336 replies to this topic

[Celthora]

Josef Nader, on 09 October 2014 - 02:15 PM, said:

Delete the mechlab. Stock mechs only!

Well i remember i spent lots of time on mechlab when i was playing MW4. You still would spend same time with sized hardpoints system, the only difference is you switch from a mech to another. A mech didnt support the build you created? Do it on another. For example you are building a Blackjack and you say: Damn it would be excellent with gauss. So you switch your Hollander and continue building. Now: Damn it would be awesome with ac20! So you switch to your Hunchback. At last, you applied the build you created.

Even mechlab would be more fun.

Edited by Celthora, 09 October 2014 - 02:48 PM.

[Josef Nader]

Celthora, on 09 October 2014 - 02:34 PM, said:

Well i remember i spent lots of time on mechlab when i was playing MW4. You still would spend same time with sized hardpoints system, the only difference is you switch from a mech to another. A mech didnt support the build you created? Do it on another. For example you are building a Blackjack and you say: Damn it would be excellent with gauss. So you switch your Hollander and continue building. Now: Damn it would be awesome with ac20! So you switch to your Hunchback. At last, you applied the build you created.

Even mechlab would be more fun.

And mechs that can't support decent builds are never used. I remember that mechlab too. It was atrocious. There were a small handful of mechs that could support decent builds, and those that couldn't do it without the baggage of terrible hitboxes or a few bad hardpoints were left to rot.

No thanks. We have a significantly better mechlab right now.

[Celthora]

Josef Nader, on 09 October 2014 - 02:53 PM, said:

And mechs that can't support decent builds are never used.

Every mech supposed to be unique and different as i said. So if there is a mech with poor hardpoints, game should buff it from other parts like increasing torso-arm speeds and angles, maybe help it on heat like Awesome, and keep all mechs usage equal or close as much as possible. Not like now: 90% madcat, 10%summoner. Wait and see this percentage goes worse after TW falls on CB.

[1453 R]

Lightfoot, on 09 October 2014 - 02:21 PM, said:

The way you "fairly" remove the Gauss Rifle as a brawling weapon is give it a 25-33% longer recharge than brawling weapons. Strange how this one little oversight PGI made back in the MWO alpha got so blown out of proportion as to require the Gauss Rifle be given the charge-up mechanic of a 3rd person shooter sniper rifle. The Gauss doesn't do anywhere near the damage of a sniper rifle, which, just guesstimating, would be more like 24-27 damage in MWO. That's why you almost never see players using just one.

I just wish they would make the Gauss de-sync into something that worked for something other than just the Mouse. That is just not fair, and why all the fear about what is really a mediocre weapon except for it's accuracy?

You're nuts.

I see - and use - singleton Gauss all the time, especially C-Gauss. It's an excellent weapon with a lot to recommend it. 15 damage wherever you want it (within the limitations of your ability to aim) at whatever range you feel like is superb, and the inert ammo is a very hefty bonus. Sure, the rifle itself can/does explode, but it's a 20-point pop. Nowhere near as vicious as a 140-damage boom from a ton of unused AC/20 shells. The charge mechanic doesn't even hurt it, it just changes the feel and playstyle - to the betterment of some and the detriment of others I will admit, but still. Dual-Gauss machines are far from the only times I see Gauss rifles.

[Asmudius Heng]

Celthora, on 09 October 2014 - 03:04 PM, said:

Every mech supposed to be unique and different as i said. So if there is a mech with poor hardpoints, game should buff it from other parts like increasing torso-arm speeds and angles, maybe help it on heat like Awesome, and keep all mechs usage equal or close as much as possible. Not like now: 90% madcat, 10%summoner. Wait and see this percentage goes worse after TW falls on CB.

Exactly - the poor amount of viable mechs in MW4 was not due to hardpoints ... it was due to bad balance and little thought into how those mechs were not competitive.

Mechs that had the most Energy slots were prized only because ERLL was so ridiculously broken, not because the hardpoints made it that way. If they allowed you to put any weapon anywhere people STILL would have boated ERLL because it was effective.

[Jun Watarase]

Lets assume the game had came with sized hardpoints from the very beginning.

What this would have meant : Mechs with clearly defined roles, and less dead weight mechs. The CPLT-K2 would have been one of the few mechs capable of mounting dual PPCs...giving it a clear niche. Instead what happened was people looked at the two ballistic hardpoints and went "oooh gauss boat!". BT fans facepalmed at the abomination that was a dual gauss/AC20 CPLT-K2. And the same thing happened with the jagermech. Instead of being a light AC mech, people just boated AC20s/Gauss because it was the best thing since sliced bread.

There was and still is no reason to pick most of the mechs in the game because there exists a mech with similar hardpoints that can do the same build better. There is no reason whatsoever to pick the awesome when the stalker can boat energy weapons AND missles at the same time.

Sure quirks -might- solve the problem. But so would sized hardpoints and we wouldnt have had 2-3 years of pointless garbage mechs and imbalanced boating. Looking at the clan mechs, it is obvious quirks are not going to solve the problem (they are very minor differences and in no way balance the mechs. Look at the quirks for the summoner, then compare the mech itself to the timberwolf. The quirks dont balance out the terrible summoner at all).

Many of the balance issues such as the 6 PPC stalker, dual gauss/ac20 jagermech and now, the 6x UAC5 direwolf would have never have occured if PGI had the foresight to implement sized hardpoints from the very beginning. Unfortunately they didnt, so we are stuck with this mess where 90% of the mechs in the game are non competitive because another mech with similar hardpoints is just better.

When the timberwolf gets released, almost every summoner pilot will switch right over because the timberwolf is a summoner with more hardpoints, tonnage and still has the ability to mount JJs. With sized hardpoints, there would have been a reason to stick with the summoner, but there isnt any now.

I suspect everyone who is complaining about "restrictions" doesnt have a BT background and hasnt seen the sheer stupidity of past MW games which had little to no restrictions (12 med laser boats anyone?). Restrictions are good as they add variety...there would be no reason to play chess if every piece on the board was a queen.

[Gerhardt Jorgensson]

Jun Watarase, on 09 October 2014 - 03:13 PM, said:

I suspect everyone who is complaining about "restrictions" doesnt have a BT background and hasnt seen the sheer stupidity of past MW games which had little to no restrictions (12 med laser boats anyone?). Restrictions are good as they add variety...there would be no reason to play chess if every piece on the board was a queen.

I am old enough to remember the 12 ER Small laser legging Shadow Cats which were the whole reason MechWarrior 4 had hardpoint systems.......

Quality post that explains the problem very well, unfortunately players would rather be able to do this:



then have to redesign 'Mechs that cannot rely on pressing one button to win or that might have worse hitboxes than the four or so 'Mechs deemed "Tier 1".

Of course I'm sure competitive changes and quirks like "5% less leg damage" are going to be more than enough to get players flocking to the tier 5 'Mechs.

[Agent 0 Fortune]

Josef Nader, on 09 October 2014 - 01:46 PM, said:

No, what happens is that the field of viable mechs drops to those mechs that can field good loadouts AND have good hitboxes.
…
Nobody cares about mounting multiple PPCs enough to ever, ever, ever, ever field an Awesome in serious competitive play.

Josef Nader, on 09 October 2014 - 01:46 PM, said:

Imposing further restrictions on customization only serves to choke out variants that have bad hitboxes by preventing them from even mounting good weapons (see, the Dragon, Quickdraw, Awesome, Jägermech, Battlemaster, Banshee, etc. etc. etc.).

You are contradicting yourself. You say no one will play and Awesome to be able to field 3 PPCs, or a hunchback to field an AC20, because the alternatives are that much better, even if they cannot carry the same weapon loadout. But then you turn around and argue that fix hardpoints will reduce the amount of Dragon, Quickdraw, Awesomes on the battlefield, when in fact no one is playing them now, because you can replicate their loadouts on superior mechs.

Fixed hardpoints is going to give players a reason to play some of the less popular mechs, having unlimited hardpoints is what takes that benefit away. Your example and personal prejudice against the hunchback aside, if it is the only medium mech able to carry and AC20, it will get played. While currently it is infrequently played because the SHD is so much better.

[Josef Nader]

What you people are completely failing to understand is that there is no room in this game for light mechs mounting gauss rifles, or light AC boats, or mixed loadout mechs with a myriad of small weapons. These mechs aren't good for anything beyond masochistic pugging. I run a Shadow Hawk with a stock loadout (SRM2 and all), but this is largely because I hate my own KDR and enjoy the novelty of killing real mechs in my awful, awful build.

You guys are losing your mind that a spider can mount an AC10 when that's the Urbanmech's job, without recognizing that both the AC10 Spider and the Urbanmech are -terrible- in this game, and the role the Urbanmech fills is a terrible one that was only really useful as a method for cheaply getting another AC10 on the field in tabletop.

The stock Jägermech is terribad. That's another one I run for giggles. Plinking away at real mechs with my 2x AC2/2x AC5 awfulness is more amusement than competitive.

The roles you guys are lamenting these mechs aren't filling aren't even effective roles in this game, and trying to shoehorn these mechs into those roles would kill the chassis out of anything beyond pugging with terrible mechs for giggles.

Agent 0 Fortune, on 09 October 2014 - 03:19 PM, said:

You are contradicting yourself. You say no one will play and Awesome to be able to field 3 PPCs, or a hunchback to field an AC20, because the alternatives are that much better, even if they cannot carry the same weapon loadout. But then you turn around and argue that fix hardpoints will reduce the amount of Dragon, Quickdraw, Awesomes on the battlefield, when in fact no one is playing them now, because you can replicate their loadouts on superior mechs.

Fixed hardpoints is going to give players a reason to play some of the less popular mechs, having unlimited hardpoints is what takes that benefit away. Your example and personal prejudice against the hunchback aside, if it is the only medium mech able to carry and AC20, it will get played. While currently it is infrequently played because the SHD is so much better.

Except they won't get played. See above. Certain things just don't have a role in this game. The Awesome can be tweaked into viability by a determined player, but it will never, ever be a competitive design. As we've been over, the Shadow Hawk isn't so superior to the Hunchback that they aren't strongly competitive, with the Hawk's only real advantage being it's better hitboxes. The Hunch handles significantly better.

Again, just because other mechs can field 3x PPCs right now doesn't mean that people would flock to the Awesome if they couldn't. It just means that people wouldn't field 3x PPCs -ever-. The Awesome would be a specialist, sure, but no one would use that specialization because the Awesome is terrible.

Edited by Josef Nader, 09 October 2014 - 03:24 PM.

[Ultimax]

Lightfoot, on 09 October 2014 - 02:21 PM, said:

The way you "fairly" remove the Gauss Rifle as a brawling weapon is give it a 25-33% longer recharge than brawling weapons. Strange how this one little oversight PGI made back in the MWO alpha

No, you don't.

Then you nerf it to the point no one takes it, because they don't want to be useless with a 15 ton weapon.


A SINGLE AC 5 has almost the same DPS as a 15 Ton Gauss Rifle.

2 of them, is nearly double the DPS.

A mere TWO SRM 6s for 8 tons will out brawl the hell out of a Gauss Rifle.

For one ton less, you can take an AC 20 as a dedicated brawler - you give up long range but you gain SIXY PERCENT higher DPS, and 33% higher single shot impact.


You can brawl with it if you have to, that doesn't mean it is a good choice for brawling nor is it optimal.

That also doesn't mean it competes with specialized brawling weapons.

Edited by Ultimatum X, 09 October 2014 - 03:33 PM.

[Asmudius Heng]

Josef Nader, on 09 October 2014 - 03:20 PM, said:

The roles you guys are lamenting these mechs aren't filling aren't even effective roles in this game, and trying to shoehorn these mechs into those roles would kill the chassis out of anything beyond pugging with terrible mechs for giggles.

The problem is then about making viable niche roles and why those roles are not effective.

That is not a hardpoint issue at all that is a role warfare and balance issue which exists with or without hardpoint restrictions.

Bad mechs are getting tweaks now to hopefully make them more viable at least in a niche capacity.

With hardpoint sizes the same thing would need to happen anyway except instead of giving bonuses for certain weapons to encourage use like is done now it is much more prescriptive and would work better in creating roles for mechs.

If those roles suck, then it needs to be looked into WHY they suck and see what can be done to save that role if it should truly be in MWO.

Some of the reasons certain roles suck has nothing even to do with the chassis and weapons but has to do with the way sensors work for instance, and certainly the lack of logistics in the game means there is no such thing as a cheap workhorse mech either.

Hardpoint sizes are actually pretty small parts of a larger role warfare problem ... i would prefer them in but there is a lot more too it

[Gerhardt Jorgensson]

Josef Nader, on 09 October 2014 - 03:20 PM, said:

What you people are completely failing to understand is that there is no room in this game for light mechs mounting gauss rifles, or light AC boats, or mixed loadout mechs with a myriad of small weapons. These mechs aren't good for anything beyond masochistic pugging. I run a Shadow Hawk with a stock loadout (SRM2 and all), but this is largely because I hate my own KDR and enjoy the novelty of killing real mechs in my awful, awful build.

You guys are losing your mind that a spider can mount an AC10 when that's the Urbanmech's job, without recognizing that both the AC10 Spider and the Urbanmech are -terrible- in this game, and the role the Urbanmech fills is a terrible one that was only really useful as a method for cheaply getting another AC10 on the field in tabletop.

The stock Jägermech is terribad. That's another one I run for giggles. Plinking away at real mechs with my 2x AC2/2x AC5 awfulness is more amusement than competitive.

The roles you guys are lamenting these mechs aren't filling aren't even effective roles in this game, and trying to shoehorn these mechs into those roles would kill the chassis out of anything beyond pugging with terrible mechs for giggles.




Except they won't get played. See above. Certain things just don't have a role in this game. The Awesome can be tweaked into viability by a determined player, but it will never, ever be a competitive design. As we've been over, the Shadow Hawk isn't so superior to the Hunchback that they aren't strongly competitive, with the Hawk's only real advantage being it's better hitboxes. The Hunch handles significantly better.

Again, just because other mechs can field 3x PPCs right now doesn't mean that people would flock to the Awesome if they couldn't. It just means that people wouldn't field 3x PPCs -ever-. The Awesome would be a specialist, sure, but no one would use that specialization because the Awesome is terrible.

The funny thing is, the examples you used, the Awesome, is considered one of the best 'Mechs in the game amongst the Stock 'Mech Monday player groups for the fact that it is one of the few 'Mechs that can put out constant FLD damage. The Jagermech in its stock loadout can put out some of the fastest DPS in the game.

Amazing how restrictions would switch up what is viable in the game, backed by actual playing with restrictions shows.

Edited by Gerhardt Jorgensson, 09 October 2014 - 03:38 PM.

[1453 R]

Gerhardt Jorgensson, on 09 October 2014 - 03:37 PM, said:

The funny thing is, the examples you used, the Awesome, is considered one of the best 'Mechs in the game amongst the Stock 'Mech Monday player groups for the fact that it is one of the few 'Mechs that can put out constant FLD damage. The Jagermech in its stock loadout can put out some of the fastest DPS in the game.

Amazing how restrictions would switch up what is viable in the game, backed by actual playing with restrictions shows.

Now take those same bone-stock 'Mechs and put them up against "Stock hardpoint size ONLY" 'Mechs, but with the freedom to modify their internals as they see fit. As well as substitute weapons for physically smaller ones, or omit them entirely for weight savings, as needed.

See how long your Awesome lasts then.

What you're not seeing, Gerhardt - what you and all the other sized-hardpoints, stock-armaments-ONLY folks categorically refuse to see - is that turning ninety-five percent of the chassis in the game into horribly armed hodgepodge FrankenMech heaps with terrible, completely nonsensical TT-style armaments won't suddenly make horribly armed hodgepodge FrankenMech heaps with terrible, completely nonsensical TT-style armaments good. None of those descriptors just given there will change. Not one of them.

The only thing that will change is that the tiny remaining handful of good 'Mechs capable of carrying good guns will be so utterly, overwhelmingly, crushingly dominant that the EVIL META(!!) will be far narrower and much more harshly restrictive than it currently is. The option of making bad 'Mechs semi-passable by putting good guns on them will be gone. They will instead be permanently hard-locked into being bad 'Mechs with bad guns, and thus they will vanish from the face of Creation.

Sized hardpoints does not turn bad 'Mechs into good 'Mechs, or bad guns into good guns. All sized hardpoints do is ensure that only good 'Mechs which naturally carry good guns are able to get anything done.

Why is this single, simple fact so incredibly difficult for you guys to comprehend?

[3rdworld]

Gerhardt Jorgensson, on 09 October 2014 - 03:37 PM, said:

The funny thing is, the examples you used, the Awesome, is considered one of the best 'Mechs in the game amongst the Stock 'Mech Monday player groups for the fact that it is one of the few 'Mechs that can put out constant FLD damage. The Jagermech in its stock loadout can put out some of the fastest DPS in the game.

Amazing how restrictions would switch up what is viable in the game, backed by actual playing with restrictions shows.

The awesome is good when you ban all advanced tech mechs in the game? no way. It couldn't have anything to do with having the most heat sinks and quirks which lower its heat generation, which have nothing to do with restrictions and actually points more to the promise of a quality quirks system. na.

Edited by 3rdworld, 09 October 2014 - 04:00 PM.

[Gerhardt Jorgensson]

1453 R, on 09 October 2014 - 03:50 PM, said:

Now take those same bone-stock 'Mechs and put them up against "Stock hardpoint size ONLY" 'Mechs, but with the freedom to modify their internals as they see fit. As well as substitute weapons for physically smaller ones, or omit them entirely for weight savings, as needed.

See how long your Awesome lasts then.

What you're not seeing, Gerhardt - what you and all the other sized-hardpoints, stock-armaments-ONLY folks categorically refuse to see - is that turning ninety-five percent of the chassis in the game into horribly armed hodgepodge FrankenMech heaps with terrible, completely nonsensical TT-style armaments won't suddenly make horribly armed hodgepodge FrankenMech heaps with terrible, completely nonsensical TT-style armaments good. None of those descriptors just given there will change. Not one of them.

The only thing that will change is that the tiny remaining handful of good 'Mechs capable of carrying good guns will be so utterly, overwhelmingly, crushingly dominant that the EVIL META(!!) will be far narrower and much more harshly restrictive than it currently is. The option of making bad 'Mechs semi-passable by putting good guns on them will be gone. They will instead be permanently hard-locked into being bad 'Mechs with bad guns, and thus they will vanish from the face of Creation.

Sized hardpoints does not turn bad 'Mechs into good 'Mechs, or bad guns into good guns. All sized hardpoints do is ensure that only good 'Mechs which naturally carry good guns are able to get anything done.

Why is this single, simple fact so incredibly difficult for you guys to comprehend?

Did you not understand the proposal I made in the other post? It does not restrict 'Mechs to only their stock loadout -- it allows players to take different combinations of weapons. Some may have tighter restrictions due to the size of the original loadouts, but players still have the option of tweaking their 'Mechs in multiple ways -- they still can switch engines, change the armor, and change weapons as size or hardpoints allow.

No, they no longer can turn a .5 ton machine gun into a 15 ton rail cannon.

Even the best 'Mechs will have their ability to kill so quickly reduced with restrictions; the Dire Wolf, for instance, would be relegated to being able to carry a single Gauss rifle, as the only component it has that could fit it would be the Dire Wolf A's right arm. Of course, the proposal I am making has not gone through any balance passes -- it is merely an illustration on what hardpoints 'Mechs might have if hardpoint sizes were scaled down. I have mentioned many times in the thread that many hardpoint sizes should be changed -- for instance, off the top of my head I do not believe any of the included OmniMech components would even be capable of carrying a Clan Ultra or LB-X 20 autocannon without some hard points being enlarged.

I however, am in no position to make those changes or even demand that a hard point change system be put in place. All I am attempting to do is answer Russ' suggestion that someone go through and audit what would change would look like and how it would effect current builds and provide some rationale on why such changes could benefit the game.

3rdworld, on 09 October 2014 - 04:00 PM, said:

The awesome is good when you ban all advanced tech mechs in the game? no way. It couldn't have anything to do with having the most heat sinks and quirks which lower its heat generation, which have nothing to do with restrictions and actually points more to the promise of a quality quirks system. na.

The last time I played with the Stock 'Mech Monday group was before any positive perks were introduced to the Awesome, and it was against stock Clan 'Mechs -- it still held its own very well.

Edited by Gerhardt Jorgensson, 09 October 2014 - 04:18 PM.

[Josef Nader]

Listen, I like the Awesome. Even as it is, I have a blast stomping PUGs in it. The idea of the meta player throwing his expensive headset on the ground and stamping on it when I decimate him in my stock weapons AWS-8Q is how I get my jollies off. Quirks are (hopefully) going to make it so I don't have be -quite- as lucky as I do now to get a good game out of the old girl, but she'll always be a for-fun pugstomping mech. Any serious comp team would CT core me before I got two shots off, and that doesn't really matter what weapons they're using.

The Awesome is bad. It would be bad with sized hardpoints. No serious comp player would look at the Awesome and go, "yeah, I can take that into competition." I don't care how many PPCs it's carrying. It'll still be bad after the quirk pass, at least at the highest levels of play, but for public games (maybe even casual team play!) it'll be a fun (maybe somewhat effective) mech if nothing else.

The idea that any system, be it hardpoint sizes, quirks, or stock mechs, is going to get the Awesome into serious top-tier games is laughable. It's just not happening ever.

The Awesome is one example, but there are plenty of mechs that suffer the same fate. People just need to accept that certain mechs are for fighting serious competitive games, and most mechs are for funsies. There's nothing wrong with for funsies mechs. I have 80+ mechs that are for funsies, and I play nearly all of them on a regular basis. I just accept and acknowledge that these mechs are for pugging and my own personal enjoyment and there's nothing wrong with that.

[1453 R]

Methinks, Nader, that the intent of the sized hardpoints folks is largely to try and eliminate Tier 1 as a thing.

I agree - the IS quirk pass will hopefully be enough to get a majority of 'Mechs competing at Tier 2, or at least Tier 3. I know, I know, wishful thinking that, but we can hope that further adjustments made after the system goes live continues to tighten things up. That said, you know and I know that if you started in T5, there isn't anything in the world that will ever get you up to T1.

I'm thinking that this fact just flat offends sized-hardpoints people, and what they want to do is dismantle T1 and force every 'Mech in the game, through whatever means necessary, into T2 and below. Make everything bad, and then try and redefine 'bad' such that not everything is bad anymore. It's never going to happen because that's not how competitive play, or even just serious-minded casual "I would like to win my pug matches tonight" play, works, but I'm almost entirely convinced at this point that this is the intent of the sized-hardpoints proposals. Eliminate T1, hopefully eliminate T2 if they can, and once everything is T3 or below, consider the game "balanced" because there's nothing left that's not horribly flawed in some way.

The idea of a 'Mech being good just doesn't jive with sized-hardpoint folks. Depressing, really...

[DocBach]

1453 R, on 09 October 2014 - 04:30 PM, said:

Methinks, Nader, that the intent of the sized hardpoints folks is largely to try and eliminate Tier 1 as a thing.

I agree - the IS quirk pass will hopefully be enough to get a majority of 'Mechs competing at Tier 2, or at least Tier 3. I know, I know, wishful thinking that, but we can hope that further adjustments made after the system goes live continues to tighten things up. That said, you know and I know that if you started in T5, there isn't anything in the world that will ever get you up to T1.

I'm thinking that this fact just flat offends sized-hardpoints people, and what they want to do is dismantle T1 and force every 'Mech in the game, through whatever means necessary, into T2 and below. Make everything bad, and then try and redefine 'bad' such that not everything is bad anymore. It's never going to happen because that's not how competitive play, or even just serious-minded casual "I would like to win my pug matches tonight" play, works, but I'm almost entirely convinced at this point that this is the intent of the sized-hardpoints proposals. Eliminate T1, hopefully eliminate T2 if they can, and once everything is T3 or below, consider the game "balanced" because there's nothing left that's not horribly flawed in some way.

The idea of a 'Mech being good just doesn't jive with sized-hardpoint folks. Depressing, really...

I think the purpose of hard point sizes is to make players make choices and trade offs in choosing a chassis rather than just using the one chassis that rules them all. Don't get me wrong, my Mad Cat is cool and all but now I don't really have much of a reason to use anything else in the game.

[Featherwood]

2OP,
let me assure you that many people have been dreaming about MW4 style mechlab since CBT. I warmly welcome long awaited move towards more logical mechs build construction. Fingers crossed for this feature to be implemented despite all the difficulty of its realization.

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

1453 R, on 09 October 2014 - 04:30 PM, said:

Methinks, Nader, that the intent of the sized hardpoints folks is largely to try and eliminate Tier 1 as a thing.

I agree - the IS quirk pass will hopefully be enough to get a majority of 'Mechs competing at Tier 2, or at least Tier 3. I know, I know, wishful thinking that, but we can hope that further adjustments made after the system goes live continues to tighten things up. That said, you know and I know that if you started in T5, there isn't anything in the world that will ever get you up to T1.

I'm thinking that this fact just flat offends sized-hardpoints people, and what they want to do is dismantle T1 and force every 'Mech in the game, through whatever means necessary, into T2 and below. Make everything bad, and then try and redefine 'bad' such that not everything is bad anymore. It's never going to happen because that's not how competitive play, or even just serious-minded casual "I would like to win my pug matches tonight" play, works, but I'm almost entirely convinced at this point that this is the intent of the sized-hardpoints proposals. Eliminate T1, hopefully eliminate T2 if they can, and once everything is T3 or below, consider the game "balanced" because there's nothing left that's not horribly flawed in some way.

The idea of a 'Mech being good just doesn't jive with sized-hardpoint folks. Depressing, really...

They're TT grognards, but they don't remember that 99.5% of TT mechs are complete and utter garbage. I still remember when I'd take nothing by tanks, artillery, infantry, and aerospace assets and absolutely wreck any and ALL mech-centric forces. Because stock mechs are a complete wash except for a VERY select few.

Edited by Lord Scarlett Johan, 09 October 2014 - 04:41 PM.