963 replies to this topic

[Glythe]

Alexander MacTaggart, on 20 October 2014 - 08:12 AM, said:

More mech variety is a good thing, by the way.

It's a shame then that quriks stand to lower variety on bad mechs. But it's fine for tier 1 mechs that can still play wtf they want.

I say if these quirks are so great let's leave the bad quirks on the tier 1 mechs and give them arbitrary weapon boosts to weapons you don't want to use. Let's see how you like the quirk system then.

[CDLord HHGD]

I had a similar discussion with my GM for our Pathfinder game on Saturdays and it boiled down tot he same thing.

Glythe -- I know where you are coming from.

Our GM implemented a house rule that, while I didn't lose anything on my character, it reduced the amount of my advantage over the others. I argued same as you that my character should still enjoy the advantage spread I had over the others. We discussed and eventually I capitulated because I didn't lose anything and my allies benefited from it. So did our enemies, but we have adapted and overcome and it's still a better game.

So now you are faced with the same dilema. Your mechs are no less effective than they were before. But the amount of your advantage over the others has been reduced. I'm sorry, but since I had the discussion with my GM and all, this is a pretty selfish stance to have. Your allies are going to benefit from this. Your enemies will too, but everyone will adapt just as my gaming group has. This is overall a good thing for the game as a whole.

I see nothing but positives for these quirks. You still get to keep your meta-builds, but now less effective mechs will get to shine just a little bit more. Next time you're in a match and you see an ally in a particular mech it won't be "Ugh, worthless, why did he run THAT?", it'll be more like "Hey, might not be a meta-build, but he can still help cover my dakkawolf's backside".

[Alexander MacTaggart]

Glythe, on 20 October 2014 - 08:28 AM, said:

It's a shame then that quriks stand to lower variety on bad mechs.

Lower variety within the individual chassis.

Increase variety in matches.

It's a very important distinction that you need to understand in order to grok the point of these quirk changes.

[Glythe]

Alexander MacTaggart, on 20 October 2014 - 08:35 AM, said:

Lower variety within the individual chassis.

Increase variety in matches.

The increased variety is yet to be seen. I think if there were no cost most people would switch to mechs without quirk limitations. That's really what they are.... you get a bonus if you do this... otherwise it is basically a penalty for not doing something. Judging by the sound many people won't use most of them because they don't want those bonuses.

[KraftySOT]

People keep trying to make analogies for this...

The best way I can think to put it...is this is like when Henry Ford said you can have any color car you want, as long as its black.

Now at first this seems like a bad thing. Then you consider that your option is no car...or a black car. Its clearly a benefit.

If NO ONE (and the few that are, made mistakes in buying them) is driving a certain mech...it doesnt matter if youre only buffing some pigeon holed build.

The fact remains that it was a null entity before, and now, despite the fact that your only option is "black", it exists. Your choice is no one using these mechs. Or some people using these mechs and liking that theyre "black" and some people using these mechs and hating that theyre "black".

At least theyre there at all. The other option is never seeing a Wolverine ever again.

Edited by KraftySOT, 20 October 2014 - 08:42 AM.

[AlmightyAeng]

Holy crap. I returned to this thread after last looking at it on Friday to find that it has spawned comedy gold...but hasn't really advanced any of the arguments that were started on Friday. (I was gratified to see several people come to a middle ground, though, instead of continuing to fight each other with daggers made of salt from dried tears, lol).

Here's a thought, though, for the people who are of the belief that quirks will "force" them to take a specific loadout.

As it stands, right now, "The INNER SPHERE META" is largely based around a subset of WEAPONS. Depending on the tonnage of your mech, you either take a few ERLL (to combat the range advantage of the Clans) or you take AC's (usually 5's) paired with PPC's to take advantage of mid-range pinpoint.

Right now, there are people who DON'T take mechs out that follow this Meta. Cavale, 1453 R, I'm guessing you're in this crowd.

There are people (and I'm not saying I'm among them) who already laugh at you for taking sub-optimal builds.

Now, if PGI quirks weapons that are OUTSIDE of the aforementioned meta, then, for specific variants and chassis, there may actually be a debate on what the BEST loadout is for that mech, instead of just loading up the IS Weapon Meta.

So I ASK YOU:

What is more diverse? EVEN IF NO ONE CHANGES OUT THE MECHS THEY USE AND LOVE - Seeing Shadowhawks, Cataphract 3D's and Victors running meta? Or seeing a Shadowhawk running an AC20 (because Quirks) or running SRM's (because quirks) or a Cataphract running ML-vomit (because quirks) ALONGSIDE the other pilots who STILL choose to run the Meta?

Now factor in that SOME chassis' that are normally considered total SHITE might be competitive in comparison to 'good' chassis that run Meta. What if we see more of that? How does that discourage variety?
-------------
TLDR

My point is, if you're not the type to run the Meta as it stands (the current optimal build) why does it bother you so much to ignore quirk bonuses if it isn't the build you like? You're already discarding optimal builds...does it matter that the new optimal build you'll be discarding isn't also THE META?

The only reason I can see is because you were so, so hoping that it'd be YOUR sub-optimal build that got buffed. I say this without rancor, or condescension...I'm honestly curious. What's the big deal? If you're so easily swayed from your chosen build, the Meta should have forced you away from it already.

Edited by Ghost Badger, 20 October 2014 - 08:48 AM.

[KraftySOT]

And if youre a meta kid munckin. Which lets be frank, if were even remotely concerned about our builds and DPS and what the premier mechs are....were in this thread sharing our opinion...

You have three options.

Pilot the new mechs like the Awesome that get a stupid great bonus to something (a clear Meta build, the math provided behind the energy quirks were astounding, no ghost heat on that baby) really specific and love it.

Pilot the new mechs like the Awesome that get a stupid great bonus to something really specific...and hate it.

Dont pilot the new mech at all. (which really isnt a choice because were prone to gravitate towards the most effective tool in winning the game and deriving enjoyment out of it)

So love it or hate it. Youll be along for the ride.

So stfu and let us drive yo. No one likes a backseat driver complaining about the trip were on....when you bloody full well knew where we were headed before we left.

[Alexander MacTaggart]

Glythe, on 20 October 2014 - 08:39 AM, said:

The increased variety is yet to be seen. I think if there were no cost most people would switch to mechs without quirk limitations. That's really what they are.... you get a bonus if you do this... otherwise it is basically a penalty for not doing something. Judging by the sound many people won't use most of them because they don't want those bonuses.

How many Dragons do you see people playing?
How many Vindicators?
How many Commandos?

Hell, I was in a match last night with two other Hunchbacks. Three Hunchbacks in one match was an event.

These are the mechs getting quirks. These are the mechs that you will "have" to play one way to get quirk bonuses.

Also note that these are the mechs that you almost never see anyone playing currently. Even if you "have" to play them one way (and you don't), if giving them quirks gets people to play them then it is a net positive.

Getting people to play more chassis is a Good Thing. More variety in matches, gameplay doesn't stagnate with only a couple of meta builds being played (looking at you, UAC DWFs), and PGI's work in making those chassis isn't wasted (and maybe they even make some money from people buying them and/or mechbays).

Do you SERIOUSLY think giving the COM-1B some quirks and people maybe, possibly actually playing the COM-1B is going to somehow devalue your meta-build Timber Wolf or Stormcrow? Come on.

[KraftySOT]

For what its worth...

I saw Cavale last night in two matches suiciding his Trial Spider into the enemy....I dont think that guy cares about much of anything.

[Bishop Steiner]

Ghost Badger, on 20 October 2014 - 08:45 AM, said:

Holy crap. I returned to this thread after last looking at it on Friday to find that it has spawned comedy gold...but hasn't really advanced any of the arguments that were started on Friday. (I was gratified to see several people come to a middle ground, though, instead of continuing to fight each other with daggers made of salt from dried tears, lol).

Here's a thought, though, for the people who are of the belief that quirks will "force" them to take a specific loadout.

As it stands, right now, "The INNER SPHERE META" is largely based around a subset of WEAPONS. Depending on the tonnage of your mech, you either take a few ERLL (to combat the range advantage of the Clans) or you take AC's (usually 5's) paired with PPC's to take advantage of mid-range pinpoint.

Right now, there are people who DON'T take mechs out that follow this Meta. Cavale, 1453 R, I'm guessing you're in this crowd.

There are people (and I'm not saying I'm among them) who already laugh at you for taking sub-optimal builds.

Now, if PGI quirks weapons that are OUTSIDE of the aforementioned meta, then, for specific variants and chassis, there may actually be a debate on what the BEST loadout is for that mech, instead of just loading up the IS Weapon Meta.

So I ASK YOU:

What is more diverse? EVEN IF NO ONE CHANGES OUT THE MECHS THEY USE AND LOVE - Seeing Shadowhawks, Cataphract 3D's and Victors running meta? Or seeing a Shadowhawk running an AC20 (because Quirks) or running SRM's (because quirks) or a Cataphract running ML-vomit (because quirks) ALONGSIDE the other pilots who STILL choose to run the Meta?

My point is, if you're not the type to run the Meta as it stands (the current optimal build) why does it bother you so much to ignore quirk bonuses if it isn't the build you like? You're already discarding optimal builds...does it matter that the new optimal build you'll be discarding isn't also THE META?

The only reason I can see is because you were so, so hoping that it's be YOUR sub-optimal build that got buffed. I say this without rancor, or condescension...I'm honestly curious. What's the big deal? If you're so easily swayed from your chosen build, the Meta should have forced you away from it already.

Because the old Optimal Builds, (inaccurately called Meta, but since that is how it is understood here, we will continue so for simplicity) don't have their benefits posted in Bright Numbers in the Quirk section of the Mech, so apparently, doesn't matter.
You know...despite the fact that (Fill in Meta Build of the Month, here) is still almost certainly better than ac20 HBK-4G will be. And Despite there being other Chassis and Mechs that are going to be designed to feature different weapons.

But gosh darn it, I want to drive my ac20 Shadow Hawk! How dare the HBK.4G actually use the ac20, despite having been specifically designed around it in the first place!!! Despite the SHD STILL running it just fine, and still being faster and jump capable while doing so.

Mind you not saying this is all the complaints, but let's be honest, it covers a goodly portion, which really comes down to: "The Quirks Don't optimum buff MY BUILD OF CHOICE on a certain Chassis".

[CDLord HHGD]

Glythe, on 20 October 2014 - 08:39 AM, said:

The increased variety is yet to be seen. I think if there were no cost most people would switch to mechs without quirk limitations. That's really what they are.... you get a bonus if you do this... otherwise it is basically a penalty for not doing something. Judging by the sound many people won't use most of them because they don't want those bonuses.

These quirks are yet to be seen! They are removing all the negative quirks from chassis (yay!) and adding in more positive quirks. The whole dynamic will shift for the better.

[Glythe]

cdlord, on 20 October 2014 - 08:29 AM, said:

Our GM implemented a house rule that, while I didn't lose anything on my character, it reduced the amount of my advantage over the others.

First let me say this isn't a RPG. It's a combat simulator and hopefully your game isn't the same thing. When you play pathfinder you aren't fighting an enemy team of players and that is an important distinction. It's also important to notice that your GM could have made a big deal about focusing more on the non combat elements of the other characters to make your character feel weak outside of combat. This is not applicable to MWO because there is no "outside of combat".

cdlord, on 20 October 2014 - 08:29 AM, said:

Your mechs are no less effective than they were before. But the amount of your advantage over the others has been reduced.

The situation in your game is that the T1 player (mech) is limited in some way... like a negative quirk. That's what we had before when the T1 guys got nerfed to be on the same level as the crappy T3-5 mechs. Your GM didn't say the rogue can do as much damage as you can (or whatever) if he uses a crossbow. What if the Rogue has crappy dex and doesn't want to use crossbows? What it if it goes against his character concept as a one eyed thief who has poor depth perception.

cdlord, on 20 October 2014 - 08:29 AM, said:

This is overall a good thing for the game as a whole.

This is good overall for anyone who uses a T1 mech not the game as a whole. Tier 5 mechs are bad often because of hard point limitations and positions (and lack of JJ or the ability to safely use XL engines). What you're really saying is it's fine for T1 mechs to be able to customize any way they want. That's just not fair when the bad mechs are being pulled up that level but only if they play with 1 exact build. That also presupposes these quirks are going to make the T5 mechs equal to T1 counterparts (really don't think that's going to happen).

Players really like customization because it lets them feel they have some control in how the play the game. Overall this system is just more likely to have everyone sell their T5 mechs and replace them with T1 mechs so they enjoy the same level of customization that you have with your T1 mech that they do not have with a T5 mech. That's some great variety.

cdlord, on 20 October 2014 - 08:29 AM, said:

I see nothing but positives for these quirks. You still get to keep your meta-builds, but now less effective mechs will get to shine just a little bit more.

It would be a better system overall to just take those mechs that are bad and everyone knows is bad to lower their effective tonnage for the match maker. Take a 4G HBK and weigh it in as a commando. Take an awesome and weigh that in as a Jag. Note these are examples not specific balance suggestions. Do this enough and you're looking at the ability for someone to take something like 300 tons to a 240 ton fight. That's a lot more interesting in my book because they still have full customization options.

People would still be able to keep their meta builds but the crap would suddenly be a lot less crappy and have no limitations to keep them crappy if you don't use build XYZ. What you want is to force a meta build on people playing bad mechs. That's a stupid solution considering the quirks may as well be assigned to random weapons. Almost no one buys a mech for its stock load out. They buy it because it has the options they think they can use to make a great custom mech.

Putting in quirks after the fact sucks unless they are willing to let us swap out our variants at no cost for the quirks we would rather have.

Edited by Glythe, 20 October 2014 - 09:07 AM.

[AlmightyAeng]

Bishop Steiner, on 20 October 2014 - 08:52 AM, said:

Because the old Optimal Builds, (inaccurately called Meta, but since that is how it is understood here, we will continue so for simplicity)

I know, but it's the local vernacular.

I'm still waiting for my 'meta' to arrive. #wtfismyCW

[KraftySOT]

See now for the next MW license holder...

Let this be a lesson for you.

When youre planing your next MW game...stop...think about this moment...and realize that its nigh time to abandon "medium lasers" and get "Direct Optics 2 Medium Laser" "Fulcrum Medium laser" "Synergy Systems Medium laser" with thier own attributes and stats, and clear, legible reasons they go in specific mechs, so you dont have to have this stupid discussion again.

Theres a reason a Hunchback isnt terrible, and a Locust has a place on the field, and a Savannah Master is **** on air jets, and a Marauder is so freaking awesome, and a King Crab wrecks.

One of the main draw backs of the entire PC series is that it cant figure out how to balance supreme customization of the mech building rules, other than hard capping you into what the devs want.

Soft baiting you into doing whats best is better, and it matches up with the lore anyways.

And then you can hock hundreds and hundreds of new weapons all the time, and balance things much better according to how you want the game to play, with bait, instead of switch.

[AlmightyAeng]

KraftySOT, on 20 October 2014 - 08:58 AM, said:

See now for the next MW license holder...

Let this be a lesson for you.

When youre planing your next MW game...stop...think about this moment...and realize that its nigh time to abandon "medium lasers" and get "Direct Optics 2 Medium Laser" "Fulcrum Medium laser" "Synergy Systems Medium laser" with thier own attributes and stats, and clear, legible reasons they go in specific mechs, so you dont have to have this stupid discussion again.

Theres a reason a Hunchback isnt terrible, and a Locust has a place on the field, and a Savannah Master is **** on air jets, and a Marauder is so freaking awesome, and a King Crab wrecks.

One of the main draw backs of the entire PC series is that it cant figure out how to balance supreme customization of the mech building rules, other than hard capping you into what the devs want.

Soft baiting you into doing whats best is better, and it matches up with the lore anyways.

And then you can hock hundreds and hundreds of new weapons all the time, and balance things much better according to how you want the game to play, with bait, instead of switch.

When I consider Star Citizens plan for allowing you to 'mod' your ship, but have the possible disadvantage of shorting your systems, inefficient energy transfer, etc...I get all warm inside.

There's a reason Frankenmechs were rare...they were a ***** to repair and fell apart easily, and often malfunctioned.

But, when you put big old ugly guns on a Mech they weren't meant for and it works...that's a good feeling.

In a perfect world I'd beg PGI to reconsider sized hardpoints...and allow you to Frankenmech your stuff with severe penalties in either heat or RoF...but you COULD do it and make niche builds.

Alas...pipedream.

Edited by Ghost Badger, 20 October 2014 - 09:02 AM.

[Alexander MacTaggart]

KraftySOT, on 20 October 2014 - 08:58 AM, said:

See now for the next MW license holder...

Let this be a lesson for you.

Nah, if someone else were to make a BattleTech game, it would need to not have customization from the start. You get stock mechs, with variants planned out and balanced specifically among each other.

Pretty much the only way to ever "balance" a BT/MW game.

NB: I am not suggesting customization be removed from MWO. That ship has sailed.

[KraftySOT]

Ghost Badger, on 20 October 2014 - 08:56 AM, said:

I know, but it's the local vernacular.

I'm still waiting for my 'meta' to arrive. #wtfismyCW

Meta, from the greek "Beyond". Popularized in the early 20th century with the culture of the "meta-physical".

The "Meta", as its been used to describe the type of play and strategies that rise out of a games competitive community, since 1989 (that I personally know of), is used to describe that which arises or "emerges" out of a set of rules, beyond what the rules intend, OR simply the fashion and strategies of play that arise or emerge out of a set of rules.

Maybe im crazy...but thats how ive understood it.

Take for instance a high level strategy game like Gary Grigsbys War in the East.

To me the "Meta" in that game is a few people like FlaviousX, Lenny, ComradeP, and the old armchair general writer for PC gamer, discovering how to avoid blizzard penalties in 1941, how to save soviet morale, how to get an 8 million man army, how to hide in poland through 1944, how to avoid movement penalties by sea transport, the way to take Riga on turn 1...all the tricks that arise out of people who REALLY know how to play the game, that the rest of us can emulate.

That becomes the "meta-physical reality" of the game, beyond that which the rules specifically intended.

[KraftySOT]

Alexander MacTaggart, on 20 October 2014 - 09:03 AM, said:

Nah, if someone else were to make a BattleTech game, it would need to not have customization from the start. You get stock mechs, with variants planned out and balanced specifically among each other.

Pretty much the only way to ever "balance" a BT/MW game.

NB: I am not suggesting customization be removed from MWO. That ship has sailed.

Yeah id drastically redo that and use the actual rules or some amalgamation of them, for customization.

Itd be like oh you have an Omicron PPC...well theres 30 other manufacturers of PPCs and most of them will fit here. For several million cbills, you can make that happen. But youre not going to be switching it out for an AC20.

Focus it much more on the pilot, and maybe a small stable (4 or so) of mechs.

Star Citizen has alot of great ideas that I think you could bring over to this franchise.

We suffer because Mechwarrior, and Battletech, and Mechwarrior...are three different things. There hasnt been in 20 years a Mechwarrior game that attempts to be a Mechwarrior game. Theyre all "Real time battletech" and cant do that right. Mechwarrior, is technically the RPG rules for Battletech. About ... you know....the pilot...the mechwarrior.

Battlech is an extrapolated wargame.

So itd be nice to see the next Mechwarrior title...be a Mechwarrior title....or at least be a GOOD "real time battletech game". Which id like to hope maybe we can still at least achieve here.

But certainly in the future, I think really paying close attention to the pilot and putting the pilot in a universe, and making choices in that universe about his progression, then pitting him against other well fleshed out "characters" in a mp environment is really what the series needs.

Edited by KraftySOT, 20 October 2014 - 09:11 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

cdlord, on 20 October 2014 - 08:54 AM, said:

These quirks are yet to be seen! They are removing all the negative quirks from chassis (yay!) and adding in more positive quirks. The whole dynamic will shift for the better.

have a feeling by pass 2, we will see some quirks reduced and a few negative ones reintroduced, though. But this gives us a clean slate for evaluation, instead of bandaids on top of bandaids, aka, Paul Balancing 101.

Glythe, on 20 October 2014 - 08:56 AM, said:

Putting in quirks after the fact sucks unless they are willing to let us swap out our variants at no cost for the quirks we would rather have.

Evolving F2P online game. NOTHING is static. Not in this, or any other game. Deal with it.

[Revis Volek]

1453 R, on 17 October 2014 - 01:32 PM, said:

I ain't getting crap, dood. Any of the 'Mechs depicted thus far that I actually own either don't gain any benefits to anything I do with them, or what I do with them only gains benefit from the smallest tertiary quirks. Also I think you've got me and Cavale confused. I do have a Jester, and I'd like to see its hardwired mobility penalties removed as well, but I haven't brought it up yet.


It's just so incredibly draining to see a bunch of people so incredibly fastened onto the whole general "Well I'm soooorrryyyy you don't like the flavor of your FREE CAKE!" argument to see that mayhaps offering a free cake to some people and jack-monkey nada to other people, as opposed to a free cupcake to everybody and an additional cupcake to some people, as was Piranha's original stated plan, has caught folks off-guard and gotten them dismayed.

Watching everybody else eat their free cake we can't have any of is pretty lame, man. Pretty lame indeed.

No one said you CAN'T have any FREE CAKE, you are CHOOSING not to have any and most of you are just being stubborn about this. Build your mechs however you like but a bad build is just that PGI never claimed they would help make your terrible builds any better they are catering the mechs to builds that work/are stock hopefully the quirks will make they a little easier to see for some people.

From what i cant tell everyone here is just upset that they dont have the freedom to play the game however they want (Good or bad)....this game never really guaranteed anything outside the freedom of mech customization (which is still there BTW, just that Builds which will benefit CW and other things now get positive quirks) and your paint schemes. While also guranteeing that we woudl get CW which is what they are working towards and im sure these quirks are for techinally as well.

Glythe, on 17 October 2014 - 01:39 PM, said:

The JJ/ECM bit is a bit extreme. So you're telling me a C4 only gets 3 buffs because it's a lame duck t4 with JJ? Oh right that makes SO much sense.



More viable is not the same as equal or competitive with clan mechs. Therein lies the insult: "have this little pat on the back and you'll be good to go."

"I told him these quirks would put him in line with clan mechs!"

-And then there was much loling

LOL, i think its funny you still have a hard time killing clan mechs......Also PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE tell me where they said Clan and IS would be COMPLETE EQUALS? Because that is impossible without making the same damn mechs. They were Suppose to be Similar in Power, Speed, toughness but were suppose to be different and have a different feel the whole time.


Most of these issues i see people positing are just because no one is capable of reading and comprehending the English language. Maybe Russ should start speaking French Canadian?! Or they are still mad there Orions and Shadowhawks dont look, shoot, and act like Timberwolves yet.....