125 replies to this topic

[Escef]

kamiko kross, on 19 January 2014 - 05:23 AM, said:

Somebody remarked to me a few days ago, the IS only won because they would do things the clans would not.

Honestly, the clans never actually stood a chance. The difference in populations and available resources was far too great. The clans' technological advantage let them rofl-stomp bandit lords and the periphery border garrisons, forces known for being poorly trained and equipped. And the clans' access to warships and ability to bend their entire economies to warfare gave them great logistical edges early on. But once they started running into front line troops and dealing with the logistical nightmare of hauling supplies in from the home worlds to fronts 5 or 6 systems (or more) deep into the Inner Sphere? Even their edges in technology and training would not change the outcome if both sides went scorched-earth on each other.

[FlyingTurtle]

Denolven, on 15 January 2014 - 06:22 AM, said:

Then you are probably not a good light mech pilot, because you didn't get it.
The number one rule is not about moving, or speed. the number one rule is DO NOT GET HIT BY BIG STUFF. I agree that speed helps with that, if applied properly, but there are other ways too. Like, you know, using brains and learning to see what is actually going on, instead of mindlessly running around at 170 kph and being useless. Speed is a tool, nothing more and nothing less. It's not about what cards you get, it's about how you play them. None of my actively played lights use their max engine (in fact I've never seen anyone else using a 265 on a Jenner), and all are perfectly fine.

Yeah! I use a XL 265 on my Jenner too. It gives manageable speed that's still fast enough to dodge some shots but enough weight to have a useful loadout.

[Jon Gotham]

Denolven, on 15 January 2014 - 06:22 AM, said:

Then you are probably not a good light mech pilot, because you didn't get it.
The number one rule is not about moving, or speed. the number one rule is DO NOT GET HIT BY BIG STUFF. I agree that speed helps with that, if applied properly, but there are other ways too. Like, you know, using brains and learning to see what is actually going on, instead of mindlessly running around at 170 kph and being useless. Speed is a tool, nothing more and nothing less. It's not about what cards you get, it's about how you play them. None of my actively played lights use their max engine (in fact I've never seen anyone else using a 265 on a Jenner), and all are perfectly fine.

In my book there are three distinct skills needed by the good light pilot.

#1 Situational awareness
#2 The ability to make a decision quickly, then DO IT.
#3 Concise communication. Not 3 in D3, but WHAT is in D3.

Of course these are all vital for any mech, but doubly so for a light.

[Felicitatem Parco]

I use a slow light with heavy weapons to great success, if you also figure that I'm hauling ECM around.

Raven 3L (35 tons) with a 225 XL, 1 ERPPC,1 PPC, Guardian ECM, and 197 pts of Ferro Fibrous armor.

Runs at about 115 KPH with Speed Tweak, has decent impulse firepower, great for supporting a firing line, and is comparable to the stock loadout of a Clan Puma/Adder (35 tons, XL-210, 2 ERPPCs, a flamer, 230 pts of FFA, runs at 107 KPH with speed tweak).

__________________________________________________________


Lights have their place as slow fire-support units, too... just imagine a game where the battlefield is populated by reduced-tonnage teams.

[Jon Gotham]

I feel these kinds of lights could be good in a world where assault is not the default goto of choice. But then, would the 55 tonners become the new assaults in packs?

[Navy Sixes]

I read this, understand the OP's points, but remember the Spider, the Griffin, and the Orion, all loudly dismissed as DOA before they were released and pilots started scoring +1k dmg in them.

Pre-release "DOA" + 2 months of actual use = "OMG these mechs are imbalanced nerf immediately!"

[CyclonerM]

Guys.. With tonnage limits if you want to follow the great PPC/UAC/5 meta you will not be able to field 12 Highlanders/Victors (maybe not even a lance!) so what are you going to do? Obvious, take some Adders and Kit Foxes! With many many less tons you have a decent firepower for a light.

You do not need a terrific speed for long range combat

[Mystere]

CyclonerM, on 19 January 2014 - 01:22 PM, said:

You do not need a terrific speed for long range combat

Well, I still want terrific speed anyway to guarantee combat remains long range.

[FireSlade]

Mystere, on 19 January 2014 - 01:30 PM, said:

Well, I still want terrific speed anyway to guarantee combat remains long range.

The way people set up their Heavies and Assaults 70+kph can dictate the ranges; 90+ for mediums. The only thing people max out is lights and only because they cannot fit that PPC with UAC5s, or AC20s.

[MischiefSC]

If the Phoenix Package is any indicator, here's what it'll look like -

Most of the Clan mechs will be, at best, mediocre.

Any chassis that come as the 'premium' version (XP and/or cbill bonus) will be flat out inferior. Clearly you deserve to be punished for buying the package and ensuring that the one you get the bonus on is the worst of the batch is a solid way to do it.

There will be probably two chassis out of the whole bunch that will be solid performers. The Timber Wolf will not be one.

Expect to regret however much or little you spend on the clan package. With the exception of the Ilya (a unique AC hardpoint configuration, only 3xLB10X/best 3xUAC5 config) and every Phoenix mech save the moderately performing Shawk, every mech bought with cash has been largely a let-down.

You watch. The actual release of the clan mechs will be one of the most depressing events in MW:O history, and that's saying something.

[Deathlike]

Tycho von Gagern, on 19 January 2014 - 01:17 PM, said:

I read this, understand the OP's points, but remember the Spider, the Griffin, and the Orion, all loudly dismissed as DOA before they were released and pilots started scoring +1k dmg in them.

Spider was DOA for the most part, given the Raven-3L was the most dominant mech at the time (with CT-homing streaks, ECM was a bigger powerhouse then, having few counters). Things have changed since then (leg hitboxes are larger than the model, ECM got some nerfs, Streaks don't pick the CT all the time). However, the Spider-5V isn't DOA, but "virtually useless" in the grand scheme of things... it is in the top 3 of most useless variants in the game. Also, the Spider's still the most reported/whined about mech due to the general state of HSR.

Edit: More about the Spider -
Let's not forget how terrible the Spider-5K was because of the terribad state of MGs. That version of the MG would still be useless vs the Locust... if anything, it would make the Locust-1V completely not usable at all.

Griffin on paper is technically DOA. Since it was given the Shadowhawk type of frame WITH the torso twisting ability of a Hunchback (no really, the numbers don't lie, both twist AND the arm articulation), it is something else. It's technically a lot more potent missile boat by design (better than the KTO) and a much better SRM boat (if and when they are fixed) because of the concentrated location of the missile hardpoints.

I do not remember the Orion being DOA (on paper), outside of it's initially bad hitboxes. Being easy to core was it's major issue (especially if it's supposed to be the "mini-Atlas"), although that indirectly allowed XL engines to be viable. Of course, things have changed since then after the hitbox changes (XL not as viable - though more of a choice/gamble).

So, please try and be accurate... there were actual issues at the time of their launch, either on paper, or the reality of the mech in use.

Edited by Deathlike, 19 January 2014 - 04:15 PM.

[Navy Sixes]

Deathlike, on 19 January 2014 - 04:08 PM, said:

there were actual issues at the time of their launch, either on paper, or the reality of the mech in use.

"The report of my death was an exaggeration" -- Mark Twain

Issues that were a lot of opinion, much like yours on the spider. Paper means little. The reality is these mechs are potent in the hands of skilled pilots, just like every other mech.

DOA is an abbreviation for "Dead On Arrival." Whatever the reasons for people crying about how useless these mechs were going to be (always more speculation than anything else, given that no one really knows how they'll perform until they actually drive them for themselves) the reality is that these mechs are not and never were dead.

Bombastic hyperbole declaring anything "dead," whether it's a mech, a mode, or PGI, always ends up being wrong. You'd think people would have figured that out by now.

[Deathlike]

Tycho von Gagern, on 19 January 2014 - 07:07 PM, said:

Issues that were a lot of opinion, much like yours on the spider. Paper means little. The reality is these mechs are potent in the hands of skilled pilots, just like every other mech.

Except, the Spider-5V. If anything, prior to the Locust, the 5V was undeniably the worst variant in the game (5K got its MG buff, therefore moving it ahead of the 5V by miles).

Quote

DOA is an abbreviation for "Dead On Arrival." Whatever the reasons for people crying about how useless these mechs were going to be (always more speculation than anything else, given that no one really knows how they'll perform until they actually drive them for themselves) the reality is that these mechs are not and never were dead.

Actually, I still think the Lolcust is mostly DOA (for competitive matches, not regular PUG matches). Pretty much any bigger light mech can do their role better. Yes, you can "save tonnage" in future tonnage matchmaking, but when it actually comes time for the real games (CW), the Locust will be staying in the hanger more often than not.

Edit: The Locust itself isn't even faster than other lights, which only when that changes, then I can reevaluate them (just like the Spider). Right now, they serve no role that any other light mech could fill (including the non-ECM variants).

Quote

Bombastic hyperbole declaring anything "dead," whether it's a mech, a mode, or PGI, always ends up being wrong. You'd think people would have figured that out by now.

It's normal, deal with it.

Edited by Deathlike, 19 January 2014 - 07:35 PM.

[18 Inches of Hard Steel]

kamiko kross, on 19 January 2014 - 05:23 AM, said:

Ok for devil's advocacy's sake 18, if they put clan mechs and tech in at their actual strength there were at in the lore.......

What would you suggest to balance it out? Because in the current game clan mechs at original "power" levels would decimate anything in the Is hands down.
Somebody remarked to me a few days ago, the IS only won because they would do things the clans would not. Ideology beat the clans-not the mechs.


So, what would you do to make a fair game?

There are many good ideas all over these forums, but what I like best is asymmetrical combat. That would take work to implement though...

[Jon Gotham]

Could you elaborate on that?

[18 Inches of Hard Steel]

kamiko kross, on 20 January 2014 - 04:56 AM, said:

Could you elaborate on that?

Sure,
by asymmetrical I mean balancing clan mechs differently than changing weapon or equipment stats.
To accomplish this we could have matches of 10 clan vs. 12 IS (2 stars vs. 3 lances), or we could use tonnage limits. Limiting the group of 12 clan mechs to 500 tons and the IS to 750, (theoretical numbers).

I know many pilots wouldnt like being on the side with the weaker mechs, but I feel the opposite. I pilot lights a lot and I am used to facing superior opponents, I find it exhilarating.

Sadly PGI has not expressed any interest in trying multiple options to balance tech. They are lazy and I expect they will implement clans like they implemented everything else: go with an initial idea and tweak it with convoluted mechanics and spot fixes until it can barely limp along instead of trying another option.

[Denolven]

FireSlade, on 19 January 2014 - 02:19 PM, said:

The only thing people max out is lights and only because they cannot fit that PPC with UAC5s, or AC20s.

Actually, you can play PPC or UAC5 easily on lights. The Raven can even mount an AC20. You just can't put 3+ heavy weapons on it. People are not satisfied with one big weapon, because really, there is no such thing as 'enough dakka'.

Here is an example with UAC5 (he also claims to have played a Gauss on the Spider):

[Firemage]

18 Inches of Hard Steel, on 20 January 2014 - 05:18 AM, said:

Sure,
by asymmetrical I mean balancing clan mechs differently than changing weapon or equipment stats.
To accomplish this we could have matches of 10 clan vs. 12 IS (2 stars vs. 3 lances), or we could use tonnage limits. Limiting the group of 12 clan mechs to 500 tons and the IS to 750, (theoretical numbers).

I know many pilots wouldnt like being on the side with the weaker mechs, but I feel the opposite. I pilot lights a lot and I am used to facing superior opponents, I find it exhilarating.

Sadly PGI has not expressed any interest in trying multiple options to balance tech. They are lazy and I expect they will implement clans like they implemented everything else: go with an initial idea and tweak it with convoluted mechanics and spot fixes until it can barely limp along instead of trying another option.

Nor have they seemed willing to use a Battle Value style system like the table top does. While i have only dabbled in the MW TT game, i am a huge pen and paper rpger, and am a big fan of challenge codes and other value systems to rate balance. Tonnage is a weaker balance tool as you have assault mechs like the atlas that carry almost at much armor tonnage as the lightest mechs have in total mass.-G

[Jon Gotham]

18 Inches of Hard Steel, on 20 January 2014 - 05:18 AM, said:

Sure,
by asymmetrical I mean balancing clan mechs differently than changing weapon or equipment stats.
To accomplish this we could have matches of 10 clan vs. 12 IS (2 stars vs. 3 lances), or we could use tonnage limits. Limiting the group of 12 clan mechs to 500 tons and the IS to 750, (theoretical numbers).

I know many pilots wouldnt like being on the side with the weaker mechs, but I feel the opposite. I pilot lights a lot and I am used to facing superior opponents, I find it exhilarating.

Sadly PGI has not expressed any interest in trying multiple options to balance tech. They are lazy and I expect they will implement clans like they implemented everything else: go with an initial idea and tweak it with convoluted mechanics and spot fixes until it can barely limp along instead of trying another option.

Oh ok, thanks for that. I wasn't sure what you meant exactly:P Perhaps if they allow clan tech to be as powerful as it was, maybe incentivise the playing of IS mechs someway? Either way I'll still be in my IS chassis.

I'm not sure tonnage would be the best way to do it-certain mechs punch far above their tonnage at the minute.

[Redshift2k5]

They'll be relegated to tiny snipers and disposable scouts :/