963 replies to this topic

[AlmightyAeng]

Abisha, on 17 October 2014 - 11:28 AM, said:

people are not negative if they explained it more.
for first time i saw it also thought ALL mechs get quirks but that's obvious not the case.

Even then, some of the T2 mechs (Lookin' at you, Spider 5D) are gonna have negligible quirks.

The 5D has ECM AND JJ. It's gonna get one, small quirk, to one thing. That's livable.

[CDLord HHGD]

Action Mac, on 17 October 2014 - 11:13 AM, said:

I think you should be playing TT if lore needs to be so rigid for you, not sure why you would want to play a Mechwarrior title full of customisation options if it bothers you that much. Oh and books are rumored to be awesome maybe I should try that sometime.

If you don't want to be bothered by lore, then go play hawken or titanfall... Keep your generic BS outta MW. And yes, books are cool, but if you can't be bothered, there's always Sarna.

[Mothykins]

Now, see, the jester it's a good example of dropping the ball to me. Just the large lasers. Not the other two out of three it carries stock. Not the really sad small lasers. Just the large lasers.
No generic energy buffs. Just large lasers.

Guess what, i can tell you what build you're going to see on that mech 90% of the time. As many Friggin large lasers as they can fit.

That's it. That is the future of the Jester. Thanks. So glad i paid money for that and the locust 1V that you want to give erll buffs to. Great. The only two i actually care about.

Edited by Cavale, 17 October 2014 - 11:32 AM.

[EvilCow]

I like the proposed quirks overall, the risk is to overdo them, that would actually reduce configuration choices.

Personally I would have reduced the SL and ML heat to original values before doing quirks.

[AlmightyAeng]

EvilCow, on 17 October 2014 - 11:33 AM, said:

I like the proposed quirks overall, the risk is to overdo them, that would actually reduce configuration choices.

Personally I would have reduced the SL and ML heat to original values before doing quirks.

What's worse? Reducing the likelihood of variety in a single chassis variant? Or having no variety in the chassis' people actually take?

Edited by Ghost Badger, 17 October 2014 - 11:35 AM.

[Mercules]

Cavale, on 17 October 2014 - 11:32 AM, said:

Now, see, the jester it's a good example of dropping the ball to me. Just the large lasers. Not the other two out of three it carries stock. Not the really sad small lasers. Just the large lasers.
No generic energy buffs. Just large lasers.

Guess what, i can tell you what build you're going to see on that mech 90% of the time. As many Friggin large lasers as they can fit.

That's it. That is the future of the Jester. Thanks. So glad i paid money for that and the locust 1V that you want to give erll buffs to. Great. The only two i actually care about.

It's a Tier 3 mech... with JJs. It gets 2 quirks because of that. So they could go with a MUCH lower generic buff to Lasers or give you a specific buff with LLs. "Damn it. I wanted pudding with my free cake and they just gave me free cake."

[Abisha]

Cavale, on 17 October 2014 - 11:32 AM, said:

Now, see, the jester it's a good example of dropping the ball to me. Just the large lasers. Not the other two out of three it carries stock. Not the really sad small lasers. Just the large lasers.
No generic energy buffs. Just large lasers.

Guess what, i can tell you what build you're going to see on that mech 90% of the time. As many Friggin large lasers as they can fit.

That's it. That is the future of the Jester. Thanks. So glad i paid money for that and the locust 1V that you want to give erll buffs to. Great. The only two i actually care about.

am disappointed with jester also.
they sudden give it a little bit of heat control or something not much but little.

[CheeseyPeas]

Mercules, on 17 October 2014 - 11:19 AM, said:

I think you should be playing Hawken if Battletech/Mechwarrior lore bothers you that much. I didn't buy a founders pack for "Generic Mechabattle Online."

We have "Generic Mechabattle Online" so why play another one, Lore in general does not bother me and I enjoy the fact that Mechwarrior games have a history but there is a line between TT and and an online game where things just do not translate well.

[AlmightyAeng]

Mercules, on 17 October 2014 - 11:36 AM, said:

It's a Tier 3 mech... with JJs. It gets 2 quirks because of that. So they could go with a MUCH lower generic buff to Lasers or give you a specific buff with LLs. "Damn it. I wanted pudding with my free cake and they just gave me free cake."

Dude...be fair. That's not a good analogy.

"Damn, I wanted free cake AND to choose the words they put on it for this other dude's birthday. All I got was to eat it."

[Johnny Z]

I have a question I have not seen answered. How do these quirks stack with weapon and mech modules?

Edited by Johnny Z, 17 October 2014 - 11:39 AM.

[Glythe]

Scratx, on 17 October 2014 - 11:25 AM, said:

The quirks are more in trying to get every IS mech on more or less the same level. It also results in making them better against the Clans as a side effect. The Atlas' buffs aren't actually bad at all, but the Atlas wasn't a bad mech to start with either.

Right and I'll bet you 1000$ that on any given sunday three dire wolves will still decimate three Atlases. I view these quirks as a failure.

If they didn't out right say it they implied the quirks would balance Clan-IS battles. I think you said it all by noting that it was a "side effect" that IS mechs will be better against Clan mechs.

If this whole CW thing is even remotely going to have a chance then the 100 ton IS mech needs to be equal to the clan mech. Until those steps are taken then this game has no chance for having a fair end game.

[AlmightyAeng]

Action Mac, on 17 October 2014 - 11:37 AM, said:

We have "Generic Mechabattle Online" so why play another one, Lore in general does not bother me and I enjoy the fact that Mechwarrior games have a history but there is a line between TT and and an online game where things just do not translate well.

Well, personally, I dislike having the meta revolve entirely around the same subset of weapon pairings...put onto chassis with different artwork but the same damn hardpoints.

I'd LOVE to see MORE types of chassis on the field, even if that means that the chance of a specific variant having a known loadout is higher.

THAT'S the 'generic' that bugs me.

Edited by Ghost Badger, 17 October 2014 - 11:40 AM.

[EvilCow]

Ghost Badger, on 17 October 2014 - 11:34 AM, said:

What's worse? Reducing the likelihood of variety in a single chassis variant? Or having no variety in the chassis' people actually take?

The risk is of creating one trick ponies out of currently not competitive mechs, see the Dragon 1N for example, it will be able to mount 2 AC5 firing as fast as AC2 after mounting the module. We will see a lot of those limiting the use of AC5 on anything else.

The 1N itself will no more be useless but will limit everything else from using AC5s. This is the reduced variety we could get from overdone quirks.

[Bishop Steiner]

Johnny Z, on 17 October 2014 - 11:38 AM, said:

I have a question I have not seen answered. How do these quirks stack with weapon and mech modules?

Tweeted to Russ on that.

My belief is that the Chassis quirk is first, then the percentages follow Skill Tree, then Module, so for example:
YLW
so 20% quirk is AC20 RoF: 3.6 seconds.
THEN you add the 5% ELITE quirk (5% of 3.6 seconds, or .18 seconds) for 3.42 seconds
Lvl5 Cooldown proves 12%, not 22%, (12% of 3.42 being .41) bringing it down to approximately a cooldown of 3.1 seconds vs 4, when totally maximized.

Instead of flat 20+5+12%.

But am still waiting to hear back for clarification.

[Mercules]

Action Mac, on 17 October 2014 - 11:37 AM, said:

...but there is a line between TT and and an online game where things just do not translate well.

Yep, but this isn't it. Now if they gave you negatives for mounting anything BUT stock loadouts, that would probably cross that line. This encourages but doesn't limit.

As I have pointed out multiple times that even if someone decides that the HBK-4G just HAS to run with an AC/20 to maximize it's buff potential, there is still a solid buff for all it's other hardpoints that they can customize. They can add in SLs and more AC ammo, a Single LL, MPLs, SPLs, add a tag to help a teammate's LRMs, throw on a PPC with the AC/20 and maybe sacrifice engine for more punch. Tons of varieties of AC/20 HB-4G.

[AlmightyAeng]

EvilCow, on 17 October 2014 - 11:40 AM, said:

The risk is of creating one trick ponies out of currently not competitive mechs, see the Dragon 1N for example, it will be able to mount 2 AC5 firing as fast as AC2 after mounting the module. We will see a lot of those limiting the use of AC5 on anything else.

The 1N itself will no more be useless but will limit everything else from using AC5s. This is the reduced variety we could get from overdone quirks.

Considering that the Dragon-1N is currently a one-trick pony who's big trick is "Taking up a heavy slot and being less useful than pretty much any other option" I'd call that an improvement. Just my 2 cents.

I'd say that turning non-competitive mechs into one-trick ponies that have a chance at being useful is FAR superior then seeing the same 'meta' mechs over and over, or the same damn loadout on 6 mechs. That's more boring to me. But, that's a matter of opinion.

[Mercules]

EvilCow, on 17 October 2014 - 11:40 AM, said:

The risk is of creating one trick ponies out of currently not competitive mechs, see the Dragon 1N for example, it will be able to mount 2 AC5 firing as fast as AC2 after mounting the module. We will see a lot of those limiting the use of AC5 on anything else.

The 1N itself will no more be useless but will limit everything else from using AC5s. This is the reduced variety we could get from overdone quirks.

Okay... but we will actually see a Dragon on the field, right? That right there is a 100% more Dragons than I have seen in the last few weeks.

[Bishop Steiner]

EvilCow, on 17 October 2014 - 11:40 AM, said:

The risk is of creating one trick ponies out of currently not competitive mechs, see the Dragon 1N for example, it will be able to mount 2 AC5 firing as fast as AC2 after mounting the module. We will see a lot of those limiting the use of AC5 on anything else.

The 1N itself will no more be useless but will limit everything else from using AC5s. This is the reduced variety we could get from overdone quirks.

Really? Because even if it shoots ac5s really well, but is overall still a bad mech, smart players will simply run ac5s in something else, like say..a Jagermech. The weapon may prove slightly less efficient in it, but the overall package will be better, so people will adapt and use something else. And since the Jager is already overall better than the Dragon, in mos troles, it make sense it needs LESS of a boost to it's ACs to compete.

What this will do, is provide maximized roles for each variant, then players will be more likely to match skillset and playstyle to the variants that matches their needs best, instead of the generic 1 size fits all build meta we currently see.

[STEF_]

Glythe, on 17 October 2014 - 11:14 AM, said:

People are upset because these buffs to make them a little more viable don't address the issue at hand. Look at the Atlas 7-D buffs.

http://mwomercs.com/...30#entry3827030

Yea great job there..... the Atlas will totally go toe to toe with the Direwolf now.

/sigh.



I think what most of us wanted was to have our old and lame IS mechs be pretty much equal in terms of viability when compared to clan mechs. Instead they give us pathetic little nothing buffs. These quirks might be fine if we were going to fight 10 clan mechs vs 12 IS mechs but that isn't the case so this is basically a slap in the face.

I really would like to see 10 clan mechs vs 12 IS, I always supported this idea.

Anyway just yesterday I saw an Atlas doing 7 kills and +1500 dmg. Ok, just a match, but still.
And king crab is coming.

Above all I would like to see IS subpar mechs a little more competitive, I think this way can do the trick, because this is a team based game, so in this way IS vs CLan should be more balanced than now.

[Johnny Z]

Bishop Steiner, on 17 October 2014 - 11:41 AM, said:

Tweeted to Russ on that.

My belief is that the Chassis quirk is first, then the percentages follow Skill Tree, then Module, so for example:
YLW
so 20% quirk is AC20 RoF: 3.6 seconds.
THEN you add the 5% ELITE quirk (5% of 3.6 seconds, or .18 seconds) for 3.42 seconds
Lvl5 Cooldown proves 12%, not 22%, (12% of 3.42 being .41) bringing it down to approximately a cooldown of 3.1 seconds vs 4, when totally maximized.

Instead of flat 20+5+12%.

But am still waiting to hear back for clarification.

Looks good.