With the OP's suggestion you probably would need MOST people to play like you. His suggestion would require there to be 2x as many people playing IS as Clan but we would probably end up with the opposite. So we would have to have a bunch of clan vs clan matches or do something to force players to play IS. But forcing people to play IS probably wouldn't go over to well even if its only a sometimes thing.

[Tombstoner]

dario03, on 19 December 2013 - 10:15 AM, said:

With the OP's suggestion you probably would need MOST people to play like you. His suggestion would require there to be 2x as many people playing IS as Clan but we would probably end up with the opposite. So we would have to have a bunch of clan vs clan matches or do something to force players to play IS. But forcing people to play IS probably wouldn't go over to well even if its only a sometimes thing.

I'll do it. I'll play IS against full clan tech only if i get 200% more xp and creds. seriously my life expectancy against is 50% less then it is now or about 2 minutes 18 seconds. from first contact with clan scouts...

Unmodified clan tech is OP and using 12 on 5 will lead to long clan que times.

[Sandpit]

Joseph Mallan, on 19 December 2013 - 10:10 AM, said:

That could work!

I think it could work as well as long as the player base is big enough to support this. My clan on CoD plays hardcore only because we get tired of pumping an entire clip into someone and watching them shoot us in the face.

[Joseph Mallan]

dario03, on 19 December 2013 - 10:15 AM, said:

With the OP's suggestion you probably would need MOST people to play like you. His suggestion would require there to be 2x as many people playing IS as Clan but we would probably end up with the opposite. So we would have to have a bunch of clan vs clan matches or do something to force players to play IS. But forcing people to play IS probably wouldn't go over to well even if its only a sometimes thing.

Better to have a few dedicated players than slave labor.

[Almond Brown]

Question:

What weighs 1/2?
What has 1/3 less Heat?
What shoots 40% farther?

Answer:

Clan Tech (not the actual values but the point stands)

Given what we have now, and the current Meta, how in the hell is one supposed to get close enough, while starting from farther away, to apply sufficient damage to deter an enemy with superior Tech? Even if you have 25% more Mechs.