876 replies to this topic

[Mechteric]

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.

The best way to lower time to death is to take it down to 8v8 (at least in certain maps or game modes that accentuate 12v12 issues of quantity). Gotta remember more mechs on the field means more weapons shooting at you. When a player rounds that corner blindly running into several mechs who open fire at once is part of why they die so quickly, not just the sake of the weapons or armor alone.

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

[Hoax415]

Dracol, on 09 September 2014 - 10:53 AM, said:

Let me ask you this. Can you provide an example of a successful game, built solely around multiplayer, has no respawns, and has a faction that is inherently better then the opposition in a 1 v 1 against equal tiered equipment?

That against equal tiered equipment thing is a joke right? That's the point. If you have a game where some units are much stronger 1v1. But team composition is still even when you total up the power levels of both teams...

What's the issue?

Games where you have this? There are many. There have been games with straight up point values. The Myth series comes to mind (Bungie from before they became whores for Microsoft and stopped making PC games). Some units were insanely powerful but they also meant the other guy who take 8 lesser units for the same points.

Another great example of point systems is in EVE. They have a big high level competitive tournament every year and you can bring tons of different combinations of ship class but they all have a point value so the teams are balanced in the end.

WoT obviously has the tier system and balances around the fact that teams are comprised of different tiers compositions.

Balance can take many different shapes or forms.

Quote

One other thing, please clarify your position. Should MW:O stick closer to TT fluff / rules or less?
Cause in one line you are saying 10 v 12 should be in place cause BTech and clans won't need to change. And in the next line you are saying Endo + FF should be balanced when FF has always been the second weight savings upgrade in Btech rules, never even close to being equal to endo.

I think 10 v 12 would have resulted in a game that people enjoyed playing more. That is why I was for 10 v 12.

Since 10 v 12 is dead we need to move onto a new reality. That Clan mechs have to be 1:1 tonnage equal to IS mechs. That means that clan mechs with Endo+FF are a big problem because other clan mechs don't get Endo and/or FF which means they are inherently weaker mechs than fully upgraded Clan counterparts. PGI has a serious balance issue on their hands there which I outlined. That balance issue mainly stems from the fact that we're doing 12v12 instead of using tonnage and/or some form of BV's plus 12v10 to balance around the fact that some mechs are much better than other mechs.

I dislike this for lore reasons and I also think PGI will be very reluctant to nerf clan mechs (that made them so much money and will make clan players sooooo sad) as hard as they need to.

I also think if you are nerfing clan mechs to 1:1 it kind of ruins the entire different flavor of clan mechs making the wisdom of even adding them to the game questionable.

Most of all I feel, that adding clan mechs, that were so obviously overpowered compared to IS counterparts while having the MM do almost nothing to keep clan tonnage balanced in matches in solo public games. Was utter bs. It was pure pay2win, short sighted, dishonest and obnoxious on PGI's part. That they ever made clan mechs as powerful as they were at release and yet they weren't even planning for 10 v 12 or even 16 v 10 in CW or working on making that happen shows a lack of foresight or concern about selling something so crazy overpowered to make some bucks knowing they'll have to nerf it into the ground later.

That bugs me. I think its bad for players, having a ride get progressively worse and less fun to drive sucks. I think its bad for the gameplay, 10v12 gives a real lore flavor and makes the gameplay that much different and interesting in CW. And yes I think its awful for the flavor of the game, which is important. The only reason PGI has gotten away with 2 years of broken promises is the love people have for this IP and respecting the history of the IP while not the most important consideration in the world should be a consideration.

Edited by Hoax415, 09 September 2014 - 02:21 PM.

[Dracol]

Hoax415, on 09 September 2014 - 02:19 PM, said:

That against equal tiered equipment thing is a joke right? That's the point. If you have a game where some units are much stronger 1v1. But team composition is still even when you total up the power levels of both teams...

What's the issue?

Games where you have this? There are many. There have been games with straight up point values. The Myth series comes to mind (Bungie from before they became whores for Microsoft and stopped making PC games). Some units were insanely powerful but they also meant the other guy who take 8 lesser units for the same points.

****Myth is an orange to MW:O's apple. Myth involved a player controlling an army, not a single unit. Does not support your argument***

Another great example of point systems is in EVE. They have a big high level competitive tournament every year and you can bring tons of different combinations of ship class but they all have a point value so the teams are balanced in the end.
***Here you refer to a tournament. The open world nature of EVE is a different beast then MW:O's single battle set-up. Are all players always forced to fight a battle where one side has higher tech and the other side as more numbers? No. ***

WoT obviously has the tier system and balances around the fact that teams are comprised of different tiers compositions.
***A Tier 1 Russian tank versus a Tier 1 German tank. How do they compare? Does one of them always crush the other when they face off 1 v 1? I would guess they are pretty equal.
​The tiers in WoT are similar to MW:O's weight classes. Main difference is a light could take out an assault. Tier 1 tank could not take out a Tier 10, if I recall correctly.***

Balance can take many different shapes or forms.

I think 10 v 12 would have resulted in a game that people enjoyed playing more. That is why I was for 10 v 12.
***I disagree, obviously ***

Since 10 v 12 is dead we need to move onto a new reality. That Clan mechs have to be 1:1 tonnage equal to IS mechs. That means that clan mechs with Endo+FF are a big problem because other clan mechs don't get Endo and/or FF which means they are inherently weaker mechs than fully upgraded Clan counterparts. PGI has a serious balance issue on their hands there which I outlined. That balance issue mainly stems from the fact that we're doing 12v12 instead of using tonnage and/or some form of BV's plus 12v10 to balance around the fact that some mechs are much better than other mechs.

***A similar issue has been prevalent before Clan mechs. Dragon V Catphract / Awesome V Atlas. What PGI has done is two things:
1. Made the MM try to match tonnage and class, not just class
2. Introduction of quirks to bring lower performers up and over achieves down
Imho, quirks are a better way to bring the clan under performers more on par with their brethren instead of messing with endo/FF ***

I dislike this for lore reasons and I also think PGI will be very reluctant to nerf clan mechs (that made them so much money and will make clan players sooooo sad) as hard as they need to.

I also think if you are nerfing clan mechs to 1:1 it kind of ruins the entire different flavor of clan mechs making the wisdom of even adding them to the game questionable.

***Since their announcement PGI has been very upfront with letting the players know clans were going to play differently than IS mechs (DOT instead of FLPP). With the prior Mechwarrior games laden with Clan mechs, not releasing them would have alienated a large segment of established fan base***

Most of all I feel, that adding clan mechs, that were so obviously overpowered compared to IS counterparts while having the MM do almost nothing to keep clan tonnage balanced in matches in solo public games. Was utter bs. It was pure pay2win, short sighted, dishonest and obnoxious on PGI's part. That they ever made clan mechs as powerful as they were at release and yet they weren't even planning for 10 v 12 or even 16 v 10 in CW or working on making that happen shows a lack of foresight or concern about selling something so crazy overpowered to make some bucks knowing they'll have to nerf it into the ground later.

*** this paragraph is filled with emotion. I respect your feelings ***

That bugs me. I think its bad for players, having a ride get progressively worse and less fun to drive sucks. I think its bad for the gameplay, 10v12 gives a real lore flavor and makes the gameplay that much different and interesting in CW. And yes I think its awful for the flavor of the game, which is important. The only reason PGI has gotten away with 2 years of broken promises is the love people have for this IP and respecting the history of the IP while not the most important consideration in the world should be a consideration.

***Only going to address one point here, your statement that 10 v 12 gives a real lore flavor and makes game play different. imho, CW would have suffered as the majority of players would have flocked to the more powerful clans. With IS and Clans on a more even footing but playing differently, the potential for a robust and interesting long term CW is viable since both sides will (hopefully) have a more equal player base to pull from. ***

Been enjoying our conversation. My replies are contained within the above quote.

Personally, I've enjoyed MW:O for over 2 years. I feel they have done a great job of bringing life back into a franchise that I loved when I was in high school (Btech and MW2)

Edited by Dracol, 09 September 2014 - 03:30 PM.

[Kyrs]

Not doing 12vs10 = being lazy programmer

[Fonzie260]

LOL

You sell the clans as being superior Technology but gimp them with "heat, damage and movement nerfs" then attempt to buff IS and still claim superior technology is with the clan mechs..... Shame on PGI for being money grabbers.. what happened to the lore approach? Did you figure out that no one not even the strongest PGI butt kissers want to play outdated mechs?

Let me ask PGI, Where is the Clan superior Technology... what do the clans have that isn't in the IS already? You have failed from the beginning due to your inability to be creative and allow clan mechs to be clan mech... you might as well call all the "clan mechs" new inner-sphere mech with nerfs.


Well done. Credit given.

[The Doctor]

Thank you PGI again for killing the fun I have with the clan mech and killing time and again this game. sorry for being sarcastic, but since I play this game it is disappointments after disappointments and unfulfilled promises...

[Washingtawn]

YES YES YES YES YES
Implement all of these. I wanna see how unique we can get each IS chassis through quirks and minutia mechanics.

[deputydog]

The only reason clans have had to be nerfed is because Russ is trying to recreate the clan invasion. IF we just had unit to unit planetary warfare and quit trying to do battle reenactments then the balance wouldn't matter as both sides could use IS and Clan mechs if they wanted.

If the IS mechs were allowed to install salvaged clan weapons it wouldn't matter either.

You could still do quirks and balance somewhat but I think everyone misses the underlying cause of all of this nerfing.

Why do we have to recreate a Clan vs IS battle in the first place...?
Why cant my unit just try to control planets and build bases on them and your unit try and take it.? I guess when they accelerate the timeline 5-10 years down the road it will be like that... until then.. nerfs.

Edited by deputydog, 10 September 2014 - 04:57 AM.

[Hoax415]

Deputydog,

That is a horrible point and you need to rethink it.

If all units can use all tech.

That basically removes 3/4ths of IS chassis right off the bat and that is probably being generous.

Without all these nerfs and with no "reenactment restrictions" you would be 100% guaranteed to see:
3 x DWF + 3 x TBR + 3 x SCR + 3 x ECM light

From every team that cares enough to try to win.

This isn't a CW problem. In fact Clan mechs were always going to be a bigger problem in normal public queue MWO because they are so much more powerful. But instead of adding nuance to the matchmaker its just been nerf city, justified by 12v12 CW because they don't want to admit that they sold a big grab deal of pay2win mechs and left them overpowered all this time intentionally to drive sales.

Edited by Hoax415, 10 September 2014 - 09:02 AM.

[Shogun459]

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

Well I thanks for remembering that we did indeed state this was our direction. We stated it well out in front because we knew how passionate the subject was going to be and will always be. People love their clan mechs and past MW games did us no favors in setting the precedent include BT tabletop ( just ask Catalyst they would agree ).

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.

Sorry Russ Too late I already quit with money stuck in the account, just popped in to read the replies to my posts and hoped for the best. Not going to get it I see.
So long.

[soulfire]

I think Hoax has allot of good points among a couple of others. In some ways I do think it was wrong to sell Clan mechs knowing you'd have to nerf them but just how much you weren't sure. Kind of like buying a car that gets 40 mpg, then having to get recalls on it and every time you drive it away from the garage you loose 10 mpg. Eventually you have a car that only gets 10 mpg and its' top speed is 50 mph slower.It may look like the same car but it really isn't.
I will always think using heat is the very worse type of adjusting in balance. It is the easy way out,adjust a couple parameters and there. Why not up how much damage I.S. armor can take in the parameters. Most mechs die by getting their center torso blown away. Right now you have a single large area. Why not have IS mechs, with standard engines, center torso be two sections or three that all have to be destroyed to kill the center torso. I'm sure there are many creative ways to fix the problem other than turn the heat up turn the damage and range down.
Clanners pride themselves on their abilities and their mechs. It Is why 10vs12 was appealing. It stays true to the lore of the game. It may have solved the balancing issue in some ways. I don't know if you ever tried it internally to see just how the games would go IS against clan mechs. Problem I think is there are two groups that play this game. You can see it in the posts. The people view MW as another shoot um up arcade game, a trickier battlefield 4 or some such. They don't see any problem in balancing the game, just like any other arcade game. Then there are those of us that want it to be a simulation drawing from table top game, fictional lore, and common thought. These are the people that want the 10vs12. These are the people who expect clan mechs to deal more damage and be faster at least in the beginning of the war, by wars end though clan and IS were pretty close to each other. In stead of messing with heat an all this bull to try to even them out perhaps you should just introduce later IS tech now.Light engines, x- pulse lasers and such.This would probably make both groups a little happier.
One of the problems with this game and the pay to play environment is you guys want to sell mechs to make money. In the coming community warfare part though are you going to force those being I.S. units to only fight I.S. mechs even though they have purchased clan ones also? Will merc units be able to have both? Will clan have to bid against each other on who gets to invade a planet or are you going to Arcade that also like world of tanks did theirs.
What I wished you would have done was to start out at 3025 the last succession war.. You could have then only had to worry about IS mechs. Did what battletech online beta did. When a player joined the game he had to join one of the houses. If a group of people wanted to play together they could be a unit in the house they joined. Everyone started out as a private.As fight you gain exp. As a private you can only fight in a light, perhaps just one type of light. As you fight and gain exp. you gain rank. With rank comes the ability to purchase better mechs. At certain ranks you will be able to purchase larger heavier mechs. What this did was control the type and weight of mechs on a battlefield.The only time one would see an assault mech was if a high ranking col, general, brought theirs because the battle was important.. You could have then worked out all the bugs that will come in CW, the mechs so forth. While this was going you could have been making clan mechs in the back ground.maps and such.You could have brought in Solaris. you could adjust the time line, so many years a month for the system. Then when you was ready you could have brought in the clan invasion.Clan mechs and all that.
Now we sit and hear about the 4 pillars of making the game. Russ we are gamers we don't care about your pillars.We hear about IGP leaving, has a feeling of they got all the money they figure they were going to get. They knew that the clan mech buy in was going to be the last big money surge why they pushed for it, the money came in, now they are gone. This pillar talk gave me this impression. We promised this, by December or early next year it will be done.If you want us to keep doing things keep giving us money. Kind of like house contractor. We promised to build you a house, there is your house. If you want wall board and carpeting and fix some of the leaks keep sending money to this address and we will work on it when we can but we are building another house down the road.

but maybe I am wrong.

[Meta 2013]

so glad this has turned into the 10 v 12 topic, no more need for the clan balancing topic, apparently all else must be fine with the clan mechs and how they got nerfed instead of balanced, please lets have more on 10 v 12 subject that they already said would take a major under taking to implement, and currently are not going to do.

pretty sure we get it, die-hards want it, and we get why, the other third to 1 half don't care. got it.

The normal crowd of I won't spend any more money/come back/ or will leave if you don't do this right now, have chimed in. Think its covered.

Edited by Meta 2013, 10 September 2014 - 06:08 PM.

[p4r4g0n]

soulfire, on 10 September 2014 - 03:59 PM, said:

-snip-
In some ways I do think it was wrong to sell Clan mechs knowing you'd have to nerf them but just how much you weren't sure.
-snip-

This is unrealistic. It has been shown time and again that players will ALWAYS find ways to do things that designers / developers cannot / do not anticipate.

This is not a problem unique to MWO and the high level of modification that can occur with the mechs exponentially increase the probability of some change being required after release.

If this bothers you, stop buying stuff until they are released in game and you have a chance to evaluate it properly using the champion mechs, smurfy's mechlab, etc. There is no gun at your head forcing you to pay to be a guinea pig.

[Sam Slade]

Russ Bullock, on 07 September 2014 - 09:50 PM, said:

ECM went through significant changes in what could negate it from BAP and PPC hits etc. But at this point I get just as many requests to add it to more mechs of which we are very careful to do. I think we did all we could to listen to player feedback.

I'm certainly open to any subject, but yes it's best to keep this around Clan weapon balance.

Make ECM affect friend & foe, introduce BAP/ECM synergy that reduces active sensors to passive sensors if BAP is equipped under ECM bubble, introduce passive/active sensor toggle(alters radar profile, missile lock/targeting speeds, detection range, use or arty/air strikes(unless TAG)) and limit BAP availability about twice as many mechs as have ECM...

Hello tactics and role warfare... THIS IS RELEVANT TO WEAPON BALANCE!!!

Ps: on the 10vs12... shouldn't CW start as IS vs IS and Clan vs Clan anyway? Allow players to have dual identities for round one of CW and give yourself time to develop 10 vs 12. As to pug balance... we'll it's pugging... **** happens

Edited by Sam Slade, 10 September 2014 - 06:54 PM.

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

In general, I agree with most of your points ... particularly the part about having a few months (maybe a year) of mini-succession war before the Clan Invasion, but these two points (quote below) are what I realy wanted to discuss ...

soulfire, on 10 September 2014 - 03:59 PM, said:

... In some ways I do think it was wrong to sell Clan mechs knowing you'd have to nerf them but just how much you weren't sure. ... I will always think using heat is the very worse type of adjusting in balance. It is the easy way out,adjust a couple parameters and there.

(I have zero inside information, this is based on my perception of balance from personal experience, watching twitch streams, and the scores form the most recent leader board event.)

I believe that PGI initially balanced Clan Mechs for the average player (not the top tier competitive player) in a 12 IS v 12 Clan scenario, with 3/3/3/3 enforced. As a 12-mech team, it probably does balance out fairly well.

However, rather than buffing armor, internals or IS weapons (which further widens the performance gap between Lights/Mediums and Heavies/Assaults), I agree with their decision to focus on heat as a way to reduce overall DPS (which should impact heavier 'mechs more than lighter 'mechs). It also makes sense form a physics perspective ... more range and damage = more power ... lighter and smaller equipment = less heat dissipation capacity.

soulfire, on 10 September 2014 - 03:59 PM, said:

... Clanners pride themselves on their abilities and their mechs. It Is why 10vs12 was appealing. It stays true to the lore of the game. It may have solved the balancing issue in some ways. ...Then there are those of us that want it to be a simulation drawing from table top game, fictional lore, and common thought. These are the people that want the 10vs12.

Also ... the "arms race" rationale about why 12v10 is a bad idea is (to me anyway) valid. Some players ... maybe even most players ... will always want to have and use the best equipment. If one Clan 'mech is approximately 120% as effective as one IS 'mech, why would anyone want to play anything but Clan 'mechs? Keep them different but (more or less) equivalent. Adherance to the lore and nostalgia will keep some players in IS factions and 'mechs, but not if they get their rear torsos kicked in every match for a year by better equipment that they don't have access to.

Edited by Kageru Ikazuchi, 10 September 2014 - 07:08 PM.

[Hoax415]

Meta 2013, on 10 September 2014 - 06:02 PM, said:

so glad this has turned into the 10 v 12 topic, no more need for the clan balancing topic, apparently all else must be fine with the clan mechs and how they got nerfed instead of balanced, please lets have more on 10 v 12 subject that they already said would take a major under taking to implement, and currently are not going to do.

pretty sure we get it, die-hards want it, and we get why, the other third to 1 half don't care. got it.

The normal crowd of I won't spend any more money/come back/ or will leave if you don't do this right now, have chimed in. Think its covered.

Posts like this are so frustratingly ignorant.

10 v 12 is the other side of the how much do we nerf clan mechs coin.

This is obvious. If it is 12v12 clan mechs need to be nerfed to the exact same power level as IS counterparts.

If its 10 v 12 they do not need to be at exactly the same level, which means less nerfs obviously.

How teams are going to be balanced IN AND ONLY IN CW is what determines where clan mechs need to end up powerlevel wise. You can't talk about one until you settle the other.

We have settled 10v12 apparently (its not happening) and as a result more nerfs are coming because clan heavies and mediums that have Endo+FF are still far too strong (lights seem ok) compared to IS counterparts and clan assaults are much stronger than IS assaults on a firepower basis. The question is how to fix that without making the clan mechs that are pretty much balanced actually too weak.

Edited by Hoax415, 10 September 2014 - 09:45 PM.

[Pezzer]

Tanreh, on 08 September 2014 - 08:50 PM, said:

Ah..BattleTech Technical readout 3050

Atlas : armor factor 304
Daishi: armor factor 304

Hunchback armor factor 160
Blackhawk armor factor 160

I did not study mathematics...I only have a master in engineering...so please explain to me why 304 is supposed to be higher than 304....the same with 160.

Sorry for the sarcasm but I am not really happy about people being TOO free with announcing *facts*

Lucky for you I don't have a technical readout. All that I know is that I was TOLD by a veteran player of the TT that the stock configurations of most clan mechs have less armor in tons than their IS counterparts. Clanners prefer firepower and maneuverability over armor, because they don't need it under Zellbriggen, where every battle is a 1v1 battle. This has been mentioned in a couple of posts in the forums as well, but idk if it's solid info. I didn't play the TT and my father stopped playing it before the clan Invasion mess was added.
Excuse me if the hearsay that has been told to me by several sources is wrong. I'm sure that you could modify a Mech to have the same level of armor as an IS mech, they just didn't come that way stock. And afaik most Mechs in the TT were kept stock due to costs? Something like that.

P.S. appreciate the snarky response to a goddamn suggestion. Not like I was even trying to make an argument!

Edited by Pezzer, 11 September 2014 - 01:29 AM.

[Luminarium]

"not make the same mistake of past MechWarrior games in establishing the Clan mech’s as the "end game"...

The only company who made gigantic mistakes with the franchise was you guys.
You keep trying to reinvent the wheel and you're failing horribly at it.

Weapons convergence aka pin point accuracy is the source of 95% of all issues. Poptarting, PPC boating, Guuss sniping, jj, ML boating - literally everything you had to "fix" with a clunky unnecessary game mechanics (gauss charge / ghost heat) came from your inability to introduce some sort of weapons bloom effect (WOT style) or terrible level of ignorance and you're not willing to listen.

There is simple reason why both in TT all the mechanics work while they don't in your game. Random dice roll is the balancing mechanic there and so it should be here. You still need skill to aim, but you're no longer guaranteed an instant kill at 800m if your shots spread out...

If you weren't willing or you're not capable to introduce that you could have limited the ammount of certain weapons you can put on a mech like you did with gauss.

Seriously why do you insist on killing this game?

Edited by Luminarium, 11 September 2014 - 06:38 AM.

[JayVrb]

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.

[Meta 2013]

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.