229 replies to this topic

[Kenyon Burguess]

only 3 pages so far in the latest "don't nerf me bro!" post about clan tech, im kinda disappointed. I liked what was written up, I liked the limitations to your mech lab, and while im kinda sad my dream of a CUAC20 hunchback has been laid to rest for now, the game in its own way will be balanced.

[CheeseThief]

So while I am rarely good at balance suggestions got fear of showing any sort of favoritism to my favorite stuff, by using the actual TT omni-tech rules, clan mechs are being reigned in from the get go.

Everything in the pre-order pack bar the Uller has it's legs filled with internals, so clanners can't hide the ammo in such rarely shot locations. This is partially balanced out by a free CASE in every section, but should mean the easy to single out torso sections on a clan mech go pop when the armour is gone, or the ammo is stored in easily shot off arms.

Fixed armour distribution is also fairly damning, especially given the look of the how their hit boxes could work out. A Daishi comes with the same armour as an Atlas, but the Daishi has 94 points on the front CT where as my Atlas has 120. My Atlas also reigns in the pod weight difference by shaving several tons off the arms and legs while the Daishi is stuck with max armour on extremities and that bullet nose.


IS mechs are the dueling tortoises,were as the clans are sharks. XL engines that can survive a side torso destruction and a free CASE in every component, balanced out by increased amounts of ammunition crits in commonly shot spots with fixed armour distribution and engine.

So long as Clan stuff is generally in line with TT numbers and they don't get increased ammo per ton on missiles or ballistics (equipped for duels, not battles), I can see clanners being completely different to the IS mechs in general while still being 'superior', yet very fragile. Keeping the IS's 'balanced' weaponry vs's the clanners TT level of weaponry would also close the gap. The TT CERLL has 10 damage, 750 range and 12 heat for 4 tons, where as our current ISERLL has 9 damage, 675 range and 9.5 heat for 5 tons. Fairly balanced.

Clanner ballistics and missiles could somewhat be balanced by having TT levels of ammo per ton, 100 damage per ton compared to the IS's current 150 damage per ton. Clanners need more ammo, which means more ammo explosions, and since clan mechs have full legs, it's a choice to either store ammo in the arms and lose it easily, or store it in the torso sections and make the easily singled out side torso sections exceptionally vulnerable.


Overall it seems to me that clanners are going to be fragile gunbags in contrast with the IS's optimized armour layouts and standard engine zombie potential. So basically everyone who can't make a good build without an XL engine now, is going to jump ship to clans because their XL engines are numpty friendly, which means PGI would probably be smart to introduce 2 engine crits worth of heat build up to clan mechs that lose a side torso, effectively neutering them anyway given 1.4 DHS.

Edited by CheeseThief, 04 February 2014 - 05:24 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Geist Null, on 04 February 2014 - 05:20 AM, said:

only 3 pages so far in the latest "don't nerf me bro!" post about clan tech, im kinda disappointed. I liked what was written up, I liked the limitations to your mech lab, and while im kinda sad my dream of a CUAC20 hunchback has been laid to rest for now, the game in its own way will be balanced.

Don't forget i am not saying not to Nerf Me. I am saying don't Nerf my enemy Geist. Also, what o you mean no Hunchback IIC?

[Artgathan]

I doubt ammo explosions will be a factor affecting clan builds, considering their infrequence. Even if ammo explosions were more frequent, components die so fast (once the armor is gone) that an ammo explosion probably only shaves a second or so off of that components expected survivability.

[Joseph Mallan]

lockwoodx, on 04 February 2014 - 04:43 AM, said:

MWO needs frontline players to begin with. The trials aren't cutting it and the meta is anything but "frontline".



Then clans would be fighting clans ect. I esssplained that lucy. Portioning drops is for the benefit of players who still want to use IS mechs.

Could you define your definition of Frontline players?

[CheeseThief]

Artgathan, on 04 February 2014 - 05:27 AM, said:

I doubt ammo explosions will be a factor affecting clan builds, considering their infrequence. Even if ammo explosions were more frequent, components die so fast (once the armor is gone) that an ammo explosion probably only shaves a second or so off of that components expected survivability.

A Matcat for example, should have enough internal structure on a side torso to survive 3 PPC blasts, which is a decent amount in lance scale combat, especially if they are compentent at twisting away damage (madcat ears not withstanding). But it's equally about ammo denial than the ammo explosion itself, clan mechs come pre-equipped with a free CASE in every section so explosions never spread, however very few clan mechs have space in the CT, Legs or Head, so their either putting the ammo in easy to remove arms, or effectively forfieting any internal structure health on the side torso's.

Either way the clanners are losing guns at a faster rate than IS mechs, either from explosions or ammo denial.


Theoretically anyway, I have no idea how PGI intends to balance things. I do however like the idea of 100 damage per ton balance for clan mechs, more bomb crits to in easy to hit locations and it reigns in the clan weapon weight and crit advantages since they need to carry 50-100% more ammo to equal an IS mech.

Armed for trials, not battles and all that jazz.

Edited by CheeseThief, 04 February 2014 - 05:47 AM.

[A banana in the tailpipe]

Joseph Mallan, on 04 February 2014 - 05:27 AM, said:

Could you define your definition of Frontline players?

Mechs designed to soak damage more than focusing on firepower. At the moment the meta is use the biggest alpha possible taking the path of least resistance. Builds are min/maxed to extremes and even trial mechs are made to die in 2 shots due to forced XL engines. MWO is in serious need of fodder that actually takes time to kill so they are a proper distraction and not just "lol BOOM HEADSHOT". This would also benefit newer players by living long enough to lean something.

To me, "big stompy robots" revolves around wearing each other down with maces. There's a certain charm to the middle ages and knights in huge suits of armor. Then along came the guy with the rapier and musket balls to mess it all up. I'm not claiming the game MUST be knights in armor, but I'll advocate it should be more like that than Mechsniper online.

Edited by lockwoodx, 04 February 2014 - 05:46 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Thats what I thought.

You mentioned Maces. You know TT has maces. That they do twice as much damage as an Axe, and it does that to a single location. So a Atlas with a Mace is a 40 point hit to one of only 6 Punch locations. The latest rules in TachOps make it a 20 point thump, but a mace is devastating as it can head cap 17% of the time under either rule set.

[A banana in the tailpipe]

Joseph Mallan, on 04 February 2014 - 05:59 AM, said:

Thats what I thought.

You mentioned Maces. You know TT has maces. That they do twice as much damage as an Axe, and it does that to a single location. So a Atlas with a Mace is a 40 point hit to one of only 6 Punch locations. The latest rules in TachOps make it a 20 point thump, but a mace is devastating as it can head cap 17% of the time under either rule set.

Never played TT, only digital titles. If mechs could use melee weapons in MWO it would make sniping worse because you'd have one group obsessed with closing range while the other determined to keep maximum distance. As the distanced mechs slowly gain superiority everyone eventually turns into a sniper mech themselves and... I just described how brawling in MWO turned out.

That's why I don't consider MWO having any genuine "frontliners" at the moment because even the mighty Atlas is cored after a few alphas.

[ReXspec]

Vidarok, on 04 February 2014 - 01:52 AM, said:

That was a good read. And I think any sane person would like to maintain an incentive to use IS mechs and tech. It's a fair notion that you have, but I fear PGI will not listen. We already have IS 'mechs that are being phased out slowly but surely. I will use them anyway, because it's not something typical. In reality, I am just gimping myself.

QFT

OMG. You have no idea how much you restored my hope for the community by saying this.

Joseph Mallan, on 04 February 2014 - 05:59 AM, said:

Thats what I thought.

You mentioned Maces. You know TT has maces. That they do twice as much damage as an Axe, and it does that to a single location. So a Atlas with a Mace is a 40 point hit to one of only 6 Punch locations. The latest rules in TachOps make it a 20 point thump, but a mace is devastating as it can head cap 17% of the time under either rule set.

I would KILL for melee in MWO.

Knocking down a 'mech is one thing, but I REALLY want to do a falcon punch with my Atlas.

[ReXspec]

lockwoodx, on 04 February 2014 - 06:59 AM, said:

That's why I don't consider MWO having any genuine "frontliners" at the moment because even the mighty Atlas is cored after a few alphas.

That will change if rates of fire are reduced to TT standards, and armor values are set to TT standards. It will increase longevity of 'mechs, matches and reduce the dreaded pinpoint damage that PGI has been desperately trying to fix.

[Joseph Mallan]

lockwoodx, on 04 February 2014 - 06:59 AM, said:

Never played TT, only digital titles. If mechs could use melee weapons in MWO it would make sniping worse because you'd have one group obsessed with closing range while the other determined to keep maximum distance. As the distanced mechs slowly gain superiority everyone eventually turns into a sniper mech themselves and... I just described how brawling in MWO turned out.

That's why I don't consider MWO having any genuine "frontliners" at the moment because even the mighty Atlas is cored after a few alphas.

That is still thanks to convergence, I don't like it any more than the rest, but I know that targeting computers could do it on TT for a price. We just don't have that price. I fire 2 AC20s at you I should have 'a chance' to put 40 damage in one location, but it should not be a near guarantee. without 6 tons of Targeting computer.

[A banana in the tailpipe]

ReXspec, on 04 February 2014 - 07:11 AM, said:

That will change if rates of fire are reduced to TT standards, and armor values are set to TT standards. It will increase longevity of 'mechs, matches and reduce the dreaded pinpoint damage that PGI has been desperately trying to fix.

With respect to pulse lasers and their abysmal range / high heat I would be perfectly ok with them remaining pinpoint.

[Joseph Mallan]

ReXspec, on 04 February 2014 - 07:11 AM, said:

That will change if rates of fire are reduced to TT standards, and armor values are set to TT standards. It will increase longevity of 'mechs, matches and reduce the dreaded pinpoint damage that PGI has been desperately trying to fix.

I don't know if that is true, I had Mechs on TT that could sustain a 75 point Alpha. Five Fifteen point hits on TT was fairly devastating to most Mechs.

lockwoodx, on 04 February 2014 - 07:18 AM, said:

With respect to pulse lasers and their abysmal range / high heat I would be perfectly ok with them remaining pinpoint.

Clan versions too?

[ReXspec]

lockwoodx, on 04 February 2014 - 07:18 AM, said:

With respect to pulse lasers and their abysmal range / high heat I would be perfectly ok with them remaining pinpoint.

Lasers will ALWAYS remain pinpoint. The trade-off is they will always do burst DoT to balance the fact that they are amazingly accurate.

What I'm looking forward to with a slight amount of chagrin actually is how PGI will "balance" Clan Pulse Lasers and X-Pulse lasers... Clan Large Pulse Lasers were the top dog weaponry for any 'mech that wanted to pack a punch up to 800m. No doubt PGI will gimp it and call it "balanced". :I

[ReXspec]

Joseph Mallan, on 04 February 2014 - 07:25 AM, said:

I don't know if that is true, I had Mechs on TT that could sustain a 75 point Alpha. Five Fifteen point hits on TT was fairly devastating to most Mechs.

What kind of 'mechs were you fighting with/against on TT? O.o

Chances are, if you were pumping out that much damage and your opponent was of equal BV he would be dishing some punishment of his own.

Edited by ReXspec, 04 February 2014 - 07:32 AM.

[A banana in the tailpipe]

Joseph Mallan, on 04 February 2014 - 07:25 AM, said:

Clan versions too?

Yep them too. Being "clan tech" shouldn't change how the weapon functions, you just get more bang for the buck. For the skill / effort it takes to use pulse weapons in range and without powering down, the accuracy is a legitimate reward imo.

Edited by lockwoodx, 04 February 2014 - 07:32 AM.

[Mycrus]

Dollars and cents...

X dollars is the cost of developing IS mechs...

They will not introduce the clan tech that you envision because it will invalidate IS mechs..... which costs X dollars to develop...

pgi only cares about balance from the point of view of keeping IS mechs viable because it costs X dollars to develop...

Read this post again and again until you get it..

[Joseph Mallan]

True there ReXspec. Lasers>Ballistics>Missiles for Convergent accuracy. So Damage should kinda counter balance that by being Missiles>Ballistic>Lasers for Damage.

ReXspec, on 04 February 2014 - 07:30 AM, said:

What kind of 'mechs were you fighting with/against on TT? O.o

Chances are, if you were pumping out that much damage and your opponent was of equal BV he would be dishing some punishment of his own.

Stone Rhino
3 Gauss (4-6 tons of ammo total)
2 ERPPC
16 doubles
full armor

Depending on his choices, he could do more or less damage. But I hunted Assaults both Omni and 2nd line.

lockwoodx, on 04 February 2014 - 07:30 AM, said:

Yep them too. Being "clan tech" shouldn't change how the weapon functions, you just get more bang for the buck. For the skill / effort it takes to use pulse weapons in range and without powering down, the accuracy is a legitimate reward imo.

Ok. Just wanted to be sure.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 04 February 2014 - 07:45 AM.

[ReXspec]

Mycrus, on 04 February 2014 - 07:32 AM, said:

Dollars and cents...

X dollars is the cost of developing IS mechs...

They will not introduce the clan tech that you envision because it will invalidate IS mechs..... which costs X dollars to develop...

pgi only cares about balance from the point of view of keeping IS mechs viable because it costs X dollars to develop...

Read this post again and again until you get it..

As I stated in the beginning, the introduction of Clan tech means that, from a lore and gameplay standpoint, certain weaponry and tech will become obsolete. Period. This is mainly because you are releasing A LOT new content that competes with IS tech.

Example:

Clan Double Heat Sinks will be the new meta, and IS double heat sinks will be phased out. This isn't wrong. This is asymmetrical warfare at it's finest (or most typical, if you want to interpret that way).