876 replies to this topic

[salkeee]

I will add something that kinda confuses me bothers me.

Since there will no be 10vs12 so aperently clans will be on equal with IS but kinda diferent play style and that is ignoring batletech lore.
Ok PGI decided to go that route I m fine with that but than are they still follow lore with clan mech prices ?(am I wrong here,correct me pls)Becouze those are some huge price diference for just a diferent but equal mech.
Now that makes no sense to me.

I m just curious.

Edited by salkeee, 08 September 2014 - 02:47 AM.

[Almeras]

not fussed about the lost of 12vs10, it would of been awkard from the start esp with the MM "carry handicap"

fyi I also don't care for ISvsClan because I don't not wish to be limited I wouldn't object to a XP/cbill penalty for using a clan mech on an IS team.

I feel the clan weapon nerf was the wrong approach, 3 clan chassis were too good (MC/DW/SC) in trying to target them you hurt the Masa, nova, uller, thor much harder. It would of been better to address chassis directly with slot/agility nerf's.

[Almeras]

Russ Bullock, on 07 September 2014 - 09:37 PM, said:

again your clan Mech still shoots at greater range, for more damage, for similar heat and often with less requirement for slots and tonnage.

Kinda have to pull you on that one. Because they may do more damage on paper but the damage is very much spread. I think if you want to nerf the clan weapons you should at least try to keep them fairly close to IS spread1s-vs-1.2s not 1s-v-1.5s because it really matters in rounds of combat that only last 2seconds.

The CERLL beam is particularly annoying because you press the button and you cant even switch if off if a friendly moves in front. The clan UAC20 is actually a UAC6 with the 3 rounds, lead, and drop your only every going to hit a moving target @ 260m with the first or last round.

[Ensaine]

Russ Bullock, on 07 September 2014 - 10:28 PM, said:

These sorts of quotes can be very frustrating because we care very deeply about our customers and want to keep them, of course. But we also feel like we delivered exactly what we promised and the team did an amazing job of it. They look and feel awesome. And please read the initial posts that we linked, these Clan mechs were defined long before anyone bought one. There still absolutely amazing.

Sorry, Russ, perhaps the bolded. italicized line was not appropriate ...??? Subjective maybe?

The main saving grace of MWO, IMO, is the Art Department.

I'm not all too hung up on the Balance issue, or the 10v12 issue.....if I don't play like an idiot, I kill Clan Mechs just fine and dandy.

One thing I am hung up on, is that UI 2.0 was supposed to be the second coming, allowing for CW implementation, and deployment, making this much easier. Yet, the UI still has major issues, even when compared to our original UI.
How is it that this 10v12 thing wasn't discovered until now, when UI 2.0 was supposed to have all of this answered?

I can assert myself even more, with several other questions, which the community still are asking, and have received no answers.

I appreciate your posting and fielding questions from the community, but, this 'new face to the community' has happened before, and as soon as a topic rises to the surface, over an issue YOU, PGI, introduced, you all get defensive, and seem to just withdraw from the forums, hacking and deleting posts you don't like. Most recent example, is the 'Auniversetoexplore' thread, that was deleted, because you didn't like the comments.

Yet, you consistently publish the most ill-timed and poorly worded press releases, in such a way, as to invite the reactions you don't like. Then, what follows, is the hack-delete-retreat format we all know and hate.

You guys have made some serious blunders since this thing started, and I'm not too keen on acquiring a forgiving tone. I, like many others, have waited a LONG time for a MW title, and while this current Arena shooter works for what it is, what it is isn't much at present, compared to what it SHOULD have been by now.

Personally, I attempted to support you guys, by buying a Founder's pack, where that Mech has been pretty much useless for over a year. I bought MC several times, but, once the Phoenix pack became reality, I had by that time decided to put no more money into this game. Glad I made that decision.

Instead, I've put money/budget that WAS earmarked for MWO, into other games instead, where I get a much higher QoL.

I really don't think you guys even begin to understand what you've done to a great many of us, especially the CB Founders.

^THAT, or you just do not care.

Edited by Ensaine, 08 September 2014 - 03:30 AM.

[NuclearPanda]

Russ Bullock, on 07 September 2014 - 09:22 PM, said:

Well in my replies you will see it may not be written off entirely and I hope to see it in some form, certainly buttons in Private matches at the least.

But the rest of your statement I must take issue with as simply irresponsible. I truly feel this is the most true to MechWarrior title there has ever been. There is no doubt we have the advantage of todays computers and technologies, but we can start a seperate thread to have this debate sometime.

Russ,

Thank you for responding directly to my posting. While I'm occasionally harsh with you folks, and I offer apologies for my bluntness, I have to stick to my guns a little. I would not call my critique of your game as it stands right now irresponsible.

- Look at the original teaser shown for this game using the Unreal engine (easily found on Youtube) versus what we have now. That's originally what made me throw a large sum of money your way as a Founder. While I understand the move to Cryengine, you've struggled for many years now to optimize your game and haven't made signifigant progress to utilize system resourses. In fact, DX11 is still terrible and I have a pretty decent GTX760 system. DX11 crawls.

- Your game is an arcade shooter. I'm saying that flat out. Your vision originally laid out for this game has in no way come to pass. We have no Role Warfare (I'm not linking to your posts from years ago, you know what I'm talking about.). We have skill trees that are STILL broken for years now (Convergence skill? For what exactly?). Shiny graphics do not make this a "thinking man's shooter", and your statement of having "today's computers and technology" is irrelevant if you're not really doing much with it in the grand scheme of things.

- 10v12 should absolutely be worked on, moreso than just Private Matches. A large majority of us feel that way as you can see. This should be a goal you should work towards.



I have many other queries and points to make, and would have no issue discussing it within another thread if you'd like to create one. I would also be open to the possibility of discussing this privately. I used to give your game high praises within our own gaming community but lately I just can't really recommend the game much to new players, let alone attempt to persuade friends to stay the course and keep playing. Unfortunately I feel Mechwarrior is within a bit of a death spiral, especially even moreso now with the announcement of a new game you're attempting to work on.

God speed Russ. I do absolutely wish you and PGI the best of luck with this title and still retain hopes for the game to succeed. Until many changes are made I cannot pledge any more funds for development.

Cheers.

Edited by NuclearPanda, 08 September 2014 - 04:16 AM.

[NuclearPanda]

Rebas Kradd, on 05 September 2014 - 02:45 PM, said:

You are not the one who defines what an "actual Mechwarrior title" is. What you were asking for is understandable, but impractical.

Maybe someday.

It's a game, with lasers and autocannons, that happens to have models skinned as and named as popular mechs within the MW/BT universe.

It's not the game they sold or pitched to us, and it's continuing to go in the wrong direction.

Cathy, on 05 September 2014 - 02:13 PM, said:

Been doing that since closed beta you only just realised MWO is just another generic stompy robot game ?

No Cathy, I've realised it for quite some time now. I've continued to attempt to stay the course and have hopes for the game but you and I both know that things don't seem to be within reach of improving to the level of expectation they originally pitched.

And now we have word they're going to start work on another game....

Are they doubling their development team? Because if they're not I hope none of you expect any timely improvements. They have a lack of developers as it is who are able to finish jobs on time.

[MasterBLB]

Mr Russ

Your attempts to even what is imbalanced in nature and lore are futile.You can't reach your goal any way - either there will be no more "true" Clan tech as it's known canonically,or strengths of IS/Clans won't be equalized.

The only reasonable way is to accept the fact Clans' tech is meant to be better than IS one.BUT you can make that power will come with a price.You can make that each side,IS and Clans,will have their strong and weak points.
You've already did it pretty well before all that latest idiotic nerfs.Clan XL engines whose can survive destroying a side torso,BUT whose cannot be changed,or have internal heatsinks added/removed.Pretty limiting a build,I'd say - especially when you take Dire Wolf into consideration,or Clans light mechs.
Then Clan Endosteel Structure/FerroFibrous Armor which has fixed location,and cannot by added/removed.Also excellent idea which limits possibilities for Clan omnimechs builds.
So far you Mr Russ and team did extremely well,Clan mechs had unique flavor - in 1:1 comparison they seemed stronger compared to IS counterparts,but in details their power had pretty hefty price.In my opinion,a perfect tradeoff.
Then you've invented another excellent idea,which was notable longer laser beams duration.I mean those what were just on introduction of Clans,not the mess we have now.Clan lasers,while possessing more power had their weakness which was they were much harder to use in close-quarter battles,especially against fast moving/fast torso-twisting targets.Also,another factor which made them significantly weaker during brawl was heat - set perfectly opposite to what we have now.Low enough to keep up the fight and do some meaningful damage,and high enough so the player would have to pay attention to heat management.
And same for Clans UACs - very good move,high DPS at lower weight,but at the cost of inability to deal pinpoint damage.Even weakened a bit too much in my opinion,I'd reduced burst size for all UACs by 1 bullet.
Not to mention LRM more vulnerable to AMS system than IS counterparts.
You overbalanced C-SSRM4 and C-SSRM6,though.

That was just brilliant,and the sole reason why I returned from my retirement in 2013.And spent money on clan a'la carte,as then you well deserved it.

Then you started to ruin everything.PPC projectile speed,module slots,clan lasers nerfs and so on...

Mr Russ,the right way to go is to keep and make stronger that uniqueness of both IS and Clans we had initially,not trying to make them the same.
I was going to write really huge post with detailed and constructive analysis how to properly balance both sides and address various problem MWO has,but after few failed attempts to contact you,Mr Paul or Mr Nikolai via PM and Twitter I abandoned that idea.I won't spent a week or more on something you won't care at all.

So,from today,I'm going to do as my signature says.

Edited by MasterBLB, 08 September 2014 - 05:56 AM.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

The problem with your balance methods is the fact you use secret squirrel squads with their own agendas instead of the PTS.

https://forums.rober...Comment_3298033

[Naduk]

Russ
I think we need to turn on full Clan Vs IS mode now
run it like that for at least 2-3 weeks
people need to see just how damn powerful clan mechs are
but people also need to see that the IS has plenty of tools they can compete with too
we will never know the true Clan balance story until we see them facing off against pure enemy forces

by pure i mean full teams of "IS vs Clan", "IS vs IS", "Clan vs Clan"
to often do i see a atlas DDC supporting 3 Timberwolfs loaded to the brim dispensing death being untouchable
the clans simply do not have anything as tanky as an Atlas with ECM and nore should they, their combat ideals are completely different, but it gets down right dirty when you mix things together
this scales down into the lower weight classes too and its just as effective there

i say enough is enough, activate separation
lets see if clan and IS are even close to balanced

then make some decisions

Edited by Naduk, 08 September 2014 - 05:44 AM.

[lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol]

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.

Russ, I mean this with the utmost respect when I present the possibility that many of the "high skill players" whom you speak of DID indeed put forth the $30-200+ for the Early Access clan packages... and I also believe that this is the reason the data for the clan mechs make them seem "OP'd"... BECAUSE of these high skill players who opted in early because they still have faith in PGI and most likely aren't "casual gamers."

A pilot given one of those "OP'd" clan mechs is NOT guaranteed a 1000 point damage with a match score over 200 and 10 kills. Hopefully this will be realized to a more reasonable extent once the F2P crowd spends their c-bills on Dire Wolves and realize they're not the autowin mechs they complain about.

Edited by 00ohDstruct, 08 September 2014 - 05:53 AM.

[Hoax415]

He goes through and answers the thread yet somehow ignores the fact that all this defending of matchmaker is questioned by about 50 posters.

THE CURRENT MATCHMAKING SYSTEM IS DEEPLY FLAWED AND BAD

Right now you are hurting your team if you bring certain chassis. I know we are moving farther and farther away from this being a Battletech game but the entire tonnage system means that not all mechs are created equal.

Bringing a Locust or Dragon or Vindicator shouldn't be hurting your team. But it is with this matchmaker no matter what "this one time I scored 1400 damage in my Dragon..." posters think that is what you are doing. Player skill can overcome weaker chassis but if you score high in a Cicada that doesn't mean that on aggregate teams with 3 Stormscrows or 3 Shawks or 3 Griffins won't crush teams 3 Cicadas. It just means you had a good game this one time and you probably would have done even more with more tonnage.

We need a matchmaker that takes into account tonnage and clan vs IS tech at a bare minimum. We always have. A team with 3 Stormscrows will have a huge advantage over a team with 3 Hunchbacks. Not because crows need more nerfs. Not because Hunchs need more buffs. But because the MM pretends that is going to be balanced.

In battletech 20t and 35t are not supposed to be equal.
In battletech 40t and 55t are not meant to be equal.
In MWO 60t and 75t are not equal.
Nobody should think that eventually 80t and 100t will be equal.

Please don't use maintaining an inadequate MM system that makes playing many chassis sub-optimal to winning as a reason why 10v12 is in the trash.

***

The second MASSIVE disappointment is this pretend argument that telling people clan mechs are better than IS will mean nobody will play IS.

1. You released mechs that were INSANELY better for $$$ with a matchmaker that did almost nothing to keep clan tonnage balanced between teams. Which meant that at release if you grouped up and took a bunch of Mad Cats and Daishis you were setting the game to easy mode to stomp faces. Every single player remotely objective player without deep personal bias for or against clantech knew and accepted this.

2. Lets pretend clans are now 1:1 balanced (which they are not). Up until that point even with clan trials and clan mechs for cbills people are playing IS mechs for many reasons.

There is loads of data and evidence that people will continue to play mechs knowing they are not the strongest. In fact many players intentionally do just that. Many players will use what they like best or think is coolest or feel is not cheap. The argument that nobody wants to play on the IS side until we achieve 1:1 balance is a smokescreen and a fabrication with nothing substantial to back it up.

We need to get to a point where Locust specialist pilots can be proud to use their machines because they knew that their teammates get to use slightly bigger mechs as a result of the fact that they have the dedication and skill to get work done in an undersized under-gunned 20-tonner.

Right now if you care about winning and are playing pubs and you see a Locust it feels like you are down a man because you have someone who isn't trying hard enough to win. That sucks and its directly a result of the limited nature of the current 3/3/3/3 MatchMaking system.

Edited by Hoax415, 08 September 2014 - 06:06 AM.

[El Bandito]

Widowmaker1981, on 08 September 2014 - 02:09 AM, said:

Russ, one question: what do you see the role of Pulse lasers being? The reason everyone started swapping out C-ERLLs to C-LPLs was because, with the 2s beam duration on the ER, the pulse lasers 1.3s duration was actually a decent trade off for a 50% tonnage and 100% slot increase (given the broadly similar range/heat/damage of the 2 weapons, 600m is enough really in most cases, 890 was pretty excessive on any map not called Alpine) Now, the Pulse laser has had the range and heat nerfed, and the ER has had the duration put back somewhere sensible, we once again have the situation where if you compare the 2 weapon systems they are roughly balanced against each other, making it a total non-decision to take the ER, because it is a lot lighter and smaller, for similar performance. The Pulse lasers need to be a good amount BETTER on balance than ERs, otherwise there is no point wasting the extra tonnage. Id suggest halving the beam duration on all large pulse lasers (IS and Clan). Medium pulses also need some love. This, imo, wouldn't lead to no one using ERs again, because 1.6 is usable (2s isnt), but would give Pulse lasers an actual place in builds. They are only the same weight as PPCs in tabletop because of the +2 to hit modifier, which is not easy to represent in an FPS where people use their own skill to aim. Actually - having said that if a heat/speed based cone of fire was implemented then Pulses could use that mechanic to be more accurate than other lasers while on the move...

IS pulse beam duration is already almost half of regular lasers. Any more reduction, and it will be almost FLD. Perhaps the damage should be increased, making them a really good close range weapon.

Hoax415, on 08 September 2014 - 05:55 AM, said:

The argument that nobody wants to play on the IS side until we achieve 1:1 balance is a smokescreen and a fabrication with nothing substantial to back it up.

Even if the Clan mechs are better people will still play IS, but far far less than Clan population. That's what we want to avoid.

I have played a game called Prime World and the population was very biased towards the Keeper side just because they got two heroes (out of many dozens!) better than the Imperial counterpart. Similar deal happened in vanilla WoW when the Shaman and Paladin class were kept away from Alliance and Horde, respectably. WoW only managed to achieve population balance after making those 2 classes available to both sides.

Bottom line is: Most people want to win. Most people care about stats.

If the Clans do not achieve overall balance with the IS, you will see way more Clanners than the IS come CW. That would be totally against lore.

Edited by El Bandito, 08 September 2014 - 06:12 AM.

[NuclearPanda]

00ohDstruct, on 08 September 2014 - 05:52 AM, said:

Russ, I mean this with the utmost respect when I present the possibility that many of the "high skill players" whom you speak of DID indeed put forth the $30-200+ for the Early Access clan packages... and I also believe that this is the reason the data for the clan mechs make them seem "OP'd"... BECAUSE of these high skill players who opted in early because they still have faith in PGI and most likely aren't "casual gamers."

A pilot given one of those "OP'd" clan mechs is NOT guaranteed a 1000 point damage with a match score over 200 and 10 kills. Hopefully this will be realized to a more reasonable extent once the F2P crowd spends their c-bills on Dire Wolves and realize they're not the autowin mechs they complain about.

I agree with you, but I'm posting this mostly in response to Russ's comment that you were replying to.

How is making teams of 12v10 going to break the game, let alone drive all these "high-skilled players" over to the Clans? I consider myself a pretty skilled pilot, and I would rather have the numbers advantadge.

Hoax415, on 08 September 2014 - 05:55 AM, said:

There is loads of data and evidence that people will continue to play mechs knowing they are not the strongest. In fact many players intentionally do just that. Many players will use what they like best or think is coolest or feel is not cheap. The argument that nobody wants to play on the IS side until we achieve 1:1 balance is a smokescreen and a fabrication with nothing substantial to back it up.

This.... 100% this.

Hoax415, on 08 September 2014 - 05:55 AM, said:

In battletech 20t and 35t are not supposed to be equal.
In battletech 40t and 55t are not meant to be equal.
In MWO 60t and 75t are not equal.
Nobody should think that eventually 80t and 100t will be equal.

Please don't use maintaining an inadequate MM system that makes playing many chassis sub-optimal to winning as a reason why 10v12 is in the trash.

This is also a very good reason as to why the current 3/3/3/3 system solves nothing.

[Marodeur]

UBCslayer, on 05 September 2014 - 10:43 AM, said:

• Complete IS mech Quirk pass to give more uniqueness and ability when used within their respective roles.

This is the one part of balancing that I hope is done the most efficiently. For example, the Awesome quirks were done well... the Cent, Hunch, and Dragon quirks didn't go nearly far enough.



I think most of the community would prefer that IS mechs be buffed rather than Clan mechs be nerfed.

What you said is exactly also in my mind. I think some quirks for the IS mechs are a good choice to balance futher between IS and Clans, BUT I think it is ok that the Clans are a bit stronger as they meant to be. If you now nerf the clans so hard, that they are more or less the same as IS mechs, that doesn't feel right for me. Of course it is a more work for you to implement a system that allows also unequal numbers of players( 10vs12 or even others), but hey... you earn your money with it, so do it. I think for later game modes you nevertheless need to have a match maker that can create an ELO "balanced" group of unequal numbered teams. I know that this would crush the actuall time plan, so for me (as some others also said before) it would be ok to implement it a bit later. But please don't through it comletely over bord.
I really don't like to say that, but it also has a bad taste, that now when the clan mechs one after another become available for c-bills for all players, they are nerved so hard. I can remeber as I read some comments right after the clan release that said "now clans are overpowered and later they will be nerved to the ground, when they are free for all" that I thought, these people just want to flame a bit. But now... mhh. I don't want to go that far to say it has a method behind it. But it is really bad timing. Blancing is good, but so hard?
So finally I have to say, I don't like that game design decision for the future. Also I don't like the last weapon balance change. And I am a free birth! (mostly ;-))

Edited by Marodeur, 08 September 2014 - 06:58 AM.

[Groundpound Devalis]

Uh, El Bandito...

WoW Population is by no means balanced on any of their countless servers, it has always been either Alliance dominate server or Horde dominate server. Not one one server is close to 50/50. Literally the only thing that caused a population shift once horde got their hands on Paladin class was this... Blood Elf population sky rocketed to the most used Race. That was going to happen regardless of paladin class or not. For proof... Blood Elf is still most populated Horde Race even when Paladin was opened to Tauren. In otherwords, people are going to play what they want to play.

[SaltBeef]

I still think the approach was all wrong, I would have left the Map of the galaxy but had dates setting for the map that would change when certain dates were selected. This would change the borders boundries of the era and open up types of play. Would not have to create a huge galaxy with planets just eras and areas of the map connected with dates.....,( It is not my game to develop but it is my opine:) could have kept it simple stupid with era modes. On the mission drop down menu have era battles. Clan vs clan ( MW2 style ). IS vs Clan ( needs to be in 3060 with access to all tech and later ) IS vs IS succession wars ( mechs are faction specific groupings in maps that are lore related ) Pheeeew!! Sorry if hard to read been up 20 hrs already.

[Why Run]

NuclearPanda, on 08 September 2014 - 04:15 AM, said:

Russ,

Thank you for responding directly to my posting. While I'm occasionally harsh with you folks, and I offer apologies for my bluntness, I have to stick to my guns a little. I would not call my critique of your game as it stands right now irresponsible.

- Look at the original teaser shown for this game using the Unreal engine (easily found on Youtube) versus what we have now. That's originally what made me throw a large sum of money your way as a Founder. While I understand the move to Cryengine, you've struggled for many years now to optimize your game and haven't made signifigant progress to utilize system resourses. In fact, DX11 is still terrible and I have a pretty decent GTX760 system. DX11 crawls.

- Your game is an arcade shooter. I'm saying that flat out. Your vision originally laid out for this game has in no way come to pass. We have no Role Warfare (I'm not linking to your posts from years ago, you know what I'm talking about.). We have skill trees that are STILL broken for years now (Convergence skill? For what exactly?). Shiny graphics do not make this a "thinking man's shooter", and your statement of having "today's computers and technology" is irrelevant if you're not really doing much with it in the grand scheme of things.

- 10v12 should absolutely be worked on, moreso than just Private Matches. A large majority of us feel that way as you can see. This should be a goal you should work towards.



I have many other queries and points to make, and would have no issue discussing it within another thread if you'd like to create one. I would also be open to the possibility of discussing this privately. I used to give your game high praises within our own gaming community but lately I just can't really recommend the game much to new players, let alone attempt to persuade friends to stay the course and keep playing. Unfortunately I feel Mechwarrior is within a bit of a death spiral, especially even moreso now with the announcement of a new game you're attempting to work on.

God speed Russ. I do absolutely wish you and PGI the best of luck with this title and still retain hopes for the game to succeed. Until many changes are made I cannot pledge any more funds for development.

Cheers.

Please stop posting that video, it's positively depressing... It's also the reason I dumped so much money into this game!

[Blacksoul1987]

DV McKenna, on 08 September 2014 - 05:36 AM, said:

The problem with your balance methods is the fact you use secret squirrel squads with their own agendas instead of the PTS.

https://forums.rober...Comment_3298033

this, absolutely this. The C-ERLL change especially, what we have now is basically what many players suggested it should be set to. but initially we got the most absolutely ridiculous set of nerfs applied to a single weapon.

[Pope RW]

Russ Bullock, on 07 September 2014 - 08:37 PM, said:

But were still committed to keeping them very unique and VERY powerful. We just need to make it so IS can compete if they play them right.

This is the main problem Russ, IS pilots haven't adapted their game style to play against CLAN mechs. They continue to fight them like IS mechs, not taking advantage of the differences but allowing the CLAN mechs to dictate the engagements.

[NuclearPanda]

Why Run, on 08 September 2014 - 07:20 AM, said:

Please stop posting that video, it's positively depressing... It's also the reason I dumped so much money into this game!

That video still gives me goosebumps. Unfortunately it was all a pipe dream and shattered promises.