35 replies to this topic

[Felicitatem Parco]

There is a verry simple metric that can be used to determine if Clan Mechs are balanced against their Inner Sphere counterparts.

"If a brand-new player is more successful in an Inner Sphere Mech compared to its Clan-equivalent, then the Mechs are balanced. If a New Player is more successful in a Clan Mech than its Inner Sphere equuivalent, then the Clan Mech is not balanced."

This metric is 100% derived from PGI's rule-of-thumb that a player's skill should determine how well they can perform in a Clan Mech, instead of merely riding on the Clan's technology-coattails. If a new player can thrive in Clan Mechs moreso than IS Mechs, then that means they are riding coattails, and those tails should be trimmed. Only skilled players should be able to utilie Clan Mechs to a potential that out-classes IS Mechs.

I know that there are MANY people who think that lighter and smaller equipment should be more battlefield-effective than their heavier and bulkier counterparts by default (an utter fallacy, by-the-way... complete fallacy). I feel that, on the contrary, the lighter and less bulky equipment should only be more powerful when wielded by very skilled hands, and the heavyweight, bulky weapons should be more effective than the lightweight stuff in the hands of a newbie.

Does anyone else feel this way?

[Y E O N N E]

No.

Why?

Because there are good 'Mechs and bad 'Mechs for both tech sets and they overlap. A good IS 'Mech is better than a bad Clan 'Mech and vice versa. There are also plenty of 'Mechs that, when loaded right, are so close in performance to each other as to be meaningless in the hands of a novice.

Furthermore, not every new player is equal with her peers. Some are better than others for reasons including talent, previous experience with similar games, attention to detail, and overall ability to learn and adapt on the fly.

[Mystere]

Did Dassault or Sukhoi use crop duster pilots to test the performance of the Rafale and Su-27 respectively?

[Wolfways]

From my experience in the solo queue i think that the biggest reason players do badly in IS mechs is that full customization lets people make very bad builds, and many people do exactly that.

[Carrie Harder]

Wolfways, on 02 September 2014 - 07:05 PM, said:

From my experience in the solo queue i think that the biggest reason players do badly in IS mechs is that full customization lets people make very bad builds, and many people do exactly that.

>Insert any IS player who ever used Flamers or SPL here
>XL Stalkers (even before the trial mech)
>Etc.

Trollolololol

Edited by Carrie Harder, 02 September 2014 - 07:09 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

Carrie Harder, on 02 September 2014 - 07:08 PM, said:

>Insert any IS player who ever used Flamers or SPL here
>XL Stalkers (even before the trial mech)
>Etc.

Trollolololol

Hey now! Some of us made them work!

Actually, my 8 flamer BJ-1X was awful but still hilarious when I got three kills in a match with it...and two of them all by my self.

[Felicitatem Parco]

Mystere, on 02 September 2014 - 07:05 PM, said:

Did Dassault or Sukhoi use crop duster pilots to test the performance of the Rafale and Su-27 respectively?

So, you agree that Su-27's are unbalanced compared to cropdusters? So do I. The combat performance of Su27s are far superior to the combat performance of cropdusters, regardless of the pilot, and so I would say they are unbalanced. Ggood to see that you agree with me.

[Mystere]

Prosperity Park, on 02 September 2014 - 07:14 PM, said:

So, you agree that Su-27's are unbalanced compared to cropdusters? So do I. The combat performance of Su27s are far superior to the combat performance of cropdusters, regardless of the pilot, and so I would say they are unbalanced. Ggood to see that you agree with me.

If you were doing a crop duster vs. Su-27 comparison, maybe ( ). But if it were a Rafale vs. Su-27 performance comparison ...

[InspectorG]

New players suffer in IS mechs because they have to grind to get 3 of the same chassis/WEIGHT CLASS to get efficiencies AND grind(usually) for DHS and XLengines.

Clans come with DHS and a better XLengine with grinding only left for better weapons and efficiencies.

DHS alone makes a huge difference, not just the weapons. A newb who profits 40k/match will have to grind forever to get DHS if they dont know to use the cadet bonus to upgrade, and depending what their first mech is, they likely wont have enough butter to spread on 3 pieces of bread.

PGI should start every new player with a 3 mech 'Mario' package with an extra XLengine, an AC10, ppc, 2SRM6. One of the mechs should already be Elited so they can experience the difference in efficiencies. I would say start them on a HBK G/P/J with the G elited. The HBK WILL force them to learn twisting and basic tactics like ridgehumping and cornerpeeking.

The Newb IS grind needs to change, it seems a huge barrier to new players who dont know what type of grind this game can be.
An updated Sticky(or tutorial) on tiers and loadouts would be nice for newbs. Something official. Newbs likely wont know a comp player from an underhiver from a pilot who style works with his very idiosyncratic loadout.

[Johnny Z]

InspectorG, on 02 September 2014 - 07:19 PM, said:

New players suffer in IS mechs because they have to grind to get 3 of the same chassis/WEIGHT CLASS to get efficiencies AND grind(usually) for DHS and XLengines.

Clans come with DHS and a better XLengine with grinding only left for better weapons and efficiencies.

DHS alone makes a huge difference, not just the weapons. A newb who profits 40k/match will have to grind forever to get DHS if they dont know to use the cadet bonus to upgrade, and depending what their first mech is, they likely wont have enough butter to spread on 3 pieces of bread.

PGI should start every new player with a 3 mech 'Mario' package with an extra XLengine, an AC10, ppc, 2SRM6. One of the mechs should already be Elited so they can experience the difference in efficiencies. I would say start them on a HBK G/P/J with the G elited. The HBK WILL force them to learn twisting and basic tactics like ridgehumping and cornerpeeking.

The Newb IS grind needs to change, it seems a huge barrier to new players who dont know what type of grind this game can be.
An updated Sticky(or tutorial) on tiers and loadouts would be nice for newbs. Something official. Newbs likely wont know a comp player from an underhiver from a pilot who style works with his very idiosyncratic loadout.

The faster they balance the clans, the better off newbies will be as well as anyone wanting to pilot an inner sphere mech.

Weapons balances are a good start. But the only balance that will make any difference is if inner sphere mechs using Xl's dont go boom on side torso loss, or if clan side torso does go boom on a loss. Take your pick.

The double heat sinks taking less crits and a ton of other OP equipment needs to be looked at also.

Easier said than done I know, because many players want an "I WIN" button. Sad but true.

[InspectorG]

Johnny Z, on 02 September 2014 - 07:55 PM, said:

The faster they balance the clans, the better off newbies will be as well as anyone wanting to pilot an inner sphere mech.

Weapons balances are a good start. But the only balance that will make any difference is if inner sphere mechs using Xl's dont go boom on side torso loss, or if clan side torso does go boom on a loss. Take your pick.

The double heat sinks taking less crits and a ton of other OP equipment needs to be looked at also.

Easier said than done I know, because many players want an "I WIN" button. Sad but true.

Well, the elephant in the room is Clans are SUPPOSED to be OP compared to IS.
Balance shouldnt mean 'equal to', it should mean 'different and perhaps slightly more advantageous style of play'.

Battletech by its very nature and premise had a good amount of power creep in it.

To me the weapons largely feel fine. Individual weapons need tweaks but overall i think it feels about right.

IS mechs SHOULD be at a disadvantage, but not one that is game-breaking. Think about it: if you bought a Clan mech on release and it was just a re-skin of some IS mech, how would you feel. I would have been, well, maybe pissed.

IS XLengines are a risk/reward proposition, the DHS are lower quality(more crit slots) compared to Clan.
Clan mechs do have flaws as well. Most weapons are carried in the often low hanging arms. CT's tend to be more pronounced and easier to hit. Mech speed is 'fixed' and while this lends itself to better unit cohesion now, in CW should we get role warfare, IS engine customization may well be an advantage for role and/or objectives. Clan mech tend to be bulkier in size in relation to their weight(endo and ferro?).

New maps, theoretically, smaller maps, would favor the IS with their front-loaded-damage and cooler? faster-firing? weapons. Clans would be more advantaged at larger flatter maps where their range and similar-speed-across-chassis would help.

Also should R&R be re- implemented, clans will likely be very expensive to maintain. Certain (near)stock IS mechs may be C-bill grinders. Yay Locust!!!
Would you drop in a Clam mech knowing you likely wont make as much C-bills as a cheaper to run IS mech? Depends. Are you currently grinding for a new shiny? These choices will help shape Clan vs IS balance.

'Balance' will likely come through CW and more/better mission objectives rather than number tweaking individual weapons. No one mech will likely be meta in all scenarios. Assuming CW brings variety and a more long term strategic play rather than the semi-Solaris we have now.

Some players want an 'I WIN BUTTON' they can mash as fast as possible. This is the reality of gaming.

Others like myself want Chess in giant robots with some twitch and a dash of crazy.

[Asmudius Heng]

R&R was terrible please no. It did awful things for player behaviour.

Like I am saying at every turn .... they need a system based on LOGISTICS. This should never be linked to cbills but should simulate that less effective mechs would be cheap and top end ones expensive

See Rolands post for one way to deal with this. Cant find the link but it a market based approach where lesser used mechs would be cheaper to field for a team for instance but the meta mechs would be harder to field.

[Valore]

This is a stupid argument, one which I cannot believe keeps popping up.

Why are we even discussing Clan vs IS balance when we don't know what the final, balanced 'competition' game mode is going to be.

Balancing IS mechs to be equal to Clan mechs is stupid, because Clan mechs are meant to be better ton for ton.

Basically any 'imbalance' that currently exists is all down to PGI being the way they are, i.e. abominably bad at any kind of sensible planning in terms of content releases.

In fact, one could say that the current state of Clan vs IS power balance is absolutely accurate and correct. Clan stuff should outright smash the crap out of IS stuff.

What a better, non-incompetent developer would have done, is released new asymmetrical game modes such as 12 v 10, along with the Clan tech and balanced for those.

Sadly we have PGI.

Edited by Valore, 02 September 2014 - 10:16 PM.

[FDJustin]

Wolfways, on 02 September 2014 - 07:05 PM, said:

From my experience in the solo queue i think that the biggest reason players do badly in IS mechs is that full customization lets people make very bad builds, and many people do exactly that.

Nah, I do equally bad in good builds.

Carrie Harder, on 02 September 2014 - 07:08 PM, said:

>Insert any IS player who ever used Flamers or SPL here
>XL Stalkers (even before the trial mech)
>Etc.

Trollolololol

I won't defend the SPL. I'll just continue to use it instead.

[Hagoromo Gitsune]

Prosperity Park, on 02 September 2014 - 06:55 PM, said:

There is a verry simple metric that can be used to determine if Clan Mechs are balanced against their Inner Sphere counterparts.

"If a brand-new player is more successful in an Inner Sphere Mech compared to its Clan-equivalent, then the Mechs are balanced. If a New Player is more successful in a Clan Mech than its Inner Sphere equuivalent, then the Clan Mech is not balanced."

This metric is 100% derived from PGI's rule-of-thumb that a player's skill should determine how well they can perform in a Clan Mech, instead of merely riding on the Clan's technology-coattails. If a new player can thrive in Clan Mechs moreso than IS Mechs, then that means they are riding coattails, and those tails should be trimmed. Only skilled players should be able to utilie Clan Mechs to a potential that out-classes IS Mechs.

I know that there are MANY people who think that lighter and smaller equipment should be more battlefield-effective than their heavier and bulkier counterparts by default (an utter fallacy, by-the-way... complete fallacy). I feel that, on the contrary, the lighter and less bulky equipment should only be more powerful when wielded by very skilled hands, and the heavyweight, bulky weapons should be more effective than the lightweight stuff in the hands of a newbie.

Does anyone else feel this way?

I feel this way while running a TW on battlefield and comparing to my HGN-732 which actually being nerfed by JJ's and adding a lower hand actuators which that mech don't even have by the lore. Actually there is a whole lot of Is mechs must been revised for their critical slots.
Just as example let's take... HGN-732. Do you guys know what is next and previous model of this mech?
Right, the previous is HGN-694 and HGN-732B. 694 got a Heavy Gauss Rifle which takes 11(!) critical slots and weights 18(!) tons. Next is 732B who got an AC20 or a LBX-10 in a ballistic slot. And some how 732 got only 9 critical points in a B-slot when it should be 11. How for a Jeez sake PGI made that?
Now about JJ's. Did you guys actually know about such a maneuver called "death from above"? It's when some(Victor, Higlander or Pillager) went's up in the air and land with "feets" on enemy cockpit. What it means? It means that 80 or 90 or even 100 tons heavy mech must be lifted by at least 30 metres above the ground. And what Victors/Highlanders drivers with 2 fokin First Class JJ's have? 13 fokin poor metres of a lift-off!? Are you joking mates?
This is a... RIP-OFF!

[KhanCipher]

Hagoromo Gitsune, on 03 September 2014 - 12:07 AM, said:

Just as example let's take... HGN-732. Do you guys know what is next and previous model of this mech?
Right, the previous is HGN-694 and HGN-732B. 694 got a Heavy Gauss Rifle which takes 11(!) critical slots and weights 18(!) tons. Next is 732B who got an AC20 or a LBX-10 in a ballistic slot. And some how 732 got only 9 critical points in a B-slot when it should be 11.

wrong wrong wrong, and more wrong.

the HGN-694 came out in 3061-3064 (when the fed-com civil war broke out), the HGN-732 came before 2750, the HGN-732b is just the standard 732 but with DHS and Artimis, the HGN-733 is a downgraded 732 because FASA wrote in a lot of stupid people to get to the "grim dark future of 3025" (fun fact: the 2750 star league era lore was written after the 3025 lore was written), the 733C is just a 90t VTR-9B with a bit more guns, the 733P is the same thing as the 733 but ditches the ballistics for a PPC.

Signed- someone who felt the need to tell you "Lrn2Lore"

[Hagoromo Gitsune]

KhanCipher, on 03 September 2014 - 12:35 AM, said:

wrong wrong wrong, and more wrong.

the HGN-694 came out in 3061-3064 (when the fed-com civil war broke out), the HGN-732 came before 2750, the HGN-732b is just the standard 732 but with DHS and Artimis, the HGN-733 is a downgraded 732 because FASA wrote in a lot of stupid people to get to the "grim dark future of 3025" (fun fact: the 2750 star league era lore was written after the 3025 lore was written), the 733C is just a 90t VTR-9B with a bit more guns, the 733P is the same thing as the 733 but ditches the ballistics for a PPC.

Signed- someone who felt the need to tell you "Lrn2Lore"

So, that try reasonably explain why 694 is comming be fore 732b and 732?
And why there is NO years of production 694 mentioned in Sarna?

Give ya a clue... cause 694 comes earlier than 732 and 732b, and don't mix it with 736and 738. This is ComStar dude, they always cheats. Yes, it was widely introduced in a FedCom Civil War... but face production in a 2592 same as 732 and armed same as 732 with a Gauss Rifle previously. Modernized in 3063 dismanteling missiles for another balistic slot to carry HGR still remaining M7 GR. Actually on HGN694 base was made HGN-II which exactly fits to a current model 732, but just used by the Clans.
So, how about "Lear2Lore" yourself?

For MWO it means: that displacement will be:

Model 732/732b: - 1B (11cs), 3E, 2-3M
Model 694: - 2B(2x11cs), 3E, 0M

Edited by Hagoromo Gitsune, 03 September 2014 - 12:55 AM.

[KhanCipher]

Hagoromo Gitsune, on 03 September 2014 - 12:52 AM, said:

So, that try reasonably explain why 694 is comming be fore 732b and 732?
And why there is NO years of production 694 mentioned in Sarna?

Quote

HGN-694
Introduced during the FedCom Civil War, this Highlander variant replaces the missiles, medium lasers, and jump jets with two Large Lasers and a Heavy Gauss Rifle. The M-7 Gauss Rifle remains in place. BV (2.0) = 2,358

You notice that, it says Introduced, That means it started production in the civil war, not before, and not after. Hell, let's look at the heavy gauss sarna page, and this is the first sentence.

Quote

The Heavy Gauss Rifle is a new, deadly innovation by Lyran Alliance scientists introduced in 3061^[2].

I know full well what's lostech, when certain weapons are availabile, and for the most part who made/reintroduced them first.

[N0MAD]

My son just said this while reading the OP (yes he does play both IS and Clan)
There are two types of players in MWO atm, those that know Clans are OP and those that own Clan mechs...

[Joseph Mallan]

Prosperity Park, on 02 September 2014 - 07:14 PM, said:

So, you agree that Su-27's are unbalanced compared to cropdusters? So do I. The combat performance of Su27s are far superior to the combat performance of cropdusters, regardless of the pilot, and so I would say they are unbalanced. Ggood to see that you agree with me.

Actually they are balanced to a crop duster.
Balance according to the Webster Dictionary:

Quote

: a state in which different things occur in equal or proper amounts or have an equal or proper amount of importance

Proper amount of importance. Meditate on this for a few. So to be balanced Clan Equipment can be better so long as it is within a proper amount. And still be balanced. Now that proper amount is what will be debated to death.