Pariah Devalis, on 22 May 2014 - 08:29 PM, said:
Speed makes a difference, but is it enough to overcome a loss of an effective 35% of our usable weapon space? (Taking into account lighter weapons) We need to find out. Part of me feels like that given the state of customized IS mechs in this game, unless they keep the damage advantage of ERPPC, ERLLas, ERMLas, and ERSLas (and the other, pulse, lasers) we could be in trouble.
Only one way to find out, and that is to use them in a live environment for a month or two.
I paid $240 to help PGI collect metrics on Clan mechs and hopefully balance them. Wishful thinking, perhaps, but we shall see.
Effectively, we are not fighting 3050 mechs, with the customization available to them, fighting freebirth mechs is like fighting star league era mechs, period. Denying us that customization is fine as long as we have our weapons to counter them. Balancing our weapons (i.e. nerfing them) really hurts this game in the long term. Within the next 10 battletech years (which PGI can make happen tomorrow), freebirth weapons will close the gap to ours. However unless they then decide to return our weapons to full capability, PGI will have no choice but to nerf new freebirth weapons below ours (since their mechs can be customized far more than ours). By traveling down this path PGI has "painted themselves in a corner" in that all future weapons will need to be nerfed to 3050 levels to keep the game "balanced", or they will have to change ALL weapons to meet later standards - either way they are creating significantly more work for themselves than was needed....
I too paid 240$ to be a PGI test platform (though the added premium days and the extra mech bays are nice no matter what happens). I actually believe PGI will work hard to balance clan mechs as they are going to be a significant source of income for them (just look at how many more clan mechs they are planning on releasing as opposed to freebirth mechs).