16 replies to this topic

[focuspark]

I wanted to get my $0.02 in before the design for Clans was locked in, so here's my huge post about my opinion on how Clans should be added to the game without rendering existing variants useless and keeping with the Clans are clearly superior theme. So here's my eleven point approach to making Clans awesome but IS viable.

First: Inner Sphere 'mechs should never mix with Clan 'mechs on the same team. A team should either drop as IS or Clan, and the Match Maker should enforce this rule strictly.

Second: Inner Sphere technology should never be mixed with Clan technology. I know this goes against cannon, but Clan weapons and components should not be compatible with IS 'mechs; and visa-versa should be true as well. This will be needed for game play balance.

Third: Clan technology ('mechs, weapons, components, and modules) should a separate currency from Inner Sphere technology. C-bills vs K-bills perhaps? Maybe Clans do business in honor? The devs should decide what fits the "feeling" they're trying to create.

Fourth: Technology base (Clan vs Inner Sphere) should affect ELO and Match Maker placement. Low ELO IS 'mechs drop in IS vs IS matches; high ELO IS 'mech drop in IS vs Clan matches. Low ELO Clan 'mech drop in Clan vs IS matches; high ELO Clan 'mech drop in Clan vs Clan matches.

Fifth: Clan 'mechs should not share targeting information with team mates. This fits the personal honor mantra and will help level the playing field by making SSRM locks and indirect LRM fire without LOS impossible. It will also making more difficult for Clan pilots to coordinate or quickly locate enemy 'mechs to gang up on them.

Sixth: Clan 'mechs should not have access to ECM. It's dishonorable and they wouldn't have maintained the technology since they didn't share targeting data any ways.

Seventh: Keep clan weapon and components size, weight, and flavor statistic as they are in Core BattleTech rules: smaller and lighter than the Inner Sphere equivalents (this is to allow cannon 'mech builds). Adjust weapon damage, range, and heat to balance them to be 10-50% better than IS values. Clan 'mechs should be terrifying for IS 'mechs to engage: their 'mechs are faster and their weapons more damaging and with better range but less hot. Keep DHS two slots, Ferro-fiberous and Endo-steel seven slots, and XL engines ten slots; make the Clans scary.

Eight: Inner Sphere 'mechs drop in a company of twelve. Clan 'mechs should drop in a star of five vs IS, or in a trinary of fifteen (binary of ten if the engine cannot handle thirty 'mechs on the field at once) vs other Clan 'mechs.

Ninth: Inner Sphere pilots get C-bills as a reward for combat; they should also get double C-bill payout as well as the Clan currency (honor?) for actions against Clan 'mechs. Example: kills, kill assists, damage done, etc. Clan pilots should get half the Clan currency (honor?) as well as half the C-bills for actions against IS 'mechs that an IS pilot would get. In this way players can build up IS and Clan currencies without the need to already have 'mechs from a given side. If you need a back story say IS pilots were considered honorable by Clanner for defeating them and Clanners could sell IS salvage on a black market for C-bills; or whatever.

Tenth: Clan and Inner Sphere 'mech should have access to a separate list of modules. There will be modules which overlap, but Clanner shouldn't get access to Artillery or Aerospace Strikes (because where's the honor in that) and there should be Clan only modules which fit the Clan vs IS flavor differentiation pattern.

Last: Force players to adopt dual "personas" to manage Inner Sphere and Clan technologies. Don't have skills, mech bays, components, modules, etc. carry over between both sides (ie skills should IS or Clan specific); don't have start-screen-avatars carry over either. Only allow the player name, bankroll, and friends list to carry over. Same logon of course, but make the Clans feel like a separate experience as much as possible. A second leveling track, a second ELO score, maybe even a separate tab in the MechLab even. Help players feel that the Clans are alien and not just another part of the Inner Sphere; and help Clanners feel like the IS is a foreign land and not just a weaker clan.

Since some of this might not work perfectly when CW is introduced and I do not have a crystal ball telling me how CW will actually be implemented; adjust as needed. However, I do recommend waiting to adjust for CW until CW is actually here and focus on making Clans work splendidly at the time of their launch.

[focuspark]

Wow, nobody? Too much text? It's just eleven thesis

[MuonNeutrino]

This is pretty much exactly how I would have liked clans to be implemented. Unfortunately, it seems that PGI is intent on taking the exact opposite (and utterly wrong) track. For what it's worth, I agree with your proposed plan, I just wish the devs would be open to implementing it.

[HeavyRain]

Why would i choose to fight for the Inner Sphere and be cannon fodder instead of piloting the soopa kool Clan mechs and wreck face?
Assume I am not a BT nerd in love with the back-story, just some new gamer who stumbled upon this robot game.
IS vs Clan the way you envision it would be like playing a Locust all the time. It's good for a few laughs but it gets old fast.

[focuspark]

HeavyRain, on 27 December 2013 - 09:53 AM, said:

Why would i choose to fight for the Inner Sphere and be cannon fodder instead of piloting the soopa kool Clan mechs and wreck face?
Assume I am not a BT nerd in love with the back-story, just some new gamer who stumbled upon this robot game.
IS vs Clan the way you envision it would be like playing a Locust all the time. It's good for a few laughs but it gets old fast.

Because of the stacking rules, as outlined in my proposal. Even with super-cool Clan 'mechs in a 12 vs 5 scenario you'd be hard pressed to achieve victory. With addition of IS having better coordination tools (combat UI) the Clanner's superior technology would be relatively balanced out.

But, you're right there are those people who just have to be the "best" and go it solo for glory; and they're the perfect Clanners because that's exactly the type of mentality Clanners are supposed to have.

[Nick Makiaveli]

One BIG flaw in your plan is a good, ie high Elo, Clan player would only ever drop vs other Clan players except in private matches.

Which means if you get good enough, you won't be able to help in CW against the IS (assuming that's part of the deal).

As to picking IS over Clan, you do realize the Clan guys could use TS to make up for a lot of that right? "3 heavies in D4, the Jager has a weak right torso".

[ssm]

focuspark, on 27 December 2013 - 10:06 AM, said:

Because of the stacking rules, as outlined in my proposal. Even with super-cool Clan 'mechs in a 12 vs 5 scenario you'd be hard pressed to achieve victory. With addition of IS having better coordination tools (combat UI) the Clanner's superior technology would be relatively balanced out.

But, you're right there are those people who just have to be the "best" and go it solo for glory; and they're the perfect Clanners because that's exactly the type of mentality Clanners are supposed to have.

As much as i like most of your ideas (esp. dual accounts), you missed this major flaw there. It's fps shooter, and although it relies heavily on teamwork, "going solo for glory" is what most players like the best.

If we introduce Clans as in TT, a lot of people will just go over to them, because being "superior but outnumbered" is just better/more fun gaming experience. And we still need more IS players to populate six factions.

[Khobai]

Quote

Sixth: Clan 'mechs should not have access to ECM. It's dishonorable and they wouldn't have maintained the technology since they didn't share targeting data any ways.

Clan mechs do use ECM. Loki for example.

Quote

12 vs 5

12v5 is absurd. 12vs10 with clan tech being about 20% better makes more far sense. That way clan tech isn't overwhelmingly better and you still maintain the 4 and 5 units sizes for lances and stars respectively.

I agree with clans not being able to share target info. While this disadvantage can be largely overcome with TS, its no secret that premades are overpowered, and I personally think that premades of any size shouldnt be allowed to drop against pugs anyway.

Quote

If we introduce Clans as in TT, a lot of people will just go over to them, because being "superior but outnumbered" is just better/more fun gaming experience.

You could also force players to play IS for a while before unlocking clan mechs. That would ensure that you always have more IS players. The exception to this would be players that buy clan mechs for real money; they could ignore that restriction.

Edited by Khobai, 27 December 2013 - 10:53 AM.

[focuspark]

Nick Makiaveli, on 27 December 2013 - 10:09 AM, said:

One BIG flaw in your plan is a good, ie high Elo, Clan player would only ever drop vs other Clan players except in private matches.

Which means if you get good enough, you won't be able to help in CW against the IS (assuming that's part of the deal).

As to picking IS over Clan, you do realize the Clan guys could use TS to make up for a lot of that right? "3 heavies in D4, the Jager has a weak right torso".

As my post says, some of this will need to revisited when CW is clearly defined. For now CW looks to be "more of the same with extra grind for rep". So, I believe it'll all apply. Additionally, there should be a gray area in the middle where many fall that is the average ELO range which see a mix of IS and Clan engagements regardless of which side they're dropping on.

ssm, on 27 December 2013 - 10:16 AM, said:

As much as i like most of your ideas (esp. dual accounts), you missed this major flaw there. It's fps shooter, and although it relies heavily on teamwork, "going solo for glory" is what most players like the best.

If we introduce Clans as in TT, a lot of people will just go over to them, because being "superior but outnumbered" is just better/more fun gaming experience. And we still need more IS players to populate six factions.

Agreed! And those people should be Clanners - that's the mentality of the Clanners after all: solo honor and glory. IS pilots are a plucky lot which win via tactics, strategy, and teamwork.

Khobai, on 27 December 2013 - 10:44 AM, said:

Clan mechs do use ECM. Loki for example.

12v5 is absurd. 12vs10 with clan tech being about 20% better makes more far sense. That way clan tech isn't overwhelmingly better and you still maintain the 4 and 5 units sizes for lances and stars respectively.

I agree with clans not being able to share target info. While this disadvantage can be largely overcome with TS, its no secret that premades are overpowered, and I personally think that premades of any size shouldnt be allowed to drop against pugs anyway.

You could also force players to play IS for a while before unlocking clan mechs. That would ensure that you always have more IS players. The exception to this would be players that buy clan mechs for real money; they could ignore that restriction.

Regardless of cannon, to balance superior Clan firepower something has to give. Clans shouldn't be allowed ECM, it's too powerful and if they have reduced coordination support via their HUD they won't be as penalized; thus they shouldn't be allowed to use it.

I completely understand that TS negates some of the HUD reductions, but IS pilots will also have TS and getting the better teamwork focused HUD's advantages.

And I agree, teams should drop vs teams and PUGs vs PUGs but I'm not sure there's enough teams to make it work; only PGI knows.

Forcing IS is an arbitrary concept and it also implies that Clans are the "next level" which I'm trying hard to counter here. Clans and IS should equal but different. Neither should be clearly superior. Clans should look awesome on paper, but when faced with unbalanced numbers and an inferior teamwork HUD actually not perform as well as imagined.

Play testing will be very important.

Khobai, on 27 December 2013 - 10:44 AM, said:

12v5 is absurd. 12vs10 with clan tech being about 20% better makes more far sense. That way clan tech isn't overwhelmingly better and you still maintain the 4 and 5 units sizes for lances and stars respectively.

My problem is I think the Clans are about 50% better. Which would make 12 vs 8 the ideal number, but cannon tells us Clans drop in groups of five which makes this difficult. I agree 12 vs 10 sounds better, but it may not be viable with keeping the Clans > IS technology theme.

Play testing will be key.

[East Indy]

Points 1 through 3 are sensible. Playing should be a choice, even if it means the game must support separate factions.

Point 4 is reasonable.

Point 5 isn't practical or intuitive. Unless they're serious RPers, players will just use descriptors for targets, anyway.

Point 6 opens a can of worms. Sure, it may add an interesting dimension to Clan play, but the painfully boolean nature of LRMs (ineffective/devastating) would probably frustrate Clan players too much.

Point 7 is disastrous, not only on the integrity of play-to-win but on commonsense balancing. Opinion: Clans were a great narrative development but utterly destructive to gameplay as introduced. Unless extremely well-handled on tabletop (forces are handicapped via lore/numbers or the Inner Sphere player wants to play at a disadvantage) Clan tech is munchkin bait. It's just . . . awful. All of the careful balance of the original rules — zapped. Inouye's proposal is an incredible relief to me, but PGI will probably need to go further by choosing compactness or power/range; not both.

Point 8 might work with two Clan stars against an Inner Sphere company, even with heavily revised rules.

Points 9, 10, and 11 have merit. There's a lot to number-crunch for 9.

Edited by East Indy, 27 December 2013 - 11:47 AM.

[Colin Thrase]

I really like almost all of your suggestions. However, I'd like to suggest the following:

• Do not prevent Clan mechs from getting ECM - just prevent it from providing the 'umbrella' to other clan mechs. Otherwise they can't counter the IS mechs' ECM (in "J" mode) when they are nearby.
  
• Regarding IS / Clan Elo scores: I don't think a high Elo Clan player should be prevented from getting matched against IS players. I believe it would be better if high Elo clan players were matched 5 / 12 against IS players, and low Elo clan players were matched 10/12 against IS players.

I do especially like the idea of 'role-playing' the clans. While I think PGI has the best of intentions, their post describing Clan implementation makes it sound as though the clans are just like IS, but with better equipment (and if that were the case, they'd make all IS tech obsolete after they were introduced).

I do believe that a proper implementation of clan role-playing would be welcomed by the community - including those people not intimately familiar with Mechwarrior. I don't think you have to be a hard-core fan to appreciate storyline with a game. There are plenty of games I've played where I had no inkling as to the back story when I started, but really loved finding it out as I progressed through the game.

I would also like to point out that the various clan trials would be awesome to implement on the clan side.

[Tangelis]

focuspark, on 27 December 2013 - 11:06 AM, said:

My problem is I think the Clans are about 50% better. Which would make 12 vs 8 the ideal number, but cannon tells us Clans drop in groups of five which makes this difficult. I agree 12 vs 10 sounds better, but it may not be viable with keeping the Clans > IS technology theme.

Today's gameplay we can label it as "All things being equal" being that we all play IS tech. Down one man hurts but over all not overly significant. Down 2 men? Has great potential for a major team dirtnap but I've seen a few wins snagged from the underdog. Down 3?..... 4?

Superior numbers are an advantage that has been proved more often than not to be a defining factor of victory. Superior clan tech I would agree could level that playing field a bit and perhaps justify 12 vs 10 scenario's. BV is also a good arguement but there are limits. 12 vs 8 would more often than not be lambs to the slaughter regardless of the tech.

Superior numbers has always been a significant factor in any theater of war that needed to be overcome by nothing less than brilliant leadership or field tactics, whether it be real history or in fiction. Otherwise it usually spelled doom. Also, the "superiority" of a clan pilot over IS can not be reflected in MWO, which is another problem.

[Thorn Hallis]

1, 2, 3 and last get my support.

[ssm]

Colin Thrase, on 27 December 2013 - 01:10 PM, said:

I really like almost all of your suggestions. However, I'd like to suggest the following:

• Do not prevent Clan mechs from getting ECM - just prevent it from providing the 'umbrella' to other clan mechs. Otherwise they can't counter the IS mechs' ECM (in "J" mode) when they are nearby.
  
• Regarding IS / Clan Elo scores: I don't think a high Elo Clan player should be prevented from getting matched against IS players. I believe it would be better if high Elo clan players were matched 5 / 12 against IS players, and low Elo clan players were matched 10/12 against IS players.

I do especially like the idea of 'role-playing' the clans. While I think PGI has the best of intentions, their post describing Clan implementation makes it sound as though the clans are just like IS, but with better equipment (and if that were the case, they'd make all IS tech obsolete after they were introduced).


I do believe that a proper implementation of clan role-playing would be welcomed by the community - including those people not intimately familiar with Mechwarrior. I don't think you have to be a hard-core fan to appreciate storyline with a game. There are plenty of games I've played where I had no inkling as to the back story when I started, but really loved finding it out as I progressed through the game.

I would also like to point out that the various clan trials would be awesome to implement on the clan side.

There is one simple problem with role-playing in this game (or any MW game before) - it's fps shooter. And whether PGI adds RPG elements (I would welcome them) or not, it won't change anything, because they'll always be enough players around who won't bother with role-playing at all, and thus render any kind of balancing around role-playing worthless.

[focuspark]

Tangelis, on 28 December 2013 - 07:52 AM, said:

Today's gameplay we can label it as "All things being equal" being that we all play IS tech. Down one man hurts but over all not overly significant. Down 2 men? Has great potential for a major team dirtnap but I've seen a few wins snagged from the underdog. Down 3?..... 4?

Superior numbers are an advantage that has been proved more often than not to be a defining factor of victory. Superior clan tech I would agree could level that playing field a bit and perhaps justify 12 vs 10 scenario's. BV is also a good arguement but there are limits. 12 vs 8 would more often than not be lambs to the slaughter regardless of the tech.

Superior numbers has always been a significant factor in any theater of war that needed to be overcome by nothing less than brilliant leadership or field tactics, whether it be real history or in fiction. Otherwise it usually spelled doom. Also, the "superiority" of a clan pilot over IS can not be reflected in MWO, which is another problem.

Agreed, but we numbers to start with and actual play testing will reveal the truth. I was starting with 12 v 5, 12 v 10 is also a good place to start. Honestly, my guess is that 8 v 5 is the best ration but that's too few 'mechs on the field to make people happy.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

I think that selection of Clan pilots should be lore based. You can onlty play Clans if you are genetically modified and vat born who passes a Trial of Possesssion.

[focuspark]

Nik Van Rhijn, on 28 December 2013 - 02:11 PM, said:

I think that selection of Clan pilots should be lore based. You can onlty play Clans if you are genetically modified and vat born who passes a Trial of Possesssion.

Well, since exactly 0% of the population of players were vat born and (likely) none are genetically modified, the clan population is likely to be rather low given these restrictions ;-)