64 replies to this topic

[Werewolf486 ScorpS]

So way way back in TT days things were getting boring and FASA was wondering how to get business and interest back up in BattleTech. After much thought about shiny new Baubles and a trip to the Highlands... a thought occurred "Clans!". So with pen in hand the clans were hurriedly introduced into the world of BT. Everyone started splitting alliances and calling names of Clanners and Freebirths and buying up all things they could to beat each other on the battlefield!
As time wore on the same problem existed, the player base was dwindling, interest waned and OOOh Atari happened.

What nobody seems to realize until it's to late is that the concept of the Clans in BT and MW is flawed. Forces with the advantages in weaponry and numbers on the Battlefield with superior genetically enhanced minds and bodies will always win. It was a flawed concept from FASA that everyone who has taken on MW has been FORCED to try and fix to the rage of all clanners. You have better weapons, 5 mechs in a star, 3 stars in a cluster (snicker) for a total of 15 mechs on the field versus 4 in a lance and 3 lances for 12 mechs. How is that right and how was this a good business idea? You can't give clans both better weapons and more units on the field as it breaks the game. The clans needed to be more advanced, so Ok better weapons, but instead of having 15 mechs they should have had 3 mech lances instead to limit their numbers to 9 for balance. There have been many ideas discussed by friends and myself about how to tackle this issue and so many suggestions that could work but requires a rewrite of Clan history to eliminate something.The only equalizer in the TT was the dice. In the realm of online or video games we have no dice. So to give the clans the advantages of better numbers, weapons, and tech in a game like this will certainly spell doom for it like it had done in TT (No offense to those who've soldiered on). The only way around it is to quickly remove the advantage that the clans have through stolen, adapted, or new tech similar to what MekTek had to do with MW4 to keep it interesting and even that was kinda hard to do. So expect anyone who takes on MW to have to get creative to make balance, such as new weapons for the IS that don't exist anyplace but in the game it was made for. There is no way to balance Superior weapons, Superior numbers, and Superior tech against inferior numbers, inferior weapons, and inferior tech.....DUH.

Going forward just figure on getting any MW game you can get that has IS and Clan specialized equipment in name only.

[MeiSooHaityu]

I see your point, and I know the whole "balance" thing has been pretty well debated on the forums foir a while (and will continue to rage on).

As a fan of the Mechwarrior end of the universe since Mechwarrior 2, I can not even imagine anything Battletech related without the Clans. Clans seem an intrigal part of the BT story and show how IS can unite against a common enemy, and how even the Clans themselves (even though they have a common goal), are splintered in how to achieve it.

Rushed or not, flawed or not, the Clans are critical to the BT universe for most people. They are crucial to the story and lore. Removing the clans would be like removing a limb or a vital organ, it just wouldn't work right without it.

It will cause some weird balancing issues in this game (something single player games didn't have to deal much with), but it is a necessary evil in my eyes.

Edited by MeiSooHaityu, 03 December 2013 - 09:16 AM.

[Diablobo]

While you have many good points, the superior numbers argument does not work. A star of Clan mechs would be expected to take down at least two lances, if not a company.

[Zyllos]

I am wholly fine with Clan tech not being an "advantage" over IS tech.

But, how do you fix the problems of some rules that are already built into the game and default mech layouts? Things like Clan FF and ES is going to be hard to change without breaking the default builds because they assume a certain tonnage bonus with a certain critical slot size.

EDIT: If they are willing to break the builds to get balance to happen, why are they not willing to do this for IS mechs?

Edited by Zyllos, 03 December 2013 - 09:20 AM.

[Randalf Yorgen]

Actually, historically, FASA was trying to copy WWII. THe Clans = Germany/Japan, the IS = Europe, Canada, Austrailia.

The Clans just like the AXIS advanced steadily with advanced weapons across Europe and into North Africa and throughout Asia and on to Hawaii (Pearl Harbor) and were within striking distance of both London and the US Mainland. In the old BT timeline, this would be where Comstar realized that Terra was the objective of the Clans.

Rapid retooling and redeployment of forces by the IS (Allies) led to the Battle of Tukayyid (think both Normandy AND the Battle of Midway) and the Clan Advance (Axis) was stopped and broken. The following assault and eventual Annihilation of Clan Smoke Jaguar would be the March of the Allies back across Europe and back through the Pacific Islands.

Germany and Japan had much better weapons at the start of the war but the tables had turned by the end of the war to the Allies favour.

FASA really didn't do anything wrong especially seeing as how the Grey Death Memory Core was in the original lore of the game before the Clans were introduced and one of the things you could do when RPGing Mechwarrior/BT was go out and hunt for forgotten bases and salvage lost tech when ever you could.

[Werewolf486 ScorpS]

Ah, but Randalf that would mean the IS would have Superior numbers not the clans! The last time I checked 5 mechs in a star, 4 in a lance, even if you even it up the superior tech of the clans would overwhelm the IS in a 4v4.

[topgun505]

This.

You are basing your argument that combat is between like units, but that is not how the clans operate. They try to win battles with the fewest units possible.

How does that translate here? Hard to say. Pitting 2 stars vs a company seems lopsided in the clans favor. Piting 1 star vs a company seems lopsided in the spheres favor.

There is no BV or BV2 values in MWO so can't balance by that. So you either have to fudge with clan weapons so they are not so supremely efficient compared to IS tech, or you have to fudge with clan unit numbers (as you suggested maybe 3 units per star instead of 5 and then pit 2 stars vs a company (6 vs 12) or 3 stars vs a company (9 vs 12)

Diablobo, on 03 December 2013 - 09:16 AM, said:

While you have many good points, the superior numbers argument does not work. A star of Clan mechs would be expected to take down at least two lances, if not a company.

[Tombstoner]

Randalf Yorgen, on 03 December 2013 - 09:29 AM, said:

FASA really didn't do anything wrong especially seeing as how the Grey Death Memory Core was in the original lore of the game before the Clans were introduced and one of the things you could do when RPGing Mechwarrior/BT was go out and hunt for forgotten bases and salvage lost tech when ever you could.

The use of the Grey Death Memory Core is PGI's ace in the hole for game play and balance. If only they would realize that core allows them to add in new weapons/ equipment that are viable for PGI's version of MW. Weapons like the ppc-5 or the huge laser - 16. enhanced upper arm actuators giving + 10% arm speed, or new forms of internal structure materials that allow for higher armor per location or stronger internals. things like this would lead to harder to kill mechs but make crit seeking weapons more meaningful. things that let the player really customize there mechs in small but meaning full ways just like EVE.

[Charons Little Helper]

Randalf Yorgen, on 03 December 2013 - 09:29 AM, said:

Actually, historically, FASA was trying to copy WWII. THe Clans = Germany/Japan, the IS = Europe, Canada, Austrailia.

Lol - you forgot about the US.

Well - PGI has already said that turrets are coming soon. Let clans be released at the same time as AI controlled tanks / choppers / missile trucks etc. The clans get better mechs, while IS brings along a bunch of other troops to help tip the balance. (it would even fit the fluff - clanners agree to come with X # of mechs - IS agrees - but they lied and bring other troops)

[Clydewinder]

Couldn't one just balance out clan mechs in a drop once weight limits are in by counting all Clan tonnage as tonnage +20%?

[Scratx]

Werewolf486, on 03 December 2013 - 09:33 AM, said:

Ah, but Randalf that would mean the IS would have Superior numbers not the clans! The last time I checked 5 mechs in a star, 4 in a lance, even if you even it up the superior tech of the clans would overwhelm the IS in a 4v4.

The IS does have more troops than the clans. It can also recruit and replace far faster.

Your argument is based on quicksand as it looks strictly at the size of the smallest unit in their organizational scheme. You need to look at the big picture.

The clans only got as far as they did because they exploited their tech and training advantages well. Most IS units were still stuck with 3025 grade tech and were unused to clan tactics. You'll notice that Tukkayyid was a disaster for most clans because ComGuards took what was learned and turned it against the Clans, in conjunction with having royal-grade gear. (in fact the only clans that fared well there were the clans that were spearheading the invasion and had actually learned how IS units operated. Look at how Clan Wolf geared up with a strong bias for energy weapons to avoid logistic issues)

[FupDup]

A big part of the flaw with the Clans is that their equipment massively violated their own honor codes. They were SUPPOSED to be in-your-face duelists, but TT allowed them to boat long-range weapons and walk backwards the whole match, and poke you to death without ever getting within range of their foes. It was completely stupid.

Edited by FupDup, 03 December 2013 - 10:34 AM.

[Lightfoot]

"A Cluster is a Clan military formation typically consisting of between three to five Binaries and/or Trinaries, with an average of four to five Trinaries. The equivalent in most cases to an Inner Sphere regiment, Clusters are commanded by Star Colonels, often leading their unit from an independent command Star or Nova. In general Clusters are combined-arms units since fighting at this scale of combat requires an effective mix of forces, though how each Clan organizes their units varies greatly. On average a "typical" Cluster would consist of two OmniMech Trinaries, an Elemental Binary, an OmniFighter Binary and either a mixed Trinary or a Supernova Trinary."

Just so you know what a Clan Cluster is.

1. Two Stars make a Binary, 10 Clan Mechs, vs 3 Inner Sphere Lances (12 mechs). MWO's likely scenario.

2. Problem is MWO's nerf all Energy Weapons balance strategy is not going to work on the Clans, but we all knew that, I hope. It's certainly been discussed.

MWO's problem is the weapons do too much damage too quickly even without the Clans so there is no way in heck the Clans could be supported with Energy-only nerfs.

First step is full DHS 2.0, second step cut ALL weapon damage in half so it is close to Battletech norms for DPS, third step Clan Invasion and re-balance as needed, but only if over-powering.

Use salvage and cross-tech of salvage to mix things up a bit and get MWO very competitive. Cross-tech costs alot of CBills. Salvaged Clan Battlemechs cost even more CBills and their can be a Faction points cost too. This is a better way to balance the Clans, with players role-playing the lore instead of just smashing the Clans into Inner Sphere with a nerf-hammer.

[Ridersofdoom]

Quote

Actually, historically, FASA was trying to copy WWII. THe Clans = Germany/Japan, the IS = Europe, Canada, Austrailia.
The Clans just like the AXIS advanced steadily with advanced weapons across Europe and into North Africa and throughout Asia and on to Hawaii (Pearl Harbor) and were within striking distance of both London and the US Mainland. In the old BT timeline, this would be where Comstar realized that Terra was the objective of the Clans.

Rapid retooling and redeployment of forces by the IS (Allies) led to the Battle of Tukayyid (think both Normandy AND the Battle of Midway) and the Clan Advance (Axis) was stopped and broken.

there are so many mistakes in this equivalence, if you want to compare the facts of World War II with MW looks a bit what happened in eastern europe.

Edited by Ridersofdoom, 03 December 2013 - 12:24 PM.

[Spokes]

Randalf Yorgen, on 03 December 2013 - 09:29 AM, said:

Actually, historically, FASA was trying to copy WWII. THe Clans = Germany/Japan, the IS = Europe, Canada, Austrailia.

I'm pretty sure the Star League is supposed to be a stand in for the Roman Empire, and the Clans are stand ins for the Mongol Hordes.

[dal10]

spokes is right.



this book says so, i would know. i own it.

[Pht]

Werewolf486, on 03 December 2013 - 09:04 AM, said:

hat nobody seems to realize until it's to late is that the concept of the Clans in BT and MW is flawed. Forces with the advantages in weaponry and numbers...

The clans didn't and still don't have an avantage in numbers.

The whole "born in a garbage can next door to oscar the grouch" program + washout rates in sibkos and testing tends to slow down their population rate of their warriors; combined with the fact that they retire their warriors VERY early by basically throwing them away.

Quote

...on the Battlefield with superior genetically enhanced minds and bodies will always win.

Brain does not equal mind. In fact, as far as the "minds" are concerned, clan warriors as a group are sub-par as generals compared to the IS generals on the whole, which has something to do with the mentally-migeted laser-focus on tactics and glory-hounding that's built into clan warriors (where the clan generals and politicians come from).

"superior bodies" - The only place that the garbage can breeding makes any difference is in in infantry. In the other cases, it's a wash. The superior gunnery and piloting skills are due to sibko training, which isn't in the least surprising, as sibko kids do virtually nothing BUT train for their warrior slot.

Quote

It was a flawed concept from FASA that everyone who has taken on MW has been FORCED to try and fix to the rage of all clanners. You have better weapons, 5 mechs in a star, 3 stars in a cluster (snicker) for a total of 15 mechs on the field versus 4 in a lance and 3 lances for 12 mechs.

Hasty generalization. IS commanders, even when they follow hide-bound clan "honor" rules will still usually try and maintain a 2:1 ratio of mechs vs clanners; and the clanners don't mind this (silly clanners).

This goes in-universe and in actual gaming. Clanners virtually NEVER compete with more units on the field vs IS units.

Quote

How is that right and how was this a good business idea? You can't give clans both better weapons and more units on the field as it breaks the game.

They don't have more numbers; and you've simply left out the built-in downsides of being clan; namely ignorant honor rules, that there are less clan warriors overall than there are IS warriors, that if you play a clan you are FORCED to put more of your eggs into a single basket, the fact that your tech is harder to maintain, get ammo for, and procure; the fact that your tech can quite well take more than 6 months to get to you if it comes from the clan home worlds... etc.

Quote

...many suggestions that could work but requires a rewrite of Clan history to eliminate something.

Lazy. A good GM will scrupulously enforce the downsides of being a clanner and thus tamp down on such things.

Quote

In the realm of online or video games we have no dice.

Which is wrong; because the hit-location tables and to-hit numbers simulate the battlemech's ability to bring it's weapons to bear under any given condition - a factor which a player can easily control for to get the results he wants.

It's very strange that every MW game since the first in 1989 ... hasn't simulated the 'mech. Very strange indeed.

Quote

So to give the clans the advantages of better numbers, weapons, and tech in a game like this will certainly spell doom for it like it had done in TT (No offense to those who've soldiered on).

No, it wouldn't (with the caveate about your numbers being wrong). What needs to be done - and it could be done, probably easily - is to implement the clan's downsides.

MWO won't use the clan's downsides ... and to my knowledge, NONE of the past MW games have done this. Nobody's even tried, as far as I know.

It may have never even been considered.

Edited by Pht, 03 December 2013 - 06:43 PM.

[Karl Streiger]

Pht, on 03 December 2013 - 05:59 PM, said:

Which is wrong; because the hit-location tables and to-hit numbers simulate the battlemech's ability to bring it's weapons to bear under any given condition - a factor which a player can easily control for to get the results he wants.

It's very strange that every MW game since the first in 1989 ... hasn't simulated the 'mech. Very strange indeed.

I think the reason is simple:
When you won't be able to shot better as the AI - you wouldn't have been able to play those missions.
You start with a 55t Mech - and you has to beat several tanks, two light Mechs, a medium and a heavy Mech.. .when your shots are applied based on 2d6 - you wouldn't have a change.
So the former PVE Mechwarrior Games give the player the advantages for superb accurate fire - the funny part is - what is necessary for PVE is not a good design decision for PVP

[Nebfer]

IIRC it was often common to equate two lances to a star over on the B-tech forums or a binary to a company, I never really saw a Trinary being equated to a company for table top use.

Typically a Regiment faces off a Clan Cluster, 108-132 battlemechs vs 45ish mechs, 75-200 elementals and 20-30 ASFs, though that regiment technically would not be fighting alone as well, a few regiments of infantry and armor, with a wing or two of ASFs, a common example would be the Fed Com RCT involving a mech regiment, 5 or so infantry regiments, 3 armor regiments and artillery battalion and two wings of ASFs (with a few battalions of engineers mixed in). The Clans latter on started dropping entire Galaxys (3-5 Clusters) to better deal with these (though at times even single clusters have been noted to defeat an RCT).

Though I do believe Herb mentioned if he could rework the clans he would of made their default Energy weapons more like their Heavy lasers (same range as IS weapons but hit twice as hard).

[Will9761]

I can live with Stars vs Lances, but one problem with the clan tech is that some of their weapons are too powerful. Like the ER PPCs for example, 15 damage is pretty insane. Imagine fighting a Warhawk(Masakari) in MWO, with 4x Clan ER PPCs, when it group fires on you, it would possess the same damage as a 6xPPC Stalker; and we all know how annoying they were. Another fact is that some of the weapons share the same heat, despite their powerful damage. Again explaining the firepower of the Warhawk(Masakari), when it fires there is little heat penatly when it fires its six ER PPCs and that give the Clans an unfair advantage. My suggestion would be to lessen the damage slightly and increase the heat.