963 replies to this topic

[Revis Volek]

Stefka Kerensky, on 17 October 2014 - 10:53 AM, said:

This thread shows incredible posts....

There are a lot of tier 5 mechs that are going to received some bonus making them a little more viable AND there are people whining about it????? LOL

There are quirks coming, giving us more TT flavours to our mechs AND there are people whining about that??? again LOL

edit: Ok, I'm completely supporting PGI in this one

From what i can tell, no one who is here complaining understand that this game was born from TT, used TT and lore as much as it can and will continue to as long as its viable. The naysayers seem to think that this should be CoD or some other Vanilla point and click shooter. I'm sorry but it is not and myself as well as many others here are very happy to see it that way and these quirks.

There is literally NO POINT in having 100plus mechs if they all do the same thing.....

Edited by DarthRevis, 17 October 2014 - 12:17 PM.

[Zerberus]

JozefK, on 17 October 2014 - 07:11 AM, said:

For the player it means that instead of experimenting with a single purchased mech he will have to purchase several mechs. SIngle mech is becoming less variable.

Considering you need to level 3 chassis anyway to reach your extra module slot and elite efficiencies, this is an issue how exactly?

[Tynan]

Cavale, on 17 October 2014 - 12:13 PM, said:

Except it's not listed as a "quirk" it's part of the hard stats for the chassis. Look at it's quirks in game. There are none.

Yeah.

This is a legitimate point--some mechs (not all, but the Jester is definitely one) that have paid for JJs or whatnot with worse inherent mobility than other variants. Those aren't listed as quirks, they're just intrinsic stats on the design.

If those aren't being taken into account, they certainly should be.

[VanillaG]

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.

Pretty sure the reason it got LL buffs is that the K2 will get PPC buffs. A generic energy buff would allow you create a flying K2 which kind of goes against the spirit of the quirks.

Edited by VanillaG, 17 October 2014 - 12:18 PM.

[Mercules]

Cavale, on 17 October 2014 - 12:06 PM, said:

Yes. The Jester has Jumpjets. Two of them. And the largest Engine of all the Catapults.

In return it has a 20% Decrease in Torso Yaw and a 15% decrease to Arm pitch. I: IT'S ALREADY BEEN HIT BECAUSE OF THE JUMPJETS. It has worse torso twist then the C1, with FOUR energy Slots, FOUR JUMPJETS AND TWO MISSILE SLOTS.

It's already friggin' Gimped because it has Jumpjets, and now It's getting F***ed harder because of them.

You realize they are removing most negative quirks while doing this, right?

[Tynan]

Mercules, on 17 October 2014 - 12:18 PM, said:

You realize they are removing most negative quirks while doing this, right?

See my post above. He's right, those aren't "quirks" they're just the intrinsic mobility stats of the variant. If they bring those in line with other variants, great, but otherwise he does have a point.

[Mothykins]

Mercules, on 17 October 2014 - 12:18 PM, said:

You realize they are removing most negative quirks while doing this, right?

Read above; It's movement values are part of the Chassis, not Buffs. It's already paid for the JJs through Chassis hard-stats.

[Mercules]

Cavale, on 17 October 2014 - 12:13 PM, said:

Except it's not listed as a "quirk" it's part of the hard stats for the chassis. Look at it's quirks in game. There are none.

Yeah.

It's not. Use Smurfy. It lists the limited movement as a quirk. Smurfy pulls it's data from the game files themselves.

Cavale, on 17 October 2014 - 12:20 PM, said:

Read above; It's movement values are part of the Chassis, not Buffs. It's already paid for the JJs through Chassis hard-stats.

Tynan, on 17 October 2014 - 12:19 PM, said:

See my post above. He's right, those aren't "quirks" they're just the intrinsic mobility stats of the variant. If they bring those in line with other variants, great, but otherwise he does have a point.

[Bishop Steiner]

Burktross, on 17 October 2014 - 11:57 AM, said:

Yeah...
They buff variant diversity, but very well may limit in-build diversity.

Since in-build diversity often was directly at the expense of chassis and variant viability, yes..

But that is still overlooking that you can still build every variant you currently can. Each Chassis/Variant will simply excel at certain things. It is not as if they are becoming worse at non stock builds.

[Zerberus]

Bishop Steiner, on 17 October 2014 - 12:23 PM, said:

Since in-build diversity often was directly at the expense of chassis and variant viability, yes..

But that is still overlooking that you can still build every variant you currently can. Each Chassis/Variant will simply excel at certain things. It is not as if they are becoming worse at non stock builds.

Exactly, they`re just becoming better the closer they are to stock. No more, no less.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Mercules, on 17 October 2014 - 12:21 PM, said:

It's not. Use Smurfy. It lists the limited movement as a quirk. Smurfy pulls it's data from the game files themselves.

Some of the Smurfy quirks aren't listed as quirks in regards to the game files, see max engine limits which are not considered quirks themselves. Just FYI

[Mothykins]

Mercules, on 17 October 2014 - 12:21 PM, said:

It's not. Use Smurfy. It lists the limited movement as a quirk. Smurfy pulls it's data from the game files themselves.

I think Russ should be asked about this, because I find it highly unlikely that anything not listed as a Quirk by the in game Quirk list will be reverted. I don't think that the two Spiders are getting engine Caps raised.

[VtTimber]

Negative Movement Buffs, etc will be removed. Russ confirmed on Twitter that HGN movement buffs (torso twist, etc) are all removed.

[Scratx]

Glythe, on 17 October 2014 - 11:39 AM, said:

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.

Too many factors. Depends on map, builds and tactics employed. Yes, Dire Wolves are walking gun bags, but they're whales. The Atlas can be build to be both faster and much more maneuverable while retaining good firepower. That's how an Atlas beats a Dire Wolf. Well, one of the ways.

If you're using "Face to face, press trigger" as a metering stick, then Dire Wolf > EVERYTHING.

Besides, I wouldn't actually use 3 Atlas to counter 3 Dire Wolves. I'd use things that are more mobile and I'd probably want LRMs as well (NARC+LRM boat on a map without much LRM cover? Vs Dire Wolves? Profit)

So, it's not as simple as saying "Gunbag beats Atlas all the time, GGCLOSE".

[Glythe]

DarthRevis, on 17 October 2014 - 12:16 PM, said:

There is literally NO POINT in having 100plus mechs if they all do the same thing.....

And there is still literally no point in owning IS mechs with these pathetic buffs if you own clan mechs.

[AlmightyAeng]

Glythe, on 17 October 2014 - 12:30 PM, said:

And there is still literally no point in owning IS mechs with these pathetic buffs if you own clan mechs.

You have a cause...I get it. Can you use one of the dozens of 'CLAN IS OP' threads instead?

[1453 R]

*Catches up on thread for a bit*

I've got to say I'm disappointed, Bishop. I would have figured you for one of the biggest proponents of customization and personalization this system is undercutting. Sure this system improves battlefield diversity and, perhaps, diversity between individual pilots, but it effectively removes a pilot's ability to put his own personal flair on his ride of choice and not be smacked across the jowls for it.

As someone who started this game riding aroun in Dragons, for instance, let's look at the quirks for the DRG-1N - my very first owned 'Mech, still occupying pride of place in my first 'Mechbay slot. or it would if one could tell which of my slots was my first slot. Anyways:

[color=#00FFFF]Dragon 1N - Tier 5 Support[/color]

Additional Structure CT +24
Additional Structure RA +6
AC/5 Cooldown +50% 25x2
ER-LL Cooldown +25%
ER-LL Duration -25%
Energy Weapon Range +16%

So. Looking at these bonuses, it's pretty obvious that I have to run dual AC/5 on the DRG-1N. No other options - that godawful enormous bonus means it's the absolute height of utter stupidity to put together a DRG-1N that doesn'i maximize one of the biggest straight DPS bonuses in the game. As well, I don't even get any real choice of backup armaments - I get to stuff an ER large laser in that shoulder hardpoint, for the same reason of blind-stupid-obvious damage increases. My "choice", when it comes to this old friend, is whether I want a 300XL engine and two ERLL, or whether I want to use a 350XL and stick to only one backup laser. That is pretty much the entire extent of my choice when it comes to the DRG-1N. Fast dual AC/5 with a single ERLL backup, or average-speed dual AC/5 with dual ERLL backup.

The reason I bought the DRG-1N in the first place - its dual missile hardpoints and the 2x SRM-4 close-range sucker punch I used to get some pretty good mileage out of compared to my other Dragons, both more accurate and more damaging than a single SRM-6 - falls away entirely. Yes, it's an incredibly minor quibble in the scheme of things and I realize this, but this old hulk has been my buddy since I started playing the game. It hurts to watch the builds I struggled with, the lessons I learned with it, all the cool experiments I ran with it (successfully or not) just...sliced away. Discarded like so much trash, out the airlock never to return. My old buddy First-In has one thing it gets to do now, whether I wanted to do that thing with it or not.

As it turned out, that wasn't at all what I was doing with First-In, and so I get to either switch him over to dual AC/5s with an ERLL in the shoulder or I get to just sell him altogether.

Watching that happen to every T4 and T5 'Mech in the game hurts a lot of people, I'd imagine. This isn't nearly so disruptive as sized hardpoints would be, of course, and realistically we'll get over it. It just makes folks like Oogalook and I wonder what happened to the original plan.

[Bishop Steiner]

Scratx, on 17 October 2014 - 12:29 PM, said:

Too many factors. Depends on map, builds and tactics employed. Yes, Dire Wolves are walking gun bags, but they're whales. The Atlas can be build to be both faster and much more maneuverable while retaining good firepower. That's how an Atlas beats a Dire Wolf. Well, one of the ways.

If you're using "Face to face, press trigger" as a metering stick, then Dire Wolf > EVERYTHING.

Besides, I wouldn't actually use 3 Atlas to counter 3 Dire Wolves. I'd use things that are more mobile and I'd probably want LRMs as well (NARC+LRM boat on a map without much LRM cover? Vs Dire Wolves? Profit)

So, it's not as simple as saying "Gunbag beats Atlas all the time, GGCLOSE".

In my experience, one Raven-3L with NARC and UAV, and 2 LRM5 x6 Mad Dogs are one of the best way to erase 3 Direwolf form existence, in under 2 minutes usually. While our 3 D-DC are busy face hugging and brawling and tanking the rest of their unit.

But I guess it's because I figure tactics usually means to avoid fighting Strength on Strength"-

Go figure.

Glythe, on 17 October 2014 - 12:30 PM, said:

And there is still literally no point in owning IS mechs with these pathetic buffs if you own clan mechs.

You obviously have never run Clan Mechs.

[Prezimonto]

Cathy, on 17 October 2014 - 06:54 AM, said:

So what your bitching about is PGI making the game closer to the canon its derived from, where mechs were designed to take a standard weapons system, and custom jobs were as supposed to be by any sane engineering sub optimal.

makes mechwarrior mechwarrior and not generic stompy robot

its taken long enough but great job PGI

I can't like this hard enough.

[AlmightyAeng]

1453 R, on 17 October 2014 - 12:32 PM, said:

*Catches up on thread for a bit*

I've got to say I'm disappointed, Bishop. I would have figured you for one of the biggest proponents of customization and personalization this system is undercutting. Sure this system improves battlefield diversity and, perhaps, diversity between individual pilots, but it effectively removes a pilot's ability to put his own personal flair on his ride of choice and not be smacked across the jowls for it.

As someone who started this game riding aroun in Dragons, for instance, let's look at the quirks for the DRG-1N - my very first owned 'Mech, still occupying pride of place in my first 'Mechbay slot. or it would if one could tell which of my slots was my first slot. Anyways:

[color=#00FFFF]Dragon 1N - Tier 5 Support[/color]

Additional Structure CT +24
Additional Structure RA +6
AC/5 Cooldown +50% 25x2
ER-LL Cooldown +25%
ER-LL Duration -25%
Energy Weapon Range +16%

So. Looking at these bonuses, it's pretty obvious that I have to run dual AC/5 on the DRG-1N. No other options - that godawful enormous bonus means it's the absolute height of utter stupidity to put together a DRG-1N that doesn'i maximize one of the biggest straight DPS bonuses in the game. As well, I don't even get any real choice of backup armaments - I get to stuff an ER large laser in that shoulder hardpoint, for the same reason of blind-stupid-obvious damage increases. My "choice", when it comes to this old friend, is whether I want a 300XL engine and two ERLL, or whether I want to use a 350XL and stick to only one backup laser. That is pretty much the entire extent of my choice when it comes to the DRG-1N. Fast dual AC/5 with a single ERLL backup, or average-speed dual AC/5 with dual ERLL backup.

The reason I bought the DRG-1N in the first place - its dual missile hardpoints and the 2x SRM-4 close-range sucker punch I used to get some pretty good mileage out of compared to my other Dragons, both more accurate and more damaging than a single SRM-6 - falls away entirely. Yes, it's an incredibly minor quibble in the scheme of things and I realize this, but this old hulk has been my buddy since I started playing the game. It hurts to watch the builds I struggled with, the lessons I learned with it, all the cool experiments I ran with it (successfully or not) just...sliced away. Discarded like so much trash, out the airlock never to return. My old buddy First-In has one thing it gets to do now, whether I wanted to do that thing with it or not.

As it turned out, that wasn't at all what I was doing with First-In, and so I get to either switch him over to dual AC/5s with an ERLL in the shoulder or I get to just sell him altogether.

Watching that happen to every T4 and T5 'Mech in the game hurts a lot of people, I'd imagine. This isn't nearly so disruptive as sized hardpoints would be, of course, and realistically we'll get over it. It just makes folks like Oogalook and I wonder what happened to the original plan.

You don't have to do ****. So they're not buffing your favorite pony. You can still ride it however you want.

Now instead of having bragging rights for doing well is a **** mech, you can have bragging rights for doing well in a REALLY **** mech.

Edited by Ghost Badger, 17 October 2014 - 12:35 PM.