79 replies to this topic

[Joseph Mallan]

dario03, on 19 December 2013 - 11:52 AM, said:

Some people prefer games to be balanced so that skill is what decides the winner. Not who brought the better stuff.

Part of the skill is bringing the right stuff to begin with! And if you didn't, making the best of a bad situation.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 19 December 2013 - 11:56 AM.

[Daneiel]

Varent, on 19 December 2013 - 11:47 AM, said:

battletech generation here, Still care about it being a well balanced shooter.

Battletech never ment to be "shooter " , Mechwarrior was created to give you battlemech simulation game experience

Edited by daneiel varna, 19 December 2013 - 12:00 PM.

[dario03]

Joseph Mallan, on 19 December 2013 - 11:55 AM, said:

Part of the skill is bringing the right stuff to begin with! And if you didn't, making the best of a bad situation.

And the right stuff is the clan stuff Which is why the majority of people would bring it.

Edited by dario03, 19 December 2013 - 12:01 PM.

[Almond Brown]

Joseph Mallan, on 19 December 2013 - 11:54 AM, said:

First, players would need to learn TACTICs, Then about Over lapping fields of fire, the proper application of Suppressive fire. I was on a series of losses with my alt Anton Last night. What I was was more coordinated teams kicking the {Scrap} out of my teams! It was actually beautiful to watch a real team cut the the chaff that was my teams!

Agreed. A thing of beauty to watch. Then provide that well coordinated Team even better Tech, and send them out. Do you really think many would like to continue to watch that beautiful thing after 45 lose in a row, and not ever even seeing an inkling for a Win for themselves?

Game over Joesph, game over. MW4 proved that... The unmodified Clan Tech would run ruff shod over everything for a while and then if you're not running Clan gear, and really prefer IS, player move on. Ten years we have waited. To allow that same scenario to happen again, just because a few want a challenge, well let's have a Poll and see what the word on the street is perhaps.

[Joseph Mallan]

Varent, on 19 December 2013 - 11:54 AM, said:

none of those games are shooters... this one is... MAJOR MAJOR MAJOR difference.

At the end of everything you need to realize that and understand the types of people that play shooters as well. This is geared towards them.

Honestly it sounds what your looking for is a roleplay, not a shooter or simulation. Which is fine and I approve highly, in fact my guild does this quite abit... that said, your not gonna find that here.

Then the shooter crowd may need to step on to the next Call of Duty. This is MechWarrior not BlackOps. There is a huge amount of canon in this IP, You are in our game, not the other way around.

If I was looking for an RP, I'd be typing with a German accent, and discussing the weather on Arc Royal. Not game mechanics and how tough I want my fighting to be.

dario03, on 19 December 2013 - 12:01 PM, said:

And the right stuff is the clan stuff Which is why the majority of people would bring it.

I beat Clans for a decade with Inner Sphere Tech. I wanna see if I can continue that streak.

[Joseph Mallan]

Almond Brown, on 19 December 2013 - 12:01 PM, said:

Agreed. A thing of beauty to watch. Then provide that well coordinated Team even better Tech, and send them out. Do you really think many would like to continue to watch that beautiful thing after 45 lose in a row, and not ever even seeing an inkling for a Win for themselves?

Game over Joesph, game over. MW4 proved that... The unmodified Clan Tech would run ruff shod over everything for a while and then if you're not running Clan gear, and really prefer IS, player move on. Ten years we have waited. To allow that same scenario to happen again, just because a few want a challenge, well let's have a Poll and see what the word on the street is perhaps.

Oh I know I'd lose the Poll, but that is just part of my never say die attitude. I won't give up. not till I win or the game dies cause I was wrong!

[dario03]

Joseph Mallan, on 19 December 2013 - 12:05 PM, said:

Then the shooter crowd may need to step on to the next Call of Duty. This is MechWarrior not BlackOps. There is a huge amount of canon in this IP, You are in our game, not the other way around.

If I was looking for an RP, I'd be typing with a German accent, and discussing the weather on Arc Royal. Not game mechanics and how tough I want my fighting to be.


I beat Clans for a decade with Inner Sphere Tech. I wanna see if I can continue that streak.

Thats nice but the game isn't made for just you. And hey I don't mind fighting odds, I used to set up MW4 wave mode and see how far I could get and I like playing Street Fighter 4 as Dan (literally a joke character). If this was PVE and you came on here and said hey who wants to go try the current end game mission of 2 lances of IS mechs vs 3 stars of clan mechs I would join you. But that isn't what the game is. Its a pvp game and they are trying to make it appeal to more people by balancing the clans (or at least trying to)

[Joseph Mallan]

And thats why I am sad.

[Varent]

daneiel varna, on 19 December 2013 - 11:58 AM, said:

Battletech never ment to be "shooter " , Mechwarrior was created to give you battlemech simulation game experience

and it was also not designed to be multiplayer... this is, its taking it a completely different way and with that in mind its not logical to expect something based on table top to be implimented exactly in a shooter environment.

[WarHippy]

Ghost Badger, on 19 December 2013 - 08:44 AM, said:

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.

So they are sort of sticking with lore for OmniMechs, but not for Battlemechs maybe we need to stop playing favorites and balance both the same way. The question is are you prepared to give up your endo-steel, double heatsinks, and most other mods on your IS mechs?

[Sandpit]

Joseph Mallan, on 19 December 2013 - 11:55 AM, said:

Part of the skill is bringing the right stuff to begin with! And if you didn't, making the best of a bad situation.

Most aren't going to understand this though. I thinkt here IS a generational gap in this game but not just age-based. We literally have 3 separate communities here. We have the:

1.) CoD twitchy shoot you in the face crowd that uses a modicum of strategy but aren't war-gamers and such don't understand how to apply a deeper level of tactics

2.) War gamers/ Btech tabletop vets. They understand how to take that Locust and send the uninitiated pilot rolling around in an Atlas into fits but don't have the "skills" of that CoD crowd when it comes to those twitchy reflexes.

3.) The "new" generation of gamers that think strategy is loading up as many of the biggest weapons they can and clicking that mouse button as fast as they can to pour out as much damage as they can regardless of taking out strategic targets. (These gamers are usually the ones complaining about "kill stealing" and such)

PGI hasn't shown to acknowledge that we really have three diverse groups at play here even though all 3 must coexist in the same gaming environment. That's one of the main reasons I don't feel we'll ever get a "perfect" balance. What one group calls balance the other group calls OP, while the third group calls nerf

[Varent]

Joseph Mallan, on 19 December 2013 - 12:05 PM, said:

Then the shooter crowd may need to step on to the next Call of Duty. This is MechWarrior not BlackOps. There is a huge amount of canon in this IP, You are in our game, not the other way around.

I beg to differ on many levels. http://mwsentinels.e...ewforum/3393075

THis is alternate canon based off of canon, storywriting, etc. In addition MWO has evolved into a thinking mans shooter, slower paced, similiar to world of tanks, where as call of duty etc is all quick paced twitch shooting.

I assure you im very much in the battletech crowd. I read sarna, I follow it, I enjoy it. Ive read every battletech book in existence.

That Said I approve of this game being a shooter because I can get my fix of lore and roleplay in other formats. There are plenty or table tops and other simulation style games that allow for other such context, roleplay groups, and forums.

[AlmightyAeng]

WarHippy, on 19 December 2013 - 12:21 PM, said:

So they are sort of sticking with lore for OmniMechs, but not for Battlemechs maybe we need to stop playing favorites and balance both the same way. The question is are you prepared to give up your endo-steel, double heatsinks, and most other mods on your IS mechs?

Sure. If PGI really coded it, I'd deal with it. It'd be amusing to watch so many builds that currently ride the line on heat viability torpedo into the ground and listen to the whine-fest.

And then 90% of everyone would be in clan 'mechs, and this game would look even more like an updated version of MW4. *shrug*

Or, if they really wanna screw with lore to try and make it a balanced experience, also fine. At least they're doing something original with the IP.

Either way, I'm gonna get my stompy robot fix, crack a beer, and drop with my unit.

Edited by Ghost Badger, 19 December 2013 - 12:28 PM.

[Varent]

Sandpit, on 19 December 2013 - 12:22 PM, said:

Most aren't going to understand this though. I thinkt here IS a generational gap in this game but not just age-based. We literally have 3 separate communities here. We have the:

1.) CoD twitchy shoot you in the face crowd that uses a modicum of strategy but aren't war-gamers and such don't understand how to apply a deeper level of tactics

2.) War gamers/ Btech tabletop vets. They understand how to take that Locust and send the uninitiated pilot rolling around in an Atlas into fits but don't have the "skills" of that CoD crowd when it comes to those twitchy reflexes.

3.) The "new" generation of gamers that think strategy is loading up as many of the biggest weapons they can and clicking that mouse button as fast as they can to pour out as much damage as they can regardless of taking out strategic targets. (These gamers are usually the ones complaining about "kill stealing" and such)

PGI hasn't shown to acknowledge that we really have three diverse groups at play here even though all 3 must coexist in the same gaming environment. That's one of the main reasons I don't feel we'll ever get a "perfect" balance. What one group calls balance the other group calls OP, while the third group calls nerf

I like this... though I will say it fails to acknowledge group number four...(and is also obviously from the group number 2 standpoint)

4) The general shooter player who has played battletech since the rough start and then gone on to enjoy the other games based around it that would very much like to FINALLY see a real shooting game with multiplayer context come to life based around this genre.

and that said... I know ALOT of people like this.... in fact several members of the guild I run are like this. I believe honestly that this is the nice middle ground to take.

MWO isnt a twitch shooter, many weapon systems are too slow, and in additon it takes many shots to kill a mech.

MWO isnt a complete slow strategy based game. Its fast and intense and exciting.

MWO isnt just based around kills. Its why conquest and base capping exist, to snub its nose at people just out for damage and kills and laugh at them.

Right now MWO is taking that nice middle ground between them all which im quite happy to fall into myself. Its all about being open minded and realizing there is a little there for everyone.

[Daneiel]

Varent, on 19 December 2013 - 12:20 PM, said:

and it was also not designed to be multiplayer... this is, its taking it a completely different way and with that in mind its not logical to expect something based on table top to be implimented exactly in a shooter environment.

On the contrary it aways was in the base was competitive game , story line aways was the cherry over the icecream .To understand me right - battletech table top game - pure "multyplayer" game for two or more people , battletech pods - they were pure multyplayer game experience and the rest of the mechwarrior games even "single player" focused games aways has strong "multyplayer" option (probably exept mechwarrior 1 i don't remeber it verry well ) .

[WarHippy]

Malzel, on 19 December 2013 - 11:30 AM, said:

I think you misunderstood me, because I was trying to say, very nicely, that I can tell this is your first competitive game. I've been playing them since Halo came out in 2001, and the kind of game you wish for MWO to be would not work as a competitive game. People my age just wouldn't play it, and you need the people my age for it to succeed.

As someone who has been competitive gaming since before 2001 I'm going to side with Joseph on this. Being competitive doesn't always mean going up against your mirror, but rather it can also be a test of what you are capable of when going up against insurmountable odds. The thing is with a lot these younger "competitive" players they are not so much interested in getting better and competing so much as just wanting what is fair in their minds. Whereas Joseph and I would like to go against the best no matter how badly we are going to lose, because playing against your betters is what allows you to grow as a player while playing against your equals only reinforces bad habits and stunts your growth as a player.

[Hillslam]

Joseph Mallan, on 19 December 2013 - 12:05 PM, said:

I beat Clans for a decade with Inner Sphere Tech. I wanna see if I can continue that streak.

(And Joe I'm not picking on you personally. Its just that since you're voicing alot of what I feel also, I can see where you're coming from, so its easy to respond to)

But Joe - you were playing a tabletop game across the board from another live human person. Politeness and sportsmanship are always in play.

In your other life examples you were competing live against other people in sports competition.

Heck even in the videogames of previous generations they were overwhelmingly against PvE. Again totally different.

Today, here, in online gaming? It ain't like that.

In this - we won't be competing against honorable opponents.

They'll be overwhelmingly those mouth breathing fat jiggling gloat pigs that online gaming so perfectly breeds. They sure as {Scrap} ain't "genetically bred for war superhumans". But they're going to seek out any in-game advantage like OP equipment to fuel that illusion.

Now how's that sound?

Do I want to wipe the floor with people like that? You bet I do. But you need a system where that's possible. And a 12v6 system isnt' because even then they can come away with the "oh well I was ooutnumbered"...

Edited by Hillslam, 19 December 2013 - 01:34 PM.

[Tezcatli]

I'm glad they went this path they've chosen. Why would they make all the work they've done up till now obsolete? Because that's what will happen to IS if they went with the TT Clan specs. People will gravitate toward whatever is going to give them a better personal combat edge. And then the game will be Clanwarrior Online. There won't be enough IS pilots to fill the queues.

Even so. I get the feeling their balancing will still leave the Clans superior by a degree. I wouldn't be surprised if we do see 10vs12.

Edited by Tezcatli, 19 December 2013 - 01:39 PM.

[Varent]

I suppose all I can say is what my overall biggest fear would be if they truly impliment clans based off original specs.

"everyone will play clans".

Thats fine when you look at it from just a shooter. but if this game goes into planetary conquest there would be no reason to play inner sphere.

Vastly outnumbered, vastly outgunned.

As much as the argument would be "no because gamers would want a challenge and play inner sphere" that simply wouldnt happen... this game is flooded with shooter gamers who WILL, not might but WILL play with the biggest gun leaving even the most die hard fans out manned. even with true matchmaking making sure you would be outmanned, you simply will be outmatched by all the players leaving for the clans.

guilds will die, others wont be able to compete.

and as someone lore driven that DOES like the storyline and wants to play an inner sphere pilot, I will be left with a world that makes no sense and be outnumbered for no reason?

Why does it matter what the statistical number is on a weapon? It sounds to me like an argument rooted in simply wanting to have the biggest gun in a gun fight hidden behind a feint shroud of being someone that wants realism based off the universe.

If you want realism, keeping it balanced will actually give the game a REAL feel.

people that play the clans will for the RIGHT reasons and probly will act clan like. Because there wouldnt be a weapon advantage to atract the type you dont want. Inner sphere will play inner sphere for the same reasons.

[Daneiel]

If the clans are implemented as in the lore you will need to pass your trial before you even can think to pilot a mech and there is very litle people who are ready to make their way in the ranks in that way , but that is imposible to be implemented on the server side only - there is need a huge help from the community to be done !