876 replies to this topic

[Marshal Jim Duncan]

The more you 'balance' the game, the more unplayable you make it.

Instead of trying to balance the game through nerfing, try balancing the game through training?

I sucked for many months until I figured out how to configure the mech I was in for the game play that I want. With a moderate amount of time and effort a player can go from 'sucking' to 'relatively competent'. Just when I get good in a mech, you guys nerf them.

What you are teaching me is that any amount of time I spend in this game to improve my configuration and find one that I am happy with is a complete waste of time and money.

I like to shoot bullets, lasers, make things explode and wage war. Since the mech technology doesn't exist I reality -- I play this game.

Why punish me for learning how to get good??

p.s.

The javascript on the text editor sucks so bad that it keeps missing characters unless I type really really really slow. Yet one more frustrating thing you shove in front of your customers. Thanks. One more chance, or it's "So long, and thanks for the fish."

[GreyGriffin]

... wait, the #1 reason you can't do 10v12 that you list is.... UI redesign?

I know you don't have a great track record of UI design, but that's a joke, right?

[Johnny Z]

Vrbas, on 11 September 2014 - 09:57 AM, said:

I like everything in that balance patch except the longer duration for IS ER Large. They are now nearly equal burn time as the Clan ER Large with way shorter distance. I believe this was unnecessary.

Same burn time, but I think you forgot to mention CERLL also weigh less and do more damage or isnt that important any more?

Do they also have better heat and take up less space? I think the less weight more damage and longer range makes the point though so who cares about a few more advantages.

Waiting for the "But clans are suposed to be over powered" responses that have kept clan mechs far stronger than IS. REALLY? REALLY? I really dont take this seriously because no one would make an online multi player game so imbalanced and not try to rebalnce it and also there are other mitigating factors, but still its worth a REALLY????? even now.

Edited by Johnny Z, 13 September 2014 - 01:30 PM.

[Gleech]

Nikolai Lubkiewicz, on 05 September 2014 - 10:37 AM, said:

• Clan Heat and Movement penalties if a Right or Left torso is destroyed.
  
• Small increase in IS Mech heat efficiency.
  
• Complete IS mech Quirk pass to give more uniqueness and ability when used within their respective roles.
  
• Increase in IS and Clan mech armor and internal structure if time to death decreases too much.

I think this is a really good plan. I think that adding heat or movement penalties if a Clan-XL mech looses a torso is a great idea. It'll balance things out a lot, it's relatively tune-able in that you can adjust how severe the penalties are and it'll give us an incentive to add Clan standard-engine mechs like the Kingfisher or Stooping Hawk (I love the Stooping Hawk).

I also think an increase in durability is a good idea, because right now it's way to easy to die in a hail of precision damage or LRMs. People are starting to just huddle in defensible locations for the entire match, because if they poke their heads up they die rapidly. Increasing durability will make it more profitable to break cover and maneuver, which is a good thing.

[Diemos]

The other day I was searching for an opponent to play some table-top Battletech. He wanted to bring 6 Timberwolves to the table. I had only the mechs from the Intro Box put out a year or so ago. A single Timberwolf had a BV(Battle Value) of over 2700, the Atlas (the largest mech I have to field against him) has a BV of 1879-ish. Basically, a 75 ton clan mech is stronger than, arguably, the best 100t mech the IS can field. When I mentioned how this guy wanted to play me with 6 Timberwolves to the community I follow on Facebook, they all pretty much called him a "Munchkin", or a "Smurf", or a "Twink".

Ultimately one of the solutions was variable ammo loadouts, such as some kind of SRM acid ammo that was in some archaic tactics handbook, LRM Thunderer ammo, AP ammo in autocannons and so on. Targeting computers and C3 systems to gain situational awareness.

Systems are in place to defeat clan tech, on the other hand, Clanners prided themselves in the ability to face overwhelming odds with fewer assets. So basically Clans were meant to take out a Company size force or larger with a single Star (5 mechs).

[Hammer Hand]

I am excited about the changes coming. Clan Warfare and the game balancing. I like the communication and the vision for the game. The Town Hall Meeting was long but had great info in it. Just wanted to say thanks for your efforts, and I enjoy the game A LOT!

[Kraven Kor]

Wingbreaker, on 05 September 2014 - 11:20 AM, said:

Any additional heat penalties on side torso loss to clan mechs would effectively only nerf asymetrical builds, of which there are basically two.

Summoner/Adder

These are already two of the weakest Clan mechs.

Movement is acceptable, Heat is not. Once you've lost half the mech, your heat curve is already likely cut in half, so removing heat capacity wouldn't affect it. (Except for the stated edge cases)

Russ Bullock, on 07 September 2014 - 09:46 PM, said:

This is reasonable and will be considered.

Well, two sides to that. In TT, an engine crit was +X heat per turn.

If an assymetric build loses the "weaker" torso, but takes no heat penalty, it is largely unaffected.

While if a symetric build loses a torso, and takes no extra heat, it becomes a heat-neutral but lower DPS wonder.

So I'm all for something in the flavor of TT - both a movement and heat penalty. For clan and IS. Engine Crit = loss of heat containment and extra heat and loss of engine power and thus lower movement.

But then I want to see gyro and actuator crits too

[aniviron]

Russ Bullock, on 07 September 2014 - 08:32 PM, said:

Only 20 pages? Okay sorry I'm late to the party but I am going to jump in here:



Well lets keep in mind that many players including myself are very concerned with "average time to death". I personally wish the average lifespan was a little longer. As we have stated many times lots of our design decisions are based on a desired game where players really feel like they are driving a giant stomping mech that can take some abuse and possibly survive a mistake. A more "battle of attrition" feeling is what we and many of our players desire. This has been the basis for most design choices that steered us away from large pin point Alpha's and punching holes through mechs. So I would rather try and keep time to death at least where it is and that means not just buffing up the IS mechs to reach Clans. So the main problem with buffing IS mechs is just that everyone dies faster.

How many of your truly prefer that style of gameplay in MWO? Please I am actually asking.

If you're actually asking, then yes, this is exactly what I want (and seems to be a relatively common thing to desire in r/MWO).

Take a look at this. It's a video of some combat in MWO from beta, only a couple minutes long. Obviously, a lot of things have come a long way since then, but the time-to-kill has dropped pretty drastically since that video. Everyone is running XL, Ferro, and DHS, plus the pilot efficiencies have made it much easier to keep weapons perfectly on target. Now everyone's faster, more agile, cooler, and has room for more guns and more ammo- but durability never increased when the armament did.

Oh, and what happened to that internal ammo explosion effect we see at the end? That is an AMAZING effect! Truly a terrifying way to go, at least in that video.

[Jaeger Gonzo]

end round screen? thats actually just bunch of lazy excuses.

Edited by Jaeger Gonzo, 15 September 2014 - 07:13 PM.

[Haroldwolf]

I like Pauls suggestion about respwans and here is how it can help with a more realistic "play balance".

"I met with the engineers involved with CW-Phase 2 and we started talking about the game mode and the idea of respawn. Wayyy back in closed Beta everyone thought Drop Ship mode would be very cool... the ability to bring in up to 4 'Mechs (1 of each Weight Class) into a match and choose non-destroyed 'Mechs to respawn back into the match with. This was a high technical risk back then and Drop Ship was put on the back burner.

In the meeting today and planning out how we will be incorporating the new game mode into Community Warfare to make a unique experience... Drop Ship came back up. Now let me tell you this... every time I mention Drop Ship, the engineering team (I'll call them Karl & Friends) would cringe back in fear with eyes that would make an anime character jealous. We all started talking.. what's best for the game?.. what would have to get done?.. everyone agreed the community would love something like Drop Ship."

I love this idea and here is some suggestions to help with play balance:
1) Clan get 1 respawn and IS gets 2 respawns. This simulates a clan batchall with the clan calling in reinforcements. The two IS respwans simulates the arrival of their reinformants.
2) REVERSE most of the clan nerfs. If you implement #1 then the game now depends on superior tactics and mechwarrior skill to determine the winner rather than satisfy the "play balance" whiners.

[Alaric Hasek]

Russ,
I think the first mistake you made was allowing the Clans to be played by anyone, at least at first. I realize that money needed to be made to keep the game afloat - and of course PGI is a business. So, I understand why this was done. That said, probably at least initially the Clans should have been restricted to the top tournament or competitive teams, to make the Clan pilots actually something to worry about, and this represents the Clans sending the best pilots they had to invade.

I also realize that this isn't really the TT BT universe and that TT designers have said that they wish they could redo the Clans somewhat. Awesome. But what most players expect from the Clans is an advantage that they're not getting (and I'm glad they're not getting them). Sadly, what most people think the Clan advantage was that all Clan pilots are better than all IS pilots. That's not true. The advantages the Clans had at the beginning of the invasion were: the average Clan pilot was better than the average scrub garrison merc in the invasion route, the technical advantages (XL engines, longer ranged energy weapons, better heat management due to double heat sinks), and Elementals. Once those advantages began to fade, the Clans' invasion ground to a halt.

You have already given us XL engines, double heat sinks (if not quite as good as Clan DHS) and there won't be Elementals. We know that Clan pilots (players) are no better than the IS players, so why is there an invasion at all? There's no way that the Clans without their early advantages in game lore will be able to penetrate the IS as deeply as they did - they probably won't even make it to Rasalhague.

All that said, what is my point? Well, I understand you want to balance IS and Clan 'mechs, but making Clan weapons less heat-efficient while making IS weapons and 'mechs MORE heat-efficient is backwards. The Clans' lore military advantages were speed (Clan heavies moving as fast as their mediums and lights due to XL engines) rather than plodding IS heavies and assaults, range, and the ability to be aggressive when IS mercs were cautious because they had to live on salvage. None of those things are true in MWO - cluttered maps remove the range advantage, IS XLs mean most 'mechs are fast, and everyone has millions of C-Bills.

So, I'm all for nerfing the Clans so we don't have to hear as many people ending sentences with 'quiaff?' but giving the Clan 'mechs a heat disadvantage is the wrong way to go. Maybe the best thing would have been to make Clan 'mechs available only for credits so that people had to spend money on the game rather than for C-Bills? I don't know the answer on how to balance Clan and IS 'mechs, but this isn't the answer either. I think you're going to have to go back to the drawing board.

Edited by Alaric Hasek, 17 September 2014 - 07:45 AM.

[Kyle Travis]

I was a bit sad to read this update - I don't own any Clan Mechs at the moment - will likely get some in due course but I really enjoyed the Clan vs IS games on the test weekend - even though it was usually one sided - it was just like the lore (to me at least) - it was also great when we actually won a few games.....

I really was also looking forward to Lance vs Star games ( or 2 3 Lances vs 2 Stars) - ah well.

I enjoy the game and was hoping for more lore stuff - if you brought in Hatchets maybe that would even things up for the IS

[Sazabi Steppenwulfe]

why is this even an issue. at some point, the inner sphere started using clan tech in their mechs. just start making C-tech available to IS mechs and balance. even in table top Battletech clan mecha weren't guaranteed success against IS.

and the Atlas is still eating people's souls

just don't want this game turning into another E-sport/end gamer, grind-fest, complaint train. there's plenty of IPs out there for that already. been waiting since '86 for a decent virtual game and everyone under thirty is looking for "power ups" and purple gear. enough already

[Sickem]

In order to errr balance, it would help to work out where the real inbalance came from. Armour and internal structure was doubled to help new people learn how to play and to help make up for hit boxes and excessively accurate weapons that are more accurate than they should be. Unless you are at 50 metres and neither mech is moving they should not be pin point accurate. But back to the point, the longer and more prolonged the battle, the more the scales tip toward superior mechs. Inner sphere mechs have been nurfed fighting each other to make battles last longer, so now that clan mechs show up, their superior abilities stand out a lot more, not because they are so much better, but because of nurfing that has already occurred. Doubling armour and structure was the biggest nurf,it effectively halved the damage of all weapons. Perhaps, they need to try returning everything to how it is meant to be, then see how everything is working. Also there is 2 different types of armour, 1 I meant to work better against lasers, while the other is better against missiles. Not sure how much difference the armour would make, but it was a clan flaw, because everyone knows what type of armour they have. But in mixed sides, that won't help much. Too much armour and internal structure is the biggest problem. If you have a team of cars playing smash up derby with pickup trucks, the cars will lose, but they might beat a truck or 2, if you double the strength of the cars and trucks, the cars will still lose but they probably won't even beat 1 truck.

[Steven Dixon]

I'm glad to see devs posting more. I pretty much stopped visiting the forums for quite a long time because they almost never communicated.

In regards to clan balance, for years I was a believer that we should have 10v12 for clans and that clans should actually be more powerful but maybe give them some restriction (such as earning less cbills, ect). Or having more weight restrictions (such as an IS 75 ton being matched against a clan 50 ton, ect). But I think Russ's arguments about why these won't really work well are valid.

I was also surprised at how well the clan mechs were balanced using gameplay mechanics (such as longer duration on lasers, ect). I'm glad they aren't hitting the clans with a major nerfhammer. I also agree with the side torso damage causing heat idea and I like that he's talking about tuning the IS mechs to be more efficent rather than just nerf the clans. Buffs are always more fun than nerfs. This has the danger of decreasing time-to-kill which I already think is a bit too low so I also like the idea of increasing internal damage. This has the added bonus of making 'crit-seeking' weapons more important.

Edit: one idea I had for a small buff to IS mechs is to double their ammo. Ammo size has been a complaint back in early closed beta. The lore justification could be that the IS mechs have more access to ammo because they are fighting on their home turf and the clans rarely bring sufficent supplies due to the way they generally conduct warfare (this was one of the factors that Comstar used to defeat them at Tukkayid).

Edited by Steven Dixon, 18 September 2014 - 07:46 PM.

[Joanna Conners]

Personally, I'd love to see the Clans maintain power and tech and suffer reduced numbers in drops against the IS. It would be an interesting, fun, and engaging dynamic that would be unique among many multiplayer games.

However, I understand that general audiences don't want that. It doesn't matter how many people post on the forums to support the purist approach, because the silent majority would still get frustrated and/or quit playing.

I'm disappointed, but I can live with it. MWO will be a different animal. The upside is that it's a fun game to play (even if it isn't "launched" yet until CW is released in my mind, sorry devs!) and as long as the game gets completed with CW and new game modes, I'll happily play it. Every single incarnation of MW video games has been different in some way or another. We all have our favorites. Maybe we even rage against some titles we deem inferior, such as MW4 and Mech Assault 1 & 2.

IMO, MWO has done better than all three games I mentioned. Maybe it isn't perfect, but it isn't the worst, even in this incomplete state (again, sorry devs; I need that CW).

As long as the game is fun to play and stays loyal to the spirit of Battletech, then I don't think I could ask for more from PGI. I'd rather play MWO like it is now than any of those other titles.

Anyway, that's my two cents on the matter.

Edited by Demona, 18 September 2014 - 10:28 PM.

[Sandtiger]

Vrbas, on 11 September 2014 - 09:57 AM, said:

I like everything in that balance patch except the longer duration for IS ER Large. They are now nearly equal burn time as the Clan ER Large with way shorter distance. I believe this was unnecessary.

Apparently that is because you prefer the IS to Clans. Of course, players who cannot afford clan mechs would love the new "Balance" that has come into play from our illustrious Devs. I do not share this sentiment.

Meta 2013, on 11 September 2014 - 04:40 PM, said:

Not surprising Hoax415 that you missed the point. Point was they said NO. So get over it and move on to the issue of balancing ... they aren't going to do10 v 12, so the discussion of it is not relevant right now. Maybe later it will be, but right now its not. Want to get your point across...then put up a poll ...who wants, who doesn't want, who doesn't care. Now with hard numbers make the case. But say your peace and let it be, they said no.

For the third time I'll ask, why aren't they using one of the simplest and effective tools they have - Recycle/cool down times to bring clan tech DPS inline so IS noobs aren't crushed right off, while preserving the "flavor" and making clan tech require more skill as a pilot to be successful? yes they adjusted missiles a tad, but what about the rest of the weapons?

They are attempting to balance across technologies using techniques designed to balance weapons within the same technology. Apples and oranges.

NOTE* I am not against 10 v 12, Just cannot see the point of discussing it further until such time as they get to a point where it may be possible to implement.

If we could just implement a shock therapy where Russ gets zapped anytime the word heat is mentioned with balancing, maybe we could get somewhere.


Sorry but skilled Pilots in IS mechs have no problems dealing with the clan tech. But for the less skilled,the heavier clan mechs provide an advantage, though the dire is painfully slow, and gets left for lights to feast on when It comes to maps like terra.

LOL! Well Spoken! I was laughing so hard I nearly fell out of my chair! Thank you for that! ~Grins

Paulc, on 11 September 2014 - 05:52 PM, said:

The more you 'balance' the game, the more unplayable you make it.

Instead of trying to balance the game through nerfing, try balancing the game through training?

I sucked for many months until I figured out how to configure the mech I was in for the game play that I want. With a moderate amount of time and effort a player can go from 'sucking' to 'relatively competent'. Just when I get good in a mech, you guys nerf them.

What you are teaching me is that any amount of time I spend in this game to improve my configuration and find one that I am happy with is a complete waste of time and money.

I like to shoot bullets, lasers, make things explode and wage war. Since the mech technology doesn't exist I reality -- I play this game.

Why punish me for learning how to get good??

p.s.

The javascript on the text editor sucks so bad that it keeps missing characters unless I type really really really slow. Yet one more frustrating thing you shove in front of your customers. Thanks. One more chance, or it's "So long, and thanks for the fish."

Well spoken, the games not broken. Its the players who need to work on their skills. Please STOP catering to them!

[Jaeger Gonzo]

Russ Bullock, on 07 September 2014 - 10:14 PM, said:

Please read all of my replies, its very possible even probable that doing it right as you say leads to far worse problems.

I readed OP and your reasoning actually sounds as cheap excuses.

[Jaeger Gonzo]

Russ Bullock, on 07 September 2014 - 10:56 PM, said:

Its true I mentioned the work it would take to change but I have several times pointed out that the number one reason is that I am simply not willing at this point in time to tell IS players there mechs can't compete. Trust me the vast majority of high skill players will migrate to Clans and then it would be very difficult to foresee enough players of sufficient skill making for a competitve IS vs Clan battle in CW.

You need to get that you are not making CoD game, or any normal fps, where all sides are virtually same. All you got here is lore, if not the BT others will go away to Star Citizen or Heavy Gear or what ever else. BT core relation between IS and Clan is asymmetrical. Giving a same big challenge to Clans and as well to IS. Claners have challenge to not get swarmed fighting hordes, using tactics and they superior meks to the limits, IS have a challenge to beat a beast swarming them up using team work. And I will tell asymmetrical is more fun and that is from both perspective. Really all games video or not that are asymmetrical are more fun. Like a netrunner one of best or best card games system ever, that is off course asymmetrical.

MWO is team based, you not ever saying "your mek can not compete", what are you actually saying is "your IS team can compete".

Guys that wanted Clans are already there. They already migrated. Just yesterday I heard from someone. "if you gonny stick with IS you will be outgunned for a long, long time" so be it, but give me the numbers to beat those arrogant claners. Thats all I ask.

And if you will try out in the future after CW as I understood, a real asymmetrical approach, stay true to the lore and try out star vs company, as I fell like 10v12 is just to insignificant to give a proper BT flavor.
But I suppose anyway that you will stay in a CoD way off things killing that game with time more and more.

Edited by Jaeger Gonzo, 20 September 2014 - 04:52 AM.

[Threat Doc]

Drop Elo, get BV2, period; you will not be able to do the things you want to do until you get rid of this one-on-one Chess scoring means of putting together elements. BV2 will give you the flexibility, and allow your players and their units to have the flexibility they need, so you don't have to worry about 10 v 12, but can match teams -even if one side has fewer 'Mechs- to play against one another, where you're not focusing specifically on a weight class and piloting skill within it, but are focusing also on the specific build of the 'Mech -which can easily fall outside the norms of the overall weight class- and it's role.

Continue to ignore this, and you will continue to have increasing problems.