98 replies to this topic

[Lily from animove]

SC and adder are definately kinda too strong for what they are, definately unbalanced, but not OP. Nova and kitfox aren't, Adder and Sommoner are fine too.
DW and WHK are borderline strong mechs.

Sandpit, on 04 September 2014 - 06:57 AM, said:

I'm actually glad I saved my money regarding the clans. I got to toy around with them on the last PST and I was sincerely underwhelmed by them. They were definitely "cool" but nothing special. They're exactly what we had before their release, just different stats and colors.

I regularly eat Dires and timbers for lunch with my Misery. So I don't see them as "op", unfortunately Russ stated "the analytics scream OP" so that's where we're headed because that's PGI's latest audience

the analysts analysed wrong.

Who palyed there?

dediacted gamers that payed money to play in clan mechs vs mechs that they used for ages knowing their weaknesses, while they also already played their clanmechs on the live servers to gian experience.

On the other wise were a mixed amount of IS pilots also containing newbies who in bets case knew their IS mechs but not much about the clanner weaknesses.

The knowledge and experience gap here was huge and mainly the cause for those majority of clan dominance.

They should have made those statistics with the latest testserver as the servers moved, because then every lowbob and guy never having used a clanmech before would also played in a clanmech. I am very sure the results would have differed a lot.

it was kinda rotten result from the beginning, Like when i would use 11 female professional footballers and let them play vs 11 male amateur footballers. And then say: females are OP.

Edited by Lily from animove, 05 September 2014 - 05:42 AM.

[Sandpit]

Mott, on 05 September 2014 - 05:20 AM, said:

True?

Puzzled.

yup, true. Clans won more matches but IS actually killed more clan mechs. Mull that one over in your old noodle

[Tarl Cabot]

Some of the primary reasons Clan mechs are stronger would be speed (except for lights) and durability of the Clan XL engine, as well as remaining weapon load even when a side torso WITH technically 2 engine criticals gone but no reduction in heat cap and dissipation. In BT, the side torso equipped with a IS XL engine is lost, which is 3 engine crits, it dies but atm Clan XL engines/mechs are not adversely affected by the lost of part of the engine itself.

And if actual engine crits are never introduced to the game, then the lost of part of an engine should have a negative effect now, which would also provide a better foundation for Clan weapon adjustments. By default, the lost of a side torso with Clan XL would result the heat cap reduced by 10 and reduce the number of internal DHS by 5. That would be 2.0 for each DHS instead of the external 1.4 DHS. Now, the effectiveness of a severely damaged Clan mech has been reduced. And that actual number could also be tweaked and there should be accountability for a damaged Clan XL engines as there is currently for IS XL engines (destruction).

[El Bandito]

Jazzbandit1313, on 04 September 2014 - 05:46 AM, said:

After a three week hiatus whilst awaiting my new GTX760 (I fried my last one - don't ask) I patched and hopped on MWO. I played at least 5 rounds each of the trial clan mechs. I have to say, after being a strong IS advocate and arguing that the clammers were OP so many times, that my mind has changed! Now, mind you, I only played in the two trial builds, so I didn't get to use many of the clan weapons, but I can clearly distinguish that the style of play is somewhat different that IS, but not harder or easier. I know many of you may think differently, but Clans and IS have two similar but different types of gameplay involving varying strategies and types of gameplay. I won't get into the whole, pros and cons of each, because it reeeeeally comes down to personal opinion and how you play, but I truly believe now that the Clan mechs are *mostly balanced. I even feel bad for clan mech owners because of the upcoming nerfhammer about to be smashed upon their heads. So, I digress, and apologize for any misgivings I have caused anyone by insulting the clans in the past, and I urge anyone who still believes that they're OP to take a clan mech out for a stroll. *There are some issues with a few weapons here and there...Clan PPC's being too low heat, etc....but still beam durations are killer long and engine caps SUCK

Play a mastered Clan mech and then voice your opinion pls. There is a huge power gap between a basic Direwhale and a mastered Direwhale, for example.

Edited by El Bandito, 05 September 2014 - 06:54 AM.

[Mott]

Sandpit, on 05 September 2014 - 05:33 AM, said:

yup, true. Clans won more matches but IS actually killed more clan mechs. Mull that one over in your old noodle

So more wins with less kills would obviously lead one to assume that the clan pilots got their wins based on superior tactics and piloting.

How does that = an excuse to nerf slam all the clan tech?

Still puzzled.

[Revis Volek]

Viges, on 04 September 2014 - 12:45 PM, said:

Anecdoticaly they are doing pretty much exactly this. KitFox - cerll nerf. Nova - cerml nerf (most likely).

But we dont know what the final changes will be tomorrow.

Btw they did 2 tests on live servers clans vs is, tournament, almost a day on test server and they are in touch with some high tier players. They have a lot of data actually.

I think he was saying YOU POSTED no real evidence....Showing us 3 or 4 good games and nothing else is you skewing the data so it fits your argument. If you want to give me a real idea of how you did in this mech vs other mechs I will need a set of 25 or more screen shots. Every game you played in it good, bad or mediocre. Then i would also need that from about 2/3rd's of the player base and other people as well as the same across their entire stable of mechs. So if you really think you have that amount of data, and you also are capable of interpreting it correctly, without errors and staying non bias MAYBE I will take what you are saying into corroboration.

The truth is if you think you have ANY idea after 4 games then you are dead wrong and dont seem to understand what you are trying to determine. For starters if it was your first 4 games in that mech the ELO yo-yo has not stopped for you yet I'm sure. Secondly, 700 Dmg and a few kills is pedestrian at best. If we wanna compare Epeens I will bust out the 25 or so screenies of me doing just that thing in my IS JR7-F. 700 dmg and even 3 kills is decent but not OP by any means....

[Sandpit]

Mott, on 05 September 2014 - 06:54 AM, said:

So more wins with less kills would obviously lead one to assume that the clan pilots got their wins based on superior tactics and piloting.

How does that = an excuse to nerf slam all the clan tech?

Still puzzled.

I fail to see where I ever even implied clans should be nerfed...?

[Apnu]

I am a strict IS pilot. I have not bought the clan pack, nor have I purchased a c-bill clan mech. I have no plans to do so.

So, now that's out of the way, here is my statement on the subject of clans being OP.

Clan tech is fine.

[Bishop Steiner]

Apnu, on 05 September 2014 - 08:39 AM, said:

I am a strict IS pilot. I have not bought the clan pack, nor have I purchased a c-bill clan mech. I have no plans to do so.

So, now that's out of the way, here is my statement on the subject of clans being OP.

Clan tech is fine.

Largely agree. Though even as an IS guy, my traditional love of the Thor is gonna make it hard not to cbill buy them.....even if they are weak in this game. (That and the MWO version looks fantastic!)

[Ultimax]

Bishop Steiner, on 05 September 2014 - 08:46 AM, said:

Largely agree. Though even as an IS guy, my traditional love of the Thor is gonna make it hard not to cbill buy them.....even if they are weak in this game. (That and the MWO version looks fantastic!)

I'm not a fan of it but I finally got my prime fully elited.

It will never be a great mech, but if you love it there is just enough room to make a build that is decent (but not stellar).

For the time being I'm running

Gauss + 3 tons ammo
4x CERMLAS
MK I TC

[Mott]

Sandpit, on 05 September 2014 - 08:32 AM, said:

I fail to see where I ever even implied clans should be nerfed...?

Not you. But that was somehow the lesson that PGI took away from their "research".

[Sandpit]

Mott, on 05 September 2014 - 10:40 AM, said:

Not you. But that was somehow the lesson that PGI took away from their "research".

well in fairness, PGI got their last round of nerfs after "speaking with a few high level competitive players"

[Viges]

DarthRevis, on 05 September 2014 - 08:03 AM, said:

I think he was saying YOU POSTED no real evidence....

Well maybe its because I was not posting any evidence? Maybe you need to learn to read first?

I posted the examples of what I called good games for me. I don't need to proof anything to any random person on the Internet. I shared my experience, looked at other's and formed my vision on the state of the balance.

If you cant see and hear what other people say - it will only hurt you. I don't need to gather statistics and calculate deviations to see the obvious.

[Bishop Steiner]

Ultimatum X, on 05 September 2014 - 10:29 AM, said:

I'm not a fan of it but I finally got my prime fully elited.

It will never be a great mech, but if you love it there is just enough room to make a build that is decent (but not stellar).

For the time being I'm running

Gauss + 3 tons ammo
4x CERMLAS
MK I TC

Correction..... THERE WAS just enough room to make a viable, and decent Mech.

Now? Thanks to PGI way not balancing the Timberwolf, and the Pros exploiting the heck out of it, the Summoner truly is the Suckoner.

GG,close!

[Sandpit]

Viges, on 05 September 2014 - 11:35 AM, said:

I don't need to gather statistics and calculate deviations to see the obvious.

uhm.....
actually...
if you want accurate data for the entire game population yes you do, examples like yours help, but you'd need at least a hundred or more examples to begin to get a decent sampling size.

[Revis Volek]

Sandpit, on 05 September 2014 - 12:02 PM, said:

uhm.....
actually...
if you want accurate data for the entire game population yes you do, examples like yours help, but you'd need at least a hundred or more examples to begin to get a decent sampling size.

Didnt say you had to prove anything you are putting words in my mouth sir. You tried to make a statement that a mech was better then its IS counterparts, which is in more words basically saying its OP when you had no DATA to support the claim other then 3 matches with decent scores. So you did post EVIDENCE there is 3 screen shots on this thread to prove it. But you think 3 matches is enough to make a claim. I and Sandpit have suggest otherwise. You make think as you wish but its a very uneducated guess at best.

here is the rest of that post which you took out of context....

..."Showing us 3 or 4 good games and nothing else is you skewing the data so it fits your argument. If you want to give me a real idea of how you did in this mech vs other mechs I will need a set of 25 or more screen shots. Every game you played in it good, bad or mediocre. Then i would also need that from about 2/3rd's of the player base and other people as well as the same across their entire stable of mechs. So if you really think you have that amount of data, and you also are capable of interpreting it correctly, without errors and staying non bias MAYBE I will take what you are saying into corroboration.

The truth is if you think you have ANY idea after 4 games then you are dead wrong and dont seem to understand what you are trying to determine. For starters if it was your first 4 games in that mech the ELO yo-yo has not stopped for you yet I'm sure. Secondly, 700 Dmg and a few kills is pedestrian at best. If we wanna compare Epeens I will bust out the 25 or so screenies of me doing just that thing in my IS JR7-F. 700 dmg and even 3 kills is decent but not OP by any means..."

Edited by DarthRevis, 05 September 2014 - 12:18 PM.

[Viges]

Sandpit, on 05 September 2014 - 12:02 PM, said:

uhm.....
actually...
if you want accurate data for the entire game population yes you do, examples like yours help, but you'd need at least a hundred or more examples to begin to get a decent sampling size.

Lol I dont do balance changes for this game, I only need to form my own opinion. Why would I do so much work? I don't have the tools/means to do it anyway.

I wonder if PGI calculate anything though...

[Revis Volek]

Then why express it here if it is solely for YOU and YOUR OPINION? Generally curious....

Well having data and being able to interpret it correctly is two different things, we all know this. But you are right, ITS A LOT OF WORK! Which is why when people post a few screenshots and an afternoon of experience it makes me chuckle. Grante as Sandpit stated WE NEED ALL THE INFO WE CAN GET! its all important and we need it all to get to PGI so they may have the data. But our opinions at this point are useless and a waste of breath. They will bring down the nerf hammer where ever they please and its seems our opinions and the gameplay we desire is not part of their business model. Which is fine, but if thats the case they might as well close these forums and just go with whatever they had planned to begin with.

[Sandpit]

DarthRevis, on 05 September 2014 - 12:25 PM, said:

Then why express it here if it is solely for YOU and YOUR OPINION? Generally curious....

Well having data and being able to interpret it correctly is two different things, we all know this. But you are right, ITS A LOT OF WORK! Which is why when people post a few screenshots and an afternoon of experience it makes me chuckle. Grante as Sandpit stated WE NEED ALL THE INFO WE CAN GET! its all important and we need it all to get to PGI so they may have the data. But our opinions at this point are useless and a waste of breath. They will bring down the nerf hammer where ever they please and its seems our opinions and the gameplay we desire is not part of their business model. Which is fine, but if thats the case they might as well close these forums and just go with whatever they had planned to begin with.

forget getting it to PGI for a few reasons

1) They already have their metric gathering system, they don't want ours (as they've been so willing to ignore it for 2 years)

2) They would have to acknowledge that their data collection and interpretation is horrible

3) They've already made up their minds on what section of the population currently has their attention and that's who they're going to listen to.