164 replies to this topic

[Hoax415]

Warma,

You are intellectually dishonest in ways I can't get to match with the tone of your posting.

You just posted two SHD 2xAC5 builds and said they were basically even with a AC20 + PPC SMN build.

Except the alpha was 15 points lower which is 43% less than your SMN.
Except less armor (352 vs 403)
Except IS XL engine aka ST death.
Except no JJ on one.
Except you even managed to get worse heat efficiency on 1 of those SHD per smurfy's calculator which is hard to do after all the Clan heat nerfs.

What the hell. Why are we even talking about a 55t vs a 70t? You thought that proved a point?

Then you post one CTF build that should prove your point that the SMN is so bad its not even in the same league as the CTF right?

-Five less alpha damage for the CTF aka -14%.
-Half a ton less ammo for the CTF.
-No jj's for the CTF.
-IS XL for the CTF which means side torso = death.
-CTF is 7kph slower at max w/ tweak.

You called that CTF "considerably stronger". Yes hardpoint positioning matters. Yes hitboxes matter. Yes clan AC having minimal spread matters.

But considerably stronger? Nope. I'm not seeing it. Does anyone else think that considerably stronger is accurate?

70 tons of Clan mech without the ability to add Endo or remove HS or remove JJ or change engine versus 70 tons of IS with full customization and I don't see considerably stronger at all there. I see decently balanced.

Look I'll agree with you. Its pretty stupid sounding that second line Clan mechs might be stronger than omni's if they get full IS style customization with clan tech. But lets deal with that when we get there I guess.

Is the SMN in need of the massive buff of being able to use Endo?

No it is not.

The problem lies not with the SMN but with the TW and with the 35/55/75/100 system itself.

Edited by Hoax415, 18 September 2014 - 08:51 AM.

[Tombstoner]

So people think giving 3.5 more tons of equipment to the summoner will some how make it subjectively perform better then a TW has no clue about how the games art work effects combat performance. so more ammo, 3 medium lasers or 3 heat sinks, a some what larger engine theses are very small differences. hard points thats a completely different story.

Over all this is a moot point since you cant put the summoner up against another 70 tone clan mech and see what happens.
comparing a 70 to a 75 is silly.

[Joseph Mallan]

Warma, on 18 September 2014 - 08:22 AM, said:

I do not understand, why any would put the rules of an RPG over their own enjoyement. I have around 10 years of experience in RPGs as both a player and a gamemaster. It is very common, that the offical rules are extremely imbalanced and allow stupid loopholes, creating enviroments, which are not fun to play.

In those cases, we change the rules, because the rules are not the word of god and we can always play as we wish. In practically all of the RPGs we play, we have house rules which deal with the most overpowered or ******** options left by the official rules.

And they even have a clause somewhere in the books that states you can change the game any way you want AT YOUR TABLE. Bring your rules to my Table or an official game and see how your rules fly? PGI is this games GM, Pitch all you want, but they don't have to swing at it.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 18 September 2014 - 08:54 AM.

[Warma]

xXBagheeraXx, on 18 September 2014 - 08:41 AM, said:

yeah but still. In the edit i mentioned later models of most of these "problem" mechs resolving the issues of free weight for weaponry. Giving Summoners and the like endo steel would render mechs like the ThorII that will come later, and the Millions of different alternate versions of the Vulture etc irrelevant.

Isn't that a good thing. Then we don't have to implement superficially different mechs with the same geometry later, but can use existing assets and art and focus on mechs that are actually different.

GrandDragon is a different mech from Dragon, but there is no sense to publish it, as the variants can be built from existing Dragon variants. This is good.

[Joseph Mallan]

Hoax415, on 18 September 2014 - 08:42 AM, said:

Warma,

You are intellectually dishonest in ways I can't get to match with the tone of your posting.

You just posted two SHD 2xAC5 builds and said they were basically even with a AC20 + PPC SMN build.

Except the alpha was 15 points lower which is 43% less than your SMN.
Except less armor (352 vs 403)
Except IS XL engine aka ST death.
Except no JJ on one.
Except you even managed to get worse heat efficiency on 1 of those SHD per smurfy's calculator which is hard to do after all the Clan heat nerfs.

What the hell. Why are we even talking about a 55t vs a 70t? You thought that proved a point?

Then you post one CTF build that should prove your point that the SMN is so bad its not even in the same league as the CTF right?

-Five less alpha damage for the CTF aka -14%.
-Half a ton less ammo for the CTF.
-No jj's for the CTF.
-IS XL for the CTF which means side torso = death.
-CTF is 7kph slower at max w/ tweak.

You called that CTF "considerably stronger". Yes hardpoint positioning matters. Yes hitboxes matter. Yes clan AC having minimal spread matters.

But considerably stronger? Nope. I'm not seeing it. Does anyone else think that considerably stronger is accurate?

70 tons of Clan mech without the ability to add Endo or remove HS or remove JJ or change engine versus 70 tons of IS with full customization and I don't see considerably stronger at all there. I see decently balanced.

Look I'll agree with you. Its pretty stupid sounding that second line Clan mechs might be stronger than omni's if they get full IS style customization with clan tech. But lets deal with that when we get there I guess.

Is the SMN in need of the massive buff of being able to use Endo?

No it is not.

The problem lies not with the SMN but with the TW and with the 35/55/75/100 system itself.

The Timber Wolf is the perfect storm (to steal a quote from Bishop) There is Just something about that 75 ton class. The Marauder always seemed to be just a touch better than the other heavies.

A case in point of how I discuss things:

Quote

DocBach's Suggestion is much more inline with TT and Canon.

1 Engine hit -15-20% speed
2 Engine hits -25-40% speed


And not just for Clanners. IS XLs are more fragile so should also have this added.

Is from the thread discussing Clan XL and how to balance it. Doc suggested nerfing the speed due to the 2 engine hits. I agreed but added that IS Mechs should have the same penalty if SOMEHOW all three crits are not destroyed.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 18 September 2014 - 09:04 AM.

[Lily from animove]

Hoax415, on 18 September 2014 - 08:07 AM, said:

I think thats a perfectly valid choice. Do you think that choice would be universal in the way that TW > SMN is? Or would it be something that reasonable people could debate between which mech is stronger?

I too personally think the SMN is a little bit weaker than the CTF. Not terribly so but if I had to pick which is stronger.

But perfect balance isn't a real thing. As long as they are close we're in a good place.

***

Part two of the experiment is obvious:

Would you pilot your CTF over a SMN that could turn opt for Endo and FF?

If we are being honest you know damn well you wouldn't.

What if Clan customization included the HS, Endo, FF, Engine Size and jets as some have suggested it should?

Its not even close and it isn't something that should even come up in rational discussion.

I am actually the least person to ask this objectively, because I belong to the style > competition gamers.

Phract has chickenlegs and arms. Thast why I initially have not chosen a stalker or Catapult. And I like lasers (flashy lights, yay). My Phract runs 2ER LL 2LL and a PPC, which i now may drop for a lower AC I guess.
But thats also why I stick with the Nova when I play the game. But when I leave my Nova to just play something else and grab the double XP for gathering GXP faster, it feels everytime like I just went to the game options and were setting the difficulty mode to easy. And those emchs aren't even skilled. And this clearly shows whats wrong. So when I would switch to some serious competition mode I would just not use a Summoner or Nova sicne they are not competitive to what others offer.

and when no TW would be there, I would probbaly choose a stalker for competitve gameplay. But I think summober and CTF are both equally good. you can pack a good bunch of srms in bth assisted with some M lasers and a AC.
Especially the 4X is very interesting vs clanners by having 2 E and 1M for a SRM 4 in head and CT making the mech a fully Zombie one in case you lose your arms. But as tradeoff the engine limitation sucks a bit. But a great brawler.
And 2X i would run with a LBX 10 3 medium also and alo SRM's.

But now we have that TW, and its stock very much lore like. So what to do? nerfing the TW? but with +5 t ES + FF it will stay really strong. So we could now buff all other mechs to TW level. meaning FF + ES for the summoner and some quirks for the IS mechs. But I am not sure if IS quirks will ever reach to TW degree. Probably buffing Sidetorsi on IS mechs to increase their lifetime when they have XL's. Lets say +10% structure on RT and LT. That could help to not lose viable torso wepaons that fast and prevents their XL's to pop so easily.

[Warma]

Hoax415, on 18 September 2014 - 08:42 AM, said:

Warma,
You are intellectually dishonest in ways I can't get to match with the tone of your posting.

I made mechs which are similar within the build envelope of the respective technologies. The original had XL, so I used XL etc. The Shadowhawk was there because its dps is close to a few tens of percents to that of the Summoner I posted. There is a difference, but it is not really in the mechs, but the technology. If you'd make clan mechs with an STD, you'd get **** mechs too. The IS XL is death, but it is still an is XL, and I also feel that its disadvantages are overstated. I rarely die from the XL in cases, where I wouldn't be almost dead and weaponless without it, so I tend to use it in all but the brawliest mechs (something like a BLR-1S with 4xSRM6+4xMLAS).

I said there, that the difference is in the technology, not the mechs. That's why we should prefer balancing the technology, not the mechs. Also, I do not understand why you do not even question the option of having the technologies themselves be of different powerlevel. Why is it necessary to nerf a clan 70t mech to be equal or worse to an IS 70t mech in every way? It goes against everything in the lore, atmosphere and rule of cool the setting has ever had.

Moreover, I do not understand, why it is irrelevant to you whether the clan mechs are balanced against each other? You simply cannot stack enough disadvantages on the TW to match it ton for ton with the weaker chassises, and still have it fun to play.

And that's also where you should look at. When is playing actually fun to you? The game should always be fun and balanced at the same time. If I take a TW, I feel powerful and the game is fun. If I take a Griffin, I feel powerful and the game feels fun, because I feel that I can take on opponents of equal tonnage and technology level, and can even seriously hurt or kill clan mechs. If I take a Battlemaster, I have to shy away from a direct confrontation with a Dire Wolf, because I'm not designed to match it and that is not the point. I need help and that can be arranged. Even if I take a Dragon, I think that I'm able to use my tons to their full effect and be a reasonable addition to my team.

On the other hand, if I would take a Summoner, I'd feel like I'm driving a throughly gimped piece of refuse. It is not fun and it is not balanced. It simply fails to deliver.

[Joseph Mallan]

Warma, on 18 September 2014 - 09:16 AM, said:

I said there, that the difference is in the technology, not the mechs. That's why we should prefer balancing the technology, not the mechs. Also, I do not understand why you do not even question the option of having the technologies themselves be of different powerlevel. Why is it necessary to nerf a clan 70t mech to be equal or worse to an IS 70t mech in every way? It goes against everything in the lore, atmosphere and rule of cool the setting has ever had.

The Summoner on TT also did not fit the Fluff/Lore. It was never as good as the writers could ever make it. It is a standard that Game Mechanics overrule Fluff and Lore.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 18 September 2014 - 09:22 AM.

[Warma]

Joseph Mallan, on 18 September 2014 - 09:21 AM, said:

The Summoner on TT also did not fit the Fluff/Lore. It was never as good as the writers could ever make it. It is a standard that Game Mechanics overrule Fluff and Lore.

And that is a good reason to spend thousands of man-hours making a mech that no-one will play?

[Hoax415]

Warma, on 18 September 2014 - 09:16 AM, said:

I made mechs which are similar within the build envelope of the respective technologies. The original had XL, so I used XL etc. The Shadowhawk was there because its dps is close to a few tens of percents to that of the Summoner I posted.

40% less FLD alpha. Forty Percent.

Quote

Why is it necessary to nerf a clan 70t mech to be equal or worse to an IS 70t mech in every way? It goes against everything in the lore, atmosphere and rule of cool the setting has ever had.

So Mallan is wrong for using TT rules to justify no Endo swap for clans but you cite the lore for why the game should be fundamentally broken balance wise between Clan and IS?

I've said before but I think Mallan is wrong. Just because it was TT rules doesn't mean it has to be that way. I find no 10v12 to be a much bigger disrespect than if we gave the clans Endo swapping. BUT that doesn't mean buffing the SMN is a good idea as I keep banging my head against a wall explaining and you keep ignoring.

Do you not understand that CW will have 12 CLAN MECHS versus 12 IS MECHS. If the balance is off because the "rule of cool" then CW is going to be trash.

Quote

I do not understand, why it is irrelevant to you whether the clan mechs are balanced against each other? You simply cannot stack enough disadvantages on the TW to match it ton for ton with the weaker chassises, and still have it fun to play.

You and I do not disagree that much here. Except I never said that intra-clan balance doesn't matter just that it matters less than Clan <-> IS balance. I agree 100% with TopDawg, we should have DOA chassis or DOA variants or trap mechs that are bad. When that happens something is messed up.

But I have laid out quite plainly why the SMN "issue" is actually a TW and 35/55/75/100 issue. If and only if those two things are addressed and the SMN was still seeing very low usage rates because the playerbase think its garbage then its time to worry about the SMN's power level.

Edited by Hoax415, 18 September 2014 - 09:33 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Warma, on 18 September 2014 - 09:27 AM, said:

And that is a good reason to spend thousands of man-hours making a mech that no-one will play?

You use words that lead to faulty generalizations. You will not use it. Lily Probably won't use it. Tombstoner Might Use it...

Players have proposed that Atlases get some form of Armor Buff. As an Atlas Pilot I disagree... What makes you think I would Judge an Omni any different?

[TopDawg]

Joseph Mallan, on 18 September 2014 - 05:41 AM, said:

So then I guess I need to have Jenners/Firestarters nerfed into the ground, cause I rarely win against them in my Atlas. Its unfair that they can move that fast. It's unbalanced and needs fixed. That Is the extent of your argument. You don't like the rule, you want it removed. It is more selfish than my position of, it's the rules, made by the game maker, we have to live with it.

That's just not very logical at all (and [sort of] sorry to keep picking on you, but you seem to be the only proponent here for 'your side').

While I wolud recommend all the links I put together here in this post on my group's forums (Some very handy things to read about competitive gaming), these four regarding multiplayer balance should be required reading (or something) for those trying to help leave feedback for the game: Balancing Multiplayer Games, Part 1: Definitions, Part 2: Viable Options, Part 3: Fairness, Part 4: Intuition.

While I can appreciate that people want a direct translation (or as much of one as possible) from the TT, that just isn't feasible. An FPS with a lot more moving parts (least of all being the ability to aim) is going to need some creative, artistic license in order to balance properly. And that's the bottom line, it should be balanced properly.

[Joseph Mallan]

TopDawg, on 18 September 2014 - 09:34 AM, said:

That's just not very logical at all (and [sort of] sorry to keep picking on you, but you seem to be the only proponent here for 'your side').

While I wolud recommend all the links I put together here in this post on my group's forums (Some very handy things to read about competitive gaming), these four regarding multiplayer balance should be required reading (or something) for those trying to help leave feedback for the game: Balancing Multiplayer Games, Part 1: Definitions, Part 2: Viable Options, Part 3: Fairness, Part 4: Intuition.

While I can appreciate that people want a direct translation (or as much of one as possible) from the TT, that just isn't feasible. An FPS with a lot more moving parts (least of all being the ability to aim) is going to need some creative, artistic license in order to balance properly. And that's the bottom line, it should be balanced properly.

Top, Thanks for the links, I'll read them in time. It does not matter if I am the only one making the arguments (which I'm not) I have every right to voice my opinion until PGI comes down and says, "This is how it is going to be."Even then I can say I don't like how Heat sinks are set up in this game... and I do. Right now This is, "Omnis don't get to change structure and armor types.' The Devs have decided Omnis get to add, move or remove armor, That Isn't lore, that isn't TT Mechanics, but it IS the DEVs rule for this game. Am I trying to change it? No.

That Sir is the difference between Warma and I. Right now the rule is NO. I agree with that rule, I will say so. If it ruffles some players feathers... I say good. Bring your best argument, I will bring mine. Best one influences the DEVs, and rules will change or not. I will NEVER be silent because someone on the forum disagrees with me. Not even a DEV. I will tell them what I think, I will plead my case, but when the rule gets patched into the game, I hit launch and adapt to the new situation.

[Hoax415]

You don't need to participate in the thread if all you are doing is saying:
"The game works this way. The devs have spoken."

Everyone knows how the game works. You aren't adding anything despite a ton of posts in this thread.

The question you need to answer is:
Why or how is the game more fun if Clan mechs cannot add/drop Endosteel.

I personally argue that balance is a key component of fun. In fact nobody else seems to dispute that. So the thread for most of us becomes a question of how do we achieve balance effectively?

I personally answer that question by saying: Are the SMN and CTF balanced with eachother? Is it pretty close?

I think it is. And therefore buffing the SMN is stupid. Now you need to buff the CTF as well because those two mechs need to be in the same powerlevel bracket. That's dumb because the only reason we need to buff either of those mechs is to chase the almighty TW.

So sadly the TW is going to need to be nerfed. Then we don't have to buff the CTF and we don't have to buff the SMN.

But I don't want to try to nerf 100 ton mechs to be as good 80 ton mechs.

I don't want to buff 80 ton mechs to be as good as 100 ton mechs.

I don't even want to buff or nerf so that a 75 ton mech is only as good as a 70 ton mech.

That isn't battletech.

Which is why every mech balance thread is really about 3/3/3/3 aka 35/55/75/100 team creation and how that is bad for variety and bad for the game.

Edited by Hoax415, 18 September 2014 - 09:56 AM.

[Warma]

Hoax415, on 18 September 2014 - 09:30 AM, said:

40% less FLD alpha. Forty Percent.

Alpha and DPS both matter. The Phract had an alpha of 30 and the Summoner had an alpha of 35, of which 15 is pinpoint. The phract's alpha is all pinpoint. The Dragon had a 25pt alpha of which 20 is pinpoint (AC5 arguably isn't because of its rate of fire). All of these had very similar DPS.

The Hawks were there to make a point. You can make a shadowhawk with Gauss+ERPPC and you can make a Summoner with Gauss+ERPPC. There is a large difference in armor, but the role and weapon context for both mechs is similar, yet the other is inferior tech and 15 tons lighter. That is really skewed up.

Hoax415, on 18 September 2014 - 09:30 AM, said:

So Mallan is wrong for using TT rules to justify no Endo swap for clans but you cite the lore for why the game should be fundamentally broken balance wise between Clan and IS?

Mallan is using the worst kind of spoiled-brat-playing-D&D -style rules lawyering to emphasize his point of something being the law of god despite its negative effects. You can't seriously compare these things here.

The IS-Clan balance difference, on the other hand, is a much larger concept and present throughout the history of the lore. In my opinion, it is absolutely fundamental to the setting and essential to the longevity of this game.

And yet I'm willing to give it up if I get clan mechs that are balanced against each other. Does that not make you understand, how much I value good game design and balance?

Hoax415, on 18 September 2014 - 09:30 AM, said:

Do you not understand that CW will have 12 CLAN MECHS versus 12 IS MECHS. If the balance is off because the "rule of cool" then CW is going to be trash.

I sincirely hope that this is not yet set in stone. If it is really the case, they should begin balancing the technologies pretty aggressively.

I do not want a slow, sluggish TW which cannot torso twist even 90 degrees or something of that order any more than I want a Summoner that feels like that pile of refuse I mentioned earlier. A 10-damage CERPPC or a 5-damage CERML is a million times preferrable to that.

Even if we go 12v12, the clans can still be nerfed here by forcing them to take smaller mechs. Even that is a better way to go.

Hoax415, on 18 September 2014 - 09:30 AM, said:

But I have laid out quite plainly why the SMN "issue" is actually a TW and 35/55/75/100 issue. If and only if those two things are addressed and the SMN was still seeing very low usage rates because the playerbase think its garbage then its time to worry about the SMN's power level.

I am strongly of the opinion, that you have utterly failed to make the case about TW. Could you explain in a few short words, how you would nerf the TW and SC sufficiently to make them balanced without wrecking the whole game and making those mechs really unfun to play. How would you then nerf the Cauldron Born and Night Gyr in the future?

[Joseph Mallan]

Hoax415, on 18 September 2014 - 09:54 AM, said:

You don't need to participate in the thread if all you are doing is saying:
"The game works this way. The devs have spoken."

Everyone knows how the game works. You aren't adding anything despite a ton of posts in this thread.

The question you need to answer is:
Why or how is the game more fun if Clan mechs cannot add/drop Endosteel.

I personally argue that balance is a key component of fun. In fact nobody else seems to dispute that. So the thread for most of us becomes a question of how do we achieve balance effectively?

I personally answer that question by saying: Are the SMN and CTF balanced with eachother? Is it pretty close?

I think it is. And therefore buffing the SMN is stupid. Now you need to buff the CTF as well because those two mechs need to be in the same powerlevel bracket. That's dumb because the only reason we need to buff things is to chase the almighty TW.

So sadly the TW is going to need to be nerfed. Then we don't have to buff the CTF and we don't have to buff the SMN.

But I don't want to try to nerf 100 ton mechs to be as good 80 ton mechs.

Or buff 80 ton mechs to be as good as 100 ton mechs.

That isn't battletech.

So my second huge beef is that we aren't discussing 35/55/75/100 team building and how it sucks and makes "trap mechs" out of all sorts of chassis.

No that isn't the only question. I am here to play a BattleTech Game. I have played BattleTech and MW for a very long time. I am expressing My likes and dislikes as is everyone here. I have asked myself wit 3.5 more tons make the Summoner any more of a threat? My answer not really.

You say it WILL make the game better. PGI So far has said No. Now you get to do what I do in that situation, decide if you can live with that choice. I have left many a gaming table cause I didn't like the house rules. I don't play ShadowRun cause the rules are to cumbersome and Being a Hero is... Frowned upon. I pitch my ideas, the GM says No. I continue playing or walk way. Its the same thing here, and I am telling you the same thing I tell every player who disagrees with the GM. It ain't your game you don't get to make the rules.

I hear your second Beef, and I personally am having fun in my Hellslinger, Getting used to a Cataphract, Hunchback, and loathe to que up my Jenner(i'm that bad a Light Pilot. So I am doing my part to break the 35/55/75/100 trend.

[Xarian]

Two options for balancing FF and Endo:

(Short term) Reduce the number of crit slots used by FF
(Long term) Rework FF so that it is fundamentally different than ES

Unlocking the tech on Clan mechs doesn't solve the problem at all: it just means that every mech that currently uses FF will switch over to Endo. FF will continue to be useless. This is bad.

[Hoax415]

God damn it Joe I don't even agree with him. For 6 pages I've seen saying giving the SMN endo is stupid and only breaks the IS v Clan balance even further. Which will make the game less fun.

My point to you is that you aren't actually engaging in discussion on the issue.

Yes the lore and TT rules have value. No that value does not trump the game itself being fun to play. Otherwise we will not maintain a big enough playerbase to have a game to play.

That is not a controversial or radical set of ideas I hope.

Therefore you just stubbornly repeating over and over that the TT does it this way and therefore it should be this way. Is counterproductive to actual discussion and does not convince anyone who isn't ignoring the basic reality of our situation (the video game has to be fun in its own right as a video game).

You haven't stated a single reason why having endo on a SMN would be less fun. Only that it would be less like the lore/rules/canon.

That's why you are a waste of space in this discussion.

[TopDawg]

Joseph Mallan, on 18 September 2014 - 09:48 AM, said:

Top, Thanks for the links, I'll read them in time. It does not matter if I am the only one making the arguments (which I'm not) I have every right to voice my opinion until PGI comes down and says, "This is how it is going to be."Even then I can say I don't like how Heat sinks are set up in this game... and I do. Right now This is, "Omnis don't get to change structure and armor types.' The Devs have decided Omnis get to add, move or remove armor, That Isn't lore, that isn't TT Mechanics, but it IS the DEVs rule for this game. Am I trying to change it? No.

That Sir is the difference between Warma and I. Right now the rule is NO. I agree with that rule, I will say so. If it ruffles some players feathers... I say good. Bring your best argument, I will bring mine. Best one influences the DEVs, and rules will change or not. I will NEVER be silent because someone on the forum disagrees with me. Not even a DEV. I will tell them what I think, I will plead my case, but when the rule gets patched into the game, I hit launch and adapt to the new situation.

I did not mean that people shouldn't express their thoughts and feelings (in fact I'm a huge proponent of the free exchange of ideas, speech, etc). Back in closed beta I left many a feedback thread/post that weren't heeded/or listened to; but I'd do it again, as I have very little other recourse to effect change.

I've been saying this in a few places lately, but the reality is that most people (players, developers, and designers alike) just don't know what's best for the game. Balancing isn't easy. If it was, every game would be well balanced and a huge success - that simply isn't the case.

Putting aside the fact that PGI touted e-sports (and maybe it's still on the plate?), balanced games that are fun to play tend to have longer shelf lives, whereas games that are not balanced and are not fun to play, do not. For this reason alone, I am of the opinion that it is ultimately the dev's responsibility to promote healthy gameplay that leads to the longevity of the game.

And, regardless of all that, I typically enjoy well-reasoned discussion anyway, and in that end I hope those links are helpful to you!

(As for balance, I don't think Hoax is saying for more Clan Mechs to accept Endo (probably the reverse actually), and that buffing the Summoner et al to be on par with a Timberwolf only exacerbates the current balance problem(s) between IS and Clan.)

[Warma]

Xarian, on 18 September 2014 - 10:08 AM, said:

Two options for balancing FF and Endo:

(Short term) Reduce the number of crit slots used by FF
(Long term) Rework FF so that it is fundamentally different than ES

Unlocking the tech on Clan mechs doesn't solve the problem at all: it just means that every mech that currently uses FF will switch over to Endo. FF will continue to be useless. This is bad.

I'm not sure about this. On IS mechs, FF and Endo are used to reduce the power level differences of weight classes. You can look it in the way, that at about 50 tons, mechs can no longer use FF but most can always use endo. Thus lights and the lightest mediums get an extra ton of free space.

In Clan mechs, the same applies, except that evertyhing under 75 tons should use both. After that, slots are probably going to get a bit tighter and you might only use endo, with the exception of special cases like DW, in which it is sometimes optimal to use neither. This means, that all properly built clan heavies get an extra 1-2 tons of free space.

The amount of slots taken by Clan Endo and FF is probably too little, as they are too much of a no-brainer, but this is what we are stuck with.