963 replies to this topic

[Mothykins]

Alexander MacTaggart, on 20 October 2014 - 02:25 PM, said:

Honestly that was the first time I noticed any jab at a 'CoD crowd' or anything similar. 'Cheeto-dusted TT neckbeard' jabs have been a LOT more common, at least in this thread.

I was actually tempted to post basically your post earlier, but aimed at the weirdly hostile anti-TT crowd. Shows me for having restraint.

Call people on their faults. It's worth it. If they continue to be a jerk... Destroy them.

[Bishop Steiner]

Sjorpha, on 20 October 2014 - 02:08 PM, said:

How is there any non-relative way to look at it?

Nerfing the clans can be construed as a nerf to the clans or as a buff to IS, the only difference is psychological. Same with the quirks, saying it is "only buffs" has absolutely no meaning, what matters is only how it changes the relative power balance and viability between builds. They say they are "only buffing" not to offend the communitys delusions, but from a game design perspective that is a stupid limitation to put on yourself, as a system with both positive and negative quirks would be far more flexible and sutainable.

Saying "The other guy getting something doesn't take anything away from you." is, and no offense, nonsensical. If I am playing against that other guy every increase in his power is a decrease in my chances of winning the match, how does that not impact me? That's as silly as saying giving someone an extra queen in chess wouldn't impact his opponent.

Think of it as a scale with weights on boths sides, adding weight on one side has exactly the same effect as removing it on the other. Only in this case there are more than two parameter balancing against each other, but the underlying principle is the same. The relative viewpoint IS the absolute one, since the relativity is an absolute fact of the game universe.

That's not to say I'm against the quirk pass, I welcome it, but there shouldn't be this silly notion floating around that there is inherently positive and negative balance changes. It's mostly a matter of convenience to change the one instead of the many that decides whether a buff or nerf is warranted. Broadly speaking, if a single thing is OP, you nerf that. If a singe thing is UP, you buff that. And of course there is a matter of when a type of change extends it's possibilities thematically, for example with IS-Clan they can't really nerf clan lasers much more without screwing the thematic setting too much, so they are pretty much forced to work with buffing IS instead. And when the balance problems are faction internal you can't approach it generically, hence the quirks.

I want the game to be balanced and the workflow to get there efficient, but whether it's done with buffs or nerfs doesn't matter in the slightest to me.

and again:

Bishop Steiner, on 20 October 2014 - 01:36 PM, said:

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.











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.

not that I expect it to get past the blood thundering in peoples ears anymore this time than previously, which might be why Metus, Krafty and I were enjoying a nice detour from the same ol, same ol.

[Kodyn]

I'm the only one that brought up Dorito dust, and I think i explained why I felt that way about TT guys.

When every time i see a good feature suggested for this game, it gets shouted down by the vocal minority, and that actually holds water, that bothers me, so yes, I have a negative take on TT players, both because I don't enjoy their hobbies myself, and don't get why they try to change a PC game into just another version of their TT game.

I should not have gotten as stereotypical as I did, but being a guy who falls between the "CoD" crowd, and the "TT" crowd, as far as desires for this game, I wanted to distance myself from both.

Really I just wish PGi would stop listening to the TT guys like they're gods just because a few baby-boomers have spent some large amounts of cash...give them a product, if they like it, they buy it, don't keep tailoring the product to make those same few people happy, improve the product to gain more happy, paying customers... usually the suggestions I see by TT guys are the ones that will keep this game from ever growing, and thus ultimately kill it.

In this one, rare case, i agree with them, as I think the quirks are a positive step forward. Just don't want to start a precedent of agreeing with them...lol.

[Bishop Steiner]

Kodyn, on 20 October 2014 - 02:14 PM, said:

Just to clear my statement up, so I only offend the correct people, my anti-TT bias is due to only my own personal experience with a few dozen or so TT game players, plus the TT guys here. The ones I've known have been without fail, obnoxious neckbeard-types with nasally voices who live off of Mountain Dew and Doritos, and will literally hit on a woman by trying to explain what an amazing TT-gamer of whatever genre they are...while wiping Dorito dust off on their pants and fondling their 20-sided die in their pocket...

I'm sure all you TT people aren't like that, but when that's my experience with them, I do tend to be biased, and not wanting to be lumped in with them simply because I want the same things atm.

As far as the rest of this thread goes....everyone, please just see how it goes. If the quirks get a week or two of solid play, PGI gets some numbers, and everyone's unhappy, ok, then there's an issue. But right now, people are predicting that this system will do this, that, and the other thing, without even seeing all the quirks or how they work out. Patience.

You could just as easily fit the average computer gamer into this description, just for point of reference. Except there might be even less hygiene involved.

[Alexander MacTaggart]

Kodyn, on 20 October 2014 - 02:33 PM, said:

and don't get why they try to change a PC game into just another version of their TT game.

You should probably ask PGI about this, since IIRC it was kind of their marketing slogan.

[Kodyn]

It's not MegaMek...it's a FPS mech game...

EDIT: And Steiner, you're correct, but I've been a gamer nerd since MTG days, and I remember other MTG guys and TT games guys with the lowest regard. Part of why I stopped playing MTG, and never got into any other TCG or TT genres was the community. Very pissy, arrogant, self-centered people for the most part, who are generally angry at the world due to their own faults. Very much generalizing, I know, but all I have to go on is my own experiences with people, which have continued to be much the same on this forum and in this gaming community. Some really great people here, to be sure, but the rest....not so much at all. At least on PC games you don't have to see the other guy and hear his voice if he annoys you, you just blow him up and move on...TT games would have landed me in jail to be sure. ;p

Edited by Kodyn, 20 October 2014 - 02:41 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Cavale, on 20 October 2014 - 02:22 PM, said:

The jabs at folk around here as the "CoD crowd" and the like really isn't great for making people calm, or having a good conversation with them. Pretty much inflammatory and aimed generally so that it will insult anyone that disagrees with you. I understand being upset, but aiming to make others upset so you can continue to be upset yourself (Causing a reason to be "justified" in your actions) is the type of thing I would strongly discourage. I fall victim to that sort of thing myself, but I'm not going to encourage it.

Stop adding to the toxicity, and smarten up.

Good advice, that could be applied on many fronts, whether pro or anti TT grognard, CoDtard, etc.

But do also realize after seeing the same stuff regurgitated for 30 pages, sometimes, tempers will flare, patience wears thin, etc. At which point, as pointed out....40 pages ago? (lol) it's time to step away from the keyboard for a few.

Neckbeard or not. (I'm clean shaven, btw. Just putting that out there)

[merz]

...43 pages in.


I will not deny that it is very difficult for me not to dismiss this thread altogether. for the sake of offering something halfway constructive to the people who feel that the quirk system being weapon or weapon-type restrictive will diminish options for personalising their mechs and play styles, i will offer the following example:

the CTF-3D offers a ballistic slot layout enabling it to carry two gauss rifles in one of the most optimal configurations the game offers. Unlike the spread-apart (though high-mounted) jagers, it has greater mobility and the ability to jump that plays especially well off the gauss placement, thus making it somewhat more likely that you will see a dual-gauss 3d on the field than you may find a twin ac10 or ac5 variant with, suppose, ppcs. you can still do the above version or ac20 with 5 mediums, but the overall softness of the mech will make it a less effective brawler. It isn't restricted to being a gauss boat by a longshot and has some other great layouts that take advantage of high-mounted energy mounts in the side torsos, but some aspects of the chassis itself uniquely lend to its ability as a sniper.

quirks are essentially the same thing. they don't hamper loadouts that stray partially or fully from the bonuses given. some changes revealed so far show quirks that bonus split weapon systems unlikely to be used in the same build. All that they do is attempt to compensate for certain disadvantages of a chassis through giving it options towards specialised roles.

I do not understand how this limits options, particularly when the mechs most affected by these revisions are those you rarely see fielded for their comparative lack of ability to compete with certain others like the CTF-3D. If anything, there may consequently be way more variety and previously-unseen play style options/strategies in all levels of play.

Edited by merz, 20 October 2014 - 02:51 PM.

[Metus regem]

Kodyn, on 20 October 2014 - 02:33 PM, said:

I'm the only one that brought up Dorito dust, and I think i explained why I felt that way about TT guys.

When every time i see a good feature suggested for this game, it gets shouted down by the vocal minority, and that actually holds water, that bothers me, so yes, I have a negative take on TT players, both because I don't enjoy their hobbies myself, and don't get why they try to change a PC game into just another version of their TT game.

I should not have gotten as stereotypical as I did, but being a guy who falls between the "CoD" crowd, and the "TT" crowd, as far as desires for this game, I wanted to distance myself from both.

Really I just wish PGi would stop listening to the TT guys like they're gods just because a few baby-boomers have spent some large amounts of cash...give them a product, if they like it, they buy it, don't keep tailoring the product to make those same few people happy, improve the product to gain more happy, paying customers... usually the suggestions I see by TT guys are the ones that will keep this game from ever growing, and thus ultimately kill it.

In this one, rare case, i agree with them, as I think the quirks are a positive step forward. Just don't want to start a precedent of agreeing with them...lol.

I for one, would hate to see what could be a great product brought to ruin to appease a few people that think that eSports are the be all end all for this game, it's why I run as far from the 'meta' as I can, and try to run stock or TRO loads in my mechs.

I'm also as far as you could get from a 'Dorito dust' TT gamer as you can get, and still be a TT gamer. But that doesn't mean I can't see what this game could be, if it ran a little closer to the spirit and lore of the franchise it draws from.

[Sjorpha]

Alexander MacTaggart, on 20 October 2014 - 02:19 PM, said:

By looking at it in absolute terms.

That's what I was trying to get at with an earlier posts about kids having money. If you have $10 and I have $5, and someone gives me an additional $3, I just got a 'buff' but your money wasn't 'nerfed' - you still have $10, and it is worth the same as it always has been.

Money is an ok example, their worth is relative to their scarcity in a market system (inflation/deflation), so "buffing" enough peoples money with no production increase to back it up will absolutely "nerf" everyone elses money. The problem with the analogy is of course that money has so many weird bubbles going on with the speculative financial system that i't hard to use as a practical example, but my point still stands in principle.

The MWO "market" is small enough for a buff as big as the quirk pass to cause significant "inflation", popularirly called power creep. It absolutely works as a deflation to the less quirked/unquirked mechs, actually that's the whole point of implementing them if you think it through.

[Bishop Steiner]

Kodyn, on 20 October 2014 - 02:33 PM, said:

I'm the only one that brought up Dorito dust, and I think i explained why I felt that way about TT guys.

When every time i see a good feature suggested for this game, it gets shouted down by the vocal minority, and that actually holds water, that bothers me, so yes, I have a negative take on TT players, both because I don't enjoy their hobbies myself, and don't get why they try to change a PC game into just another version of their TT game.

I should not have gotten as stereotypical as I did, but being a guy who falls between the "CoD" crowd, and the "TT" crowd, as far as desires for this game, I wanted to distance myself from both.

Really I just wish PGi would stop listening to the TT guys like they're gods just because a few baby-boomers have spent some large amounts of cash...give them a product, if they like it, they buy it, don't keep tailoring the product to make those same few people happy, improve the product to gain more happy, paying customers... usually the suggestions I see by TT guys are the ones that will keep this game from ever growing, and thus ultimately kill it.

In this one, rare case, i agree with them, as I think the quirks are a positive step forward. Just don't want to start a precedent of agreeing with them...lol.

Firstly, most of the guys PGI listens to? Are Comp Gamers, most of whom don't give a fig about TT.


Secondly? The whole thing was supposedly started by a bunch of TT fanatics. Who made the pledge to deliver the closest to TT Mechwarrior title ever.

So you came to the wrong game if that is your goal.

Metus regem, on 20 October 2014 - 02:39 PM, said:

I for one, would hate to see what could be a great product brought to ruin to appease a few people that think that eSports are the be all end all for this game, it's why I run as far from the 'meta' as I can, and try to run stock or TRO loads in my mechs.

I'm also as far as you could get from a 'Dorito dust' TT gamer as you can get, and still be a TT gamer. But that doesn't mean I can't see what this game could be, if it ran a little closer to the spirit and lore of the franchise it draws from.

Ugh. Had a guy in my gaming group who was the Doritos Dust guy.

I spend 1000s of dollars and hundreds of hours painting my regiment and he touches them with his nasty dorito fingers?

Oh. It was on. One of only 3-4 times there was a literal buttwhupping at one of our RPG nights.

[Solahma]

This is like a pseudo crit slot system, except instead of restricting the hardpoint sizes, they are giving you incentives to take the lore-based builds. Pretty awesome way to address the issue IMO. Well done.

Sure, the loose customization has been hurt quite a bit (which was easy to do in TT). But this also addresses the Major customizations that had extreme draw-backs in TT. Some of the builds out there should never exist in TT, or at least they would have very significant detriments and costs involved. No way to really capture that in MWO though, nor do I think it should. This is a good enough solution for me.

Edited by Solahma, 20 October 2014 - 02:49 PM.

[Alexander MacTaggart]

Sjorpha, on 20 October 2014 - 02:42 PM, said:

It absolutely works as a deflation to the less quirked/unquirked mechs, actually that's the whole point of implementing them if you think it through.

Again, your 6xCMPL Timber Wolf isn't suddenly doing less damage or generating more heat because Commandos get quirks.

Saying that buffing mechs that virtually never get played is a nerf to the current meta is ridiculous.

[UnsafePilot]

Sjorpha, on 20 October 2014 - 02:42 PM, said:

The MWO "market" is small enough for a buff as big as the quirk pass to cause significant "inflation", popularirly called power creep. It absolutely works as a deflation to the less quirked/unquirked mechs, actually that's the whole point of implementing them if you think it through.

It's needed deflation. The only mechs losing relative power are the top tier.

[KraftySOT]

Kodyn, on 20 October 2014 - 02:14 PM, said:

Just to clear my statement up, so I only offend the correct people, my anti-TT bias is due to only my own personal experience with a few dozen or so TT game players, plus the TT guys here. The ones I've known have been without fail, obnoxious neckbeard-types with nasally voices who live off of Mountain Dew and Doritos, and will literally hit on a woman by trying to explain what an amazing TT-gamer of whatever genre they are...while wiping Dorito dust off on their pants and fondling their 20-sided die in their pocket...

Crazy...you need to meet more of them. I grew up in Socal, on beer, speed, surfing, and Black Flag (Hermosa Hardcoooore), joined the army, hung around West Germany (there was a West Germany), played TT games in the barracks, and when I was a kid...Mountain Dew is disgusting, woman are judged and hit on based on how sexy they are in combat boots, and im not even entirely sure what a neck beard is?

Perhaps come join the cloud of pot smoke, push aside the cans of PBR, tell one of us to turn off the DRI, and sit with the cool kids.

Wargamers arent all bad. You just seemed to meet a bad crop.

Edited by KraftySOT, 20 October 2014 - 02:50 PM.

[Sjorpha]

Bishop Steiner, on 20 October 2014 - 02:33 PM, said:

and again:


not that I expect it to get past the blood thundering in peoples ears anymore this time than previously, which might be why Metus, Krafty and I were enjoying a nice detour from the same ol, same ol.

I'm not sure what you are trying to argue here actually. I'm not complaining about the quirk system, just pointing out that it is impossible for a change to anything at all in a small closed game universe like MWO to be discretely about the target.

The notion that you can give without taking is simply delusional, there is no free lunch. That doesn't mean you shouldn't give and take as needed, and the quirk pass certainly qualifies, but the target of your action is always secondary to the effect on relative balance as a whole.

UnsafePilot, on 20 October 2014 - 02:47 PM, said:

It's needed deflation. The only mechs losing relative power are the top tier.

Yes, I absolutely agree with that. I'm only annoyed by the misunderstandings surrounding the change, not the change itself.

[Alexander MacTaggart]

Sjorpha, on 20 October 2014 - 02:49 PM, said:

The notion that you can give without taking is simply delusional, there is no free lunch.

Let's not make this thread about the trap that is capitalism and capitalist thinking, please.

[Bishop Steiner]

Sjorpha, on 20 October 2014 - 02:51 PM, said:

I'm not sure what you are trying to argue here actually. I'm not complaining about the quirk system, just pointing out that it is impossible for a change to anything at all in a small closed game universe like MWO to be discretely about the target.

The notion that you can give without taking is simply delusional, there is no free lunch. That doesn't mean you shouldn't give and take as needed, and the quirk pass certainly qualifies, but the target of your action is always secondary to the effect on relative balance as a whole.



Yes, I absolutely agree with that. I'm only annoyed by the misunderstandings surrounding the change, not the change itself.

actually, I was proving that in this instance, your allusion is largely inaccurate.

Because the game is so top heavy, buffs across the bottom can only be a benefit.

[Solahma]

I just realized these quirks mean there is a reason to fill my mechbays again. A lot of builds had common availability on any variant, now it would be foolhardy to not consider which variant a particular weapon system is going into.

Glad I have spare mechbays!

Edited by Solahma, 20 October 2014 - 02:53 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

UnsafePilot, on 20 October 2014 - 02:47 PM, said:

It's needed deflation. The only mechs losing relative power are the top tier.

and even then, it's a minor change in power balance, on average.