963 replies to this topic

[AdamBaines]

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

EDIT: Oh, sorry, I thought we were talking about the quirk system here

Funny "aside" there. :-)

[Alexander MacTaggart]

Apnu, on 20 October 2014 - 01:09 PM, said:

I, on the other hand, to play mechs with close to stock weapons (I keep a LL, MLs and LRMs on my TDR-5S) so the quirks are going to benefit me. In fact I tend to like the "ugly" T4 and T5 mechs over the T1s and T2 variants. I"m looking forward to the quirks and seeing more T5 buddies out there.

I am actually playing around with the Shadow Hawks in Smurphy and am having fits trying to come up with decent builds that are still stock-ish. I might just skip the sale and spend my spacebucks on an HBK-4SP and HBK-4J to finish eliting my Hunchbacks...

[1453 R]

Alexander MacTaggart, on 20 October 2014 - 01:12 PM, said:

I am actually playing around with the Shadow Hawks in Smurphy and am having fits trying to come up with decent builds that are still stock-ish. I might just skip the sale and spend my spacebucks on an HBK-4SP and HBK-4J to finish eliting my Hunchbacks...

Shadow Hawks, being T2, will be minimally affected by the quirks system and thus still permitted to use off-stock armaments, if if only grudgingly. T1 'Mechs won't get any quirks at all, which will likely force players who enjoy freedom of customization and the opportunity to explore new configurations and interesting ideas to invest more heavily in the top-heavy T1 meta, not less. Which is...dismaying, on the whole.

[CDLord HHGD]

Apnu, on 20 October 2014 - 01:09 PM, said:

Unless someone can break it down for me, all the complaints seem to be about people wanting positive quirks for already established meta-builds. Sounds lame to me.

You pretty much got the gist of it right here. They'll deny it and try to give you some sob story about how their builds are ruined, even though their performance will not change.

[Zultor]

There is a old rule in online gameing. Never nerf but instead buff. That is what PGI is doing with the quirks.

If you were running a non-standard build of a tier 3+ mech you either were doing it because for whatever reason you are good with one particular weapons system (thus compensating for the mechs weaknesses) or you were doing it because you don't mind being behind the power curve. With the quirks both of these are still as valid as they were pre-quirks. What the Quirk system is trying to bring is those players who are only interested in playing mechs which are perceived to be competitive (regardless of player skill) back into the mix. Once implemented you will start to see those iconic mechs from the IS come back as their effective usefulness is more inline with the newer clan behemoths.

Quirks are an imperfect solution to a problem which has no perfect solution. Basically the only way PGI makes money is to sell mechs. They can't go the cosmetic route (various reasons which deserves its own thread) and they can't charge for maps/features since that would mess up the game balance.

Some mechs are "better" than others and that is what we are seeing. Meta-gameplay has come to an all time high with at least half of the mechs seen in battle being min/maxed Tier 1-2 mechs. Nothing wrong with that as people want to play the mechs that they feel give them the best chance to compete.

PGI although is faced with a problem. How to get people to buy those non Tier 1-2 mechs of which there are a lot. A lesser problem this solves is too many players, myself included, are stuck with many many many mechs in their mech bay that they feel are now under powered in today's metagame. The quirk system is an attempt at bringing new life to those mothballed mechs thus increased revenue to PGI (nothing wrong with that) and a bump in old timers satisfaction allowing them to play their old mothballed mechs again.

Edited by Zultor, 20 October 2014 - 01:20 PM.

[Apnu]

Alexander MacTaggart, on 20 October 2014 - 01:12 PM, said:

I am actually playing around with the Shadow Hawks in Smurphy and am having fits trying to come up with decent builds that are still stock-ish. I might just skip the sale and spend my spacebucks on an HBK-4SP and HBK-4J to finish eliting my Hunchbacks...

Yeah the Shads aren't very stock friendly. I run mine as light hunters, they're far away from stock builds. Lots of SSRMs, LBXs, pulse lasers, BAP, big engines -- all of it.

I keep my Hunchies with kinda stock weapons, I even, pack LRM10s on my HBK-4J. Many will laugh at that, but its my 2nd best mech in terms of KDR in my stable. The only real deviant of my Hunchies is the HBK-GI. No freaking way I'd ever drive a Huncy with a GR. They could give the hunch +40 armor if I packed a GR, it would still be a liability.

I love the Hunchy, I should probably change my sig to reflect that someday. They're pretty fast, you can get in and out of trouble pretty quickly, have a awesome torso twist, and nobody expects them to be a factor in the game. Leaving you, in the Hunchback, to make them pay for ignoring you.

[CDLord HHGD]

Zultor, on 20 October 2014 - 01:18 PM, said:

There is a old rule in online gameing. Never nerf but instead buff. That is what PGI is doing with the quirks.

If you were running a non-standard build of a tier 3+ mech you either were doing it because for whatever reason you are good with one particular weapons system (thus compensating for the mechs weaknesses) or you were doing it because you don't mind being behind the power curve. With the quirks both of these are still as valid as they were pre-quirks. What the Quirk system is trying to bring is those players who are only interested in playing mechs which are perceived to be competitive (regardless of player skill) back into the mix. Once implemented you will start to see those iconic mechs from the IS come back as their effective usefulness is more inline with the newer clan behemoths.

Quirks are an imperfect solution to a problem which has no perfect solution. Basically the only way PGI makes money is to sell mechs. They can't go the cosmetic route (various reasons which deserves its own thread) and they can't charge for maps/features since that would mess up the game balance.

Some mechs are "better" than others and that is what we are seeing. Meta-gameplay has come to an all time high with at least half of the mechs seen in battle being min/maxed Tier 1-2 mechs. Nothing wrong with that as people want to play the mechs that they feel give them the best chance to compete.

PGI although is faced with a problem. How to get people to buy those non Tier 1-2 mechs of which there are a lot. A lesser problem this solves is too many players, myself included, are stuck with many many many mechs in their mech bay that they feel are now under powered in today's metagame. The quirk system is an attempt at bringing new life to those mothballed mechs thus increased revenue to PGI (nothing wrong with that) and a bump in old timers satisfaction allowing them to play their old mothballed mechs again.

There is no room in this thread for reason and logic! Begone heretic!

[Alexander MacTaggart]

1453 R, on 20 October 2014 - 01:16 PM, said:

Shadow Hawks, being T2, will be minimally affected by the quirks system and thus still permitted to use off-stock armaments, if if only grudgingly. T1 'Mechs won't get any quirks at all, which will likely force players who enjoy freedom of customization and the opportunity to explore new configurations and interesting ideas to invest more heavily in the top-heavy T1 meta, not less. Which is...dismaying, on the whole.

I don't build stock to take advantage of quirks, I build stock because that's how the mech IS.

You won't catch a gauss rifle on my HBK-4G because the Hunchback was built around an AC/20. I'll throw on endo steel, DHS, an AMS, etc. But the weapons loadout is AC/20, 3x Medium Laser.

If I had a SHD-2K, then the weapons loadout would be similar to stock (PPC, LRM5) but bowing to MWO mechanics probably more like ERPPC, 3xLRM5 (which is very tight on weight with max JJs and armor). The other Shadow Hawk variants are very samey, typically carrying AC5/LRM/SRM/couple of Medium Lasers. It's just not a mech with a lot of variety between variants (not surprising since the variants chose for MWO are half field upgrades).

Some mechs just don't have very good variants in MWO (non-C1/K2 Catapults, looking at you) sadly.

[Sjorpha]

I agree with 1453 R that optimizing your build in a competitive environment isn't really a free choice. Many people seem to have illusions that there is some kind of conceptual difference between buffs and nerfs, well there isn't. There is no essential difference between a quirk that buffs a certain weapon and a quirk that nerfs every weapon except one. It's not the colours of the numbers that matter but the effect they have, which is the same: one weapon becomes the optimal choice, and therefore competitive players are forced to adapt to this. You can't argue that making another build will be just like before because this build will now exist in a new environment shaped by the quirk system.

So it WILL limit customization for a given chassis, but on the other hand I also agree that the quirk system will force a specific kind of diversity, there will be more viable mechs to play which is a very good thing. And in many cases the preferred build will be closely resembled by what you can do on a variant that you never would have used before. This will increase the incentive to buy and keep many variants which is a good business decision for PGI since it will increase mechbay demand and act as a cbill sink.

I'm really on the fence here as to what kind of quirk approach I'd prefer, because ideally I'd want the freedom of customization along with the viability of all variants.

[Kodyn]

I really, really hope PGI doesn't take any of the naysayers in this thread or others seriously, and can see that the logic of their arguments is completely flawed.

This is a good thing for the game, no matter who you are, what you pilot, and what you THINK it's going to do....Let it happen, see how it pans out, then ***** and moan if you need to, but for mech's sake, let them do it first.

So tired of seeing PGI have to cave on good ideas when the vocal, whiny 1% of this community with founder's tags freaks out that they aren't getting exactly what they for some reason once thought they were throwing money away for, so rather then see those few people with money throw a fit, PGI gives them what they want.

The game needs this system, or something very much like it, allow the game to grow and stay healthy. I think most people will in the end enjoy it, and the game will be all around better for it. If a few mouthy founders quit over some quirks....good riddance? The rest of us will be more likely to spend money with more viable mechs in the game, not less, so I feel like that's more important to the future survival of this game than angry, annoying founders.

[Alexander MacTaggart]

Sjorpha, on 20 October 2014 - 01:26 PM, said:

Many people seem to have illusions that there is some kind of conceptual difference between buffs and nerfs, well there isn't. There is no essential difference between a quirk that buffs a certain weapon and a quirk that nerfs every weapon except one.

This is where you're falling into the trap. There absolutely is a difference in an absolute sense. You are looking at things relatively.

You are saying 'since the difference between Build X and Build Y is smaller since Build Y got buffed, that's a nerf to Build X' and that's not the case. The other guy getting something doesn't take anything away from you. A buff to Build Y is not a nerf to Build X.

[Dracol]

Sjorpha, on 20 October 2014 - 01:26 PM, said:

. It's not the colours of the numbers that matter but the effect they have, which is the same: one weapon becomes the optimal choice, and therefore competitive players are forced to adapt to this.

"Competitive" Players will stick to tier 1 mechs. They aren't "Forced" to adapt anything since the best mechs are not changing.

Non-competitive players can continue to run their same mechs with zero negatives applied to them after their quirk change. Or, they can change their build and take advantage of a quirk bonus or two. Customization is not limited in any manner with quirks, but there will be incentives to look at different chassis to utilize for a person's particular play style.

Edited by Dracol, 20 October 2014 - 01:36 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Apnu, on 20 October 2014 - 01:20 PM, said:

Yeah the Shads aren't very stock friendly. I run mine as light hunters, they're far away from stock builds. Lots of SSRMs, LBXs, pulse lasers, BAP, big engines -- all of it.

I keep my Hunchies with kinda stock weapons, I even, pack LRM10s on my HBK-4J. Many will laugh at that, but its my 2nd best mech in terms of KDR in my stable. The only real deviant of my Hunchies is the HBK-GI. No freaking way I'd ever drive a Huncy with a GR. They could give the hunch +40 armor if I packed a GR, it would still be a liability.

I love the Hunchy, I should probably change my sig to reflect that someday. They're pretty fast, you can get in and out of trouble pretty quickly, have a awesome torso twist, and nobody expects them to be a factor in the game. Leaving you, in the Hunchback, to make them pay for ignoring you.

since they are relatively unafeected by quirks anyways, not seeing it as an issue for SHDs.

Which is the point.

Those high end mechs are unchanged, mostly.

But now bargain barrel mechs will have various degrees of buffs, some which are broad in nature (your 4G still gets lasers buff and armor/is to the RT whether you run an ac20 or not), which means there is a good chance of seeing more of these mechs, which even with tweaks will likely be tier 3ish (since the worse the mech, the stronger the tweak, it's not like we are going to see them all jumping to tier 1, even built to quirk optimization). So we will see in all likelihood in all but the highest Elos, more middle of the road mechs in the queues.

Unaffected Upper tier mechs, plus more mid to lower tier mechs at play in the Queue? Equals a net bonus for ALL mechs,quirks or no. Because if even 1 tier 1 or 2 gets replaced by these per match, the net "strength" of the mechs fielded goes DOWN, not up. Thus if anything, instead of some net Nerf to no quirked mechs, it is a net buff, as they will still be as effective as they are now (or ineffective) vs tier 1 and 2. But will likely be facing more tier 3-5, Quirked or not, which will still be weaker than tier 1s, overall.

The lack of logic in the complaints is truly alarming, sorry.

1453 R, on 20 October 2014 - 01:16 PM, said:

Shadow Hawks, being T2, will be minimally affected by the quirks system and thus still permitted to use off-stock armaments, if if only grudgingly. T1 'Mechs won't get any quirks at all, which will likely force players who enjoy freedom of customization and the opportunity to explore new configurations and interesting ideas to invest more heavily in the top-heavy T1 meta, not less. Which is...dismaying, on the whole.

Avg Opfor NOW:
Tier1
Tier1
Tier1
Tier2
Tier2
Tier2
Tier2
Tier2
Tier2
Tier3
Tier4
Tier5



Avg Opfor After:
Tier1
Tier1
Tier1
Tier2
Tier2
Tier2
Tier2
Tier5 w/quirk
Tier4 w/quirk
Tier3
Tier4
Tier5



Unless those tier 4 and 5 have such powerful quirks they become tier 1 (which is unlikely as weapon quirks and such won't fix horrible hitboxes, bad hardpoints, etc), the net effect is a slightly weaker opfor to run whatever your mech of choice is.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 20 October 2014 - 01:39 PM.

[1453 R]

BLAAARGHHTBHJKRB@JHIP@BUJIP

The big deal, Zultor, is that T4/T5 'Mechs are being given one, UND PRECISELY VUN, build they get to run if they want to derive any benefit from the new quirks system. Don't want to run that build for whatever reason?

NO CAKE FOR JOO!

The disconnect comes from Piranha's original stated plan, which was a split buff wherein a 'Mech such as the HBK-4G would gain, as per Russ' original example, a 12.5% cooldown buff to ballistics in general and an additional 12.5% buff to the AC/20 in specific. This permitted the HBK-4G to retain its AC/20 specialization - and, in fact, to be a better ballistics platform in general than the Shadow Hawk, its current competitor - without iron-fisted mouthpunching the folks who enjoyed using more than one of the ballistic hardpoints on the ballistic-hardpoint-heavy 4G.

This split quirk system struck many as being as close to an ideal solution to the problem as could readily exist, shoring up weaker 'Mechs in their entirety whilst still promoting niche-specific, TT-inspired loadouts. They would not introduce such gob-smackingly gigantic performance differences between the 'Mech as a whole and the 'Mech as equipped as its quirkset demands that non-compliant loadouts are effectively removed from contention, as is currently slated to be the case for T4 and T5 'Mechs. It still promoted lore-appropriate niche roles without demanding those roles.

TT folks throughout this thread, all desiring maximum differentiation between chassis (not bad of itself) and as much minimizing of a player's ability to modify or alter their 'Mechs as they desire (YES bad of itself), argue that no existing build is losing power and that "you can still be just as terrible as you always were in your terrible builds". This is generally untrue, or only true given certain other precepts are also held to be true. Whether or not it's true, it's also unequivocally stamping PGI's Seal Of Approval™ on a single given build for any lowball chassis, and effectively discouraging (extremely harshly, in the case of T4 and T5 'Mechs) any builds which deviate from the given and established norm as indicated by a 'Mech's quirkset.

In essence, the proponents are arguing that inter-chassis diversity, i.e. the number of different 'Mechs you see on the field, is more important than intra-chassis diversity, the number of different viable builds within a single given chassis, and that furthermore anything which can attempt to force players into playing stock or near-stock loadouts is by default a Good And Positive Thing.

The detractants, which are not and never have been arguing against the quirk system itself but only against its given, highly restrictive implementation, are stating that there's no reason to sacrifice intra-chassis diversity as the current system intends to do when less narrowly-focused quirks could accomplish the same goals of role/niche differentiation whilst not completely eliminating any/every other build on a given T4/T5 chassis from contention, as the current system is set up to do. In the current list, there is no reason to ever play a Pretty Baby without large lasers, or a DRG-1N without AC/5s, or a CN9-D without an LBX-10, or any of these other 'Mechs which have been effectively hard-locked into one, UND PRECISELY VUN, primary weapons system by the razor-focused quirk system.

THAT is the Big Deal. Or rather, the entire deal, but either way.

[ShinobiHunter]

1453 R, on 20 October 2014 - 12:58 PM, said:

No, I really, really can't. Oh sure, I could equip the Gauss and some ammunition for it, finish out the 'Mech, and drop in a game with it, which by some folks' standards is "totally still being able to do that thing neither we nor Piranha want you to do anymore", but be honest with me, Shinobi - if you can get triple the DPS from dual AC/5s on your DRG-1N than you can get out of a single Gauss Rifle, with two-thirds of the single-shot burst damage at what is almost identical effective range, before you add in any efficiencies or modules at all, for one additional ton...is that a choice? And that's without even taking the ERLL bonuses into account.

The performance difference between a quirk-compliant T5 and a non-compliant T5 is so massively enormous that it effectively removes all non-compliant builds from play. Yes, I could drop in an old-fashioned Gaussdragon for nostalgia's sake and to change things up a bit, but only if I'm willing to accept that, should it so happen that I encounter a quirk-compliant version of my exact same 'Mech I'm in, that quirk-compliant DRG-1N is going to break me in half without anymuch effort at all if its pilot is even remotely competent. He's got the next best thing to a rotary autocannon in that thing, a few decades in front of the RAC's actual introduction.

The old standards just can't compete with that, and it sucks.

Yes it absolutely is a choice. If you are actually playing a Dragon now, you really should be over the whole "must take most optimal loadout" thing already. One of my favorite mechs is a Wolverine 6R with SRM's and MG's. I really doubt they will buff either of those on that particular mech, but I don't care. I will continue to run it just because I love it. If they buff AC/5's and LRM's on it, it really doesn't change a thing for me. My mech is no worse and no better. It is true that someone running the "suggested loadout" for it will probably perform better than me, if I was really worried about that I wouldn't have bother with a Wolverine in the first place. I would take something like a DragonSlayer, Misery, Timberwolf, Direwhale, Cataphract, etc.

Also, just for curiosity, if you pilot 95% clan mechs, what do you care about IS quirks?

[Bishop Steiner]

1453 R, on 20 October 2014 - 01:38 PM, said:

BLAAARGHHTBHJKRB@JHIP@BUJIP

The big deal, Zultor, is that T4/T5 'Mechs are being given one, UND PRECISELY VUN, build they get to run if they want to derive any benefit from the new quirks system.

Hunchback 4G is designated as a Tier 5 Brawler
Additional Armor (RT) +18
Additional Structure (RT) +12
AC/20 Range +25%
AC/20 Cooldown -25%
AC/20 Velocity +25%
Energy Weapon Heat Gen -12%
Energy Weapon Range +16%

Take away ac20, and still can run ALL lasers or ppc with bonuses, and still bonus RT toughness for gauss, ac10, dual 5, etc.

Hunchback 4H is designated a Tier 4 Skirmisher

Additional Armor (RT) +18
Additional Structure (RT) +12
AC/10 Range +20%
AC/10 Cooldown -20%
Medium Laser Cooldown -20%
Medium Laser Heat Gen -20%

Still gets armor, can run any ballistic and still get medium laser bonus, or ac10 and skip medium lasers bonus

so just using the top 2 listed builds, would say your PRECISELY VUN, build they get to run if they want to derive any benefit from the new quirks system, is pure bupkis as both (and pretty much all the other tier 4 and 5) HBKs see enough total quirks to benefit in MANY builds.

Now you're just spouting nonsense and hysteria, dude.

But yes, you achieve MAXIMUM benefit if you build it according to it's role.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 20 October 2014 - 01:46 PM.

[Kodyn]

Here's a request, stop lumping everyone that's for the quirks into this "TT guys" crowd...I'm all for customization in games, see why these quirks will actually help that, and I have never, nor will ever play any TT game of any genre, since I hate things determined by dice roles, and the TT community for all games is basically the chaff of the nerds, the guys us other nerdy guys avoid because they make us all look bad.

So just because we like the quirks, doesn't mean we're TT people...in my case, I've seen similar systems work well in games like EVE, so that's where my argument is coming from.

[1453 R]

ShinobiHunter, on 20 October 2014 - 01:40 PM, said:

Also, just for curiosity, if you pilot 95% clan mechs, what do you care about IS quirks?

Because the same system will eventually be applied to Clan 'Mechs, and in its current iteration it will completely and utterly ruin the entire point of the Omnipod system, which is supposed to be an enabler of widely, wildly diverse loadouts (a thing TT folks seem to hate for whatever reason) in exchange for a much more restrictive base chassis.

Ans also because I still own fifty-something IS 'Mechs, many of which I was looking forward to tinkering with again once the quirk system hit...except now I can't tinker with them at all, because any given IS 'Mech will have one, UND PRECISELY VUN, viable loadout which will be easily and immediately recognized via its given quirk package, and thus it'll be the work of perhaps three minutes per IS 'Mech to switch it over to whatever Piranha has officially told me I'm supposed to run on whatever I'm working on at the time.

It bloody well stinks, especially when I was so very much looking forward to the system until quite recently.

Edited by 1453 R, 20 October 2014 - 01:48 PM.

[Alexander MacTaggart]

1453 R, on 20 October 2014 - 01:38 PM, said:

The big deal, Zultor, is that T4/T5 'Mechs are being given one, UND PRECISELY VUN, build they get to run if they want to derive any benefit from the new quirks system. Don't want to run that build for whatever reason?

NO CAKE FOR JOO!

"Precisely one" build is greater than zero builds.

If the Dragon quirks result in people actually playing it, instead of the current state wherein virtually nobody plays it, then EVEN IF THEY'RE USING THE SAME BUILD at least they're actually playing Dragons.

Which is, after all, more Dragons than you see RIGHT NOW.

I'm not going to explain for a third time why generic quirks are a bad idea, you ignored the first couple times I tried that.

[Dracol]

1453 R, on 20 October 2014 - 01:38 PM, said:

The disconnect comes from Piranha's original stated plan, which was a split buff wherein a 'Mech such as the HBK-4G would gain, as per Russ' original example, a 12.5% cooldown buff to ballistics in general and an additional 12.5% buff to the AC/20 in specific.

1453 R You give a good reason for your angst but bury it in mounds of text.

What it appears you are trying to say is: "I enjoyed the prospects of more generalized buffs that were initially hinted by PGI. Now that development has advanced and PGI has gone a different route, one geared more towards specific weapons, I am disappointed."

Which is fine and understandable.

Edited to add: You maybe disappointed, but ability to customize will not be affected.

Edited by Dracol, 20 October 2014 - 01:51 PM.