963 replies to this topic

[UnsafePilot]

Abisha, on 17 October 2014 - 08:46 AM, said:

wOOt, you saying not all mech's get Quirks?????.

The mech's that aren't getting them are already the top performers.

[Mercules]

Abisha, on 17 October 2014 - 08:33 AM, said:

this topic was about "Customization"" unless you have forgotten it.
Quarks will not bring diversity but will utterly destroy it.

you already see now in a PuG almost zero diversity, i can tell if i log in now their is at least 6 Timbers 4 Direwolfs
at any given day.

So seeing a Trebuchet, Commando, or Hunchback, even running their quirk enhanced weapons would be less somehow?

Kaeb Odellas, on 17 October 2014 - 08:35 AM, said:

PPC boat is not a role. An Awesome can fill a long-range fire support role just fine withstandard and ER large lasers. Why does it need to carry PPCs?

AC20 carrier is also not a role. A HBK-4G can still brawl with LPLs and MGs, or an LB10X with MGs and lasers. Why does it need an AC20?

Long Range Fire support is a role. The Awesome has traditionally fullfilled such a role because of it's iconic 3 PPCs. Brawler is a Role and the Hunchback was built to be a brawler by building a medium mech frame AROUND an AC/20, thus the "hunch". They are putting on quirks that benefit the iconic weapon system.

If there was an Archer in the game with would likely get bonuses for LRM 20s even though most people would rather run 4 smaller LRM racks instead. Because Archer=2 LRM 20s.

[cSand]

UrsusMorologus, on 17 October 2014 - 08:46 AM, said:

Please explain how these changes will make your mechs "less flexible"

I second this request

[AlexEss]

JozefK, on 17 October 2014 - 08:44 AM, said:

I give up.

I stopped playing this game. But i'm still following it to see in which direction it will go. Not really gave up completely.

One of my main concern was tremendous amount of time it take to grind for the mech.

With this change, mechs I own will be less flixible meaning that i would need to grind even more if flexibility is what i like (and it is, it what i like about this game).

So yeah, have a nice day.

Not really Jozef, but s in everything else if you want to stay at the top of the competiton.. you adapt to the situation. For the average pug player this will not really do all that much... They can still use their MG HBKs and their SSRM2 jennersand be just about as effective as they are today.

Andif you follow the meta as a "real" competitor you should be used to gridning stuff by now.

I think you are over reacting and building a mountain out of a molehill.

[Little Details]

This is the first time I've ever felt bad for PGI. There is zero chance to please anything close to even a majority of people in this game on their part because, quite frankly, you're mentally handicapped. Original Poster is 100% correct that this is a horrible way to implement certain mechs/variants in a more viable way because it absolutely ruins the mech-building aspect of the game, but the majority of comments on here don't even understand the point the OP was trying to make and instead turn this into a 'meta' argument.

[Widowmaker1981]

I really can't believe some of the arguments here.

the aim of this is to bring all Mech varients to a comparable level of viability, which is obviously a good thing. I don't think its 100% possible, some chassis are too badly screwed for whatever reason but the attempt is wise. There are two ways to do that: buffs to weaker chassis or nerfs to stronger ones. Buffs are a lot nicer than nerfs, especially the blanket weapon nerfs we have been getting recently, because they don't suddenly make what you've been doing not work anymore - they just make you consider other options.

Now the fact that they are choosing to buff specific, lore relevent weapon systems rather than overly generic buffs IS a slight hit to customisation, yes. But it's a nod to the people who want this to be more like Battletech, who are a large portion of the community, and has the extra effect of making more variants useful - and really, you STILL have full customisation - its just now that Instead of having (correctly) decided the Victor was the best assualt chassis, and making whatever weapon set up you wanted to use fit on there, you now have to say that while the VIctor is STILL the best assault chassis in most cases, if i want to run a PPC heavy build its possible the awesome is now a better choice. and that is EXCELLENT. you can still set your PPC awesome up exactly as you would like and now its not just you being nostalgic and bad anymore.

The ONLY people who lose out on this are those currently running T1 or maybe T2 mechs with weapons that are completely different to the lore - and they only lose out because their build is no longer the best, others are now competitive. I'm not saying these are bad people or something, they are just sensible in my eyes - but if they complain about balance being improved im a little short on sympathy....

Edit: i suppose people running bad chassis with non lore relevant weapons also lose out, if they refuse to change their build or chassis, but those people are just being intentionally bad for no reason so again, little sympathy if they complain.

Edited by Widowmaker1981, 17 October 2014 - 08:53 AM.

[JozefK]

UrsusMorologus, on 17 October 2014 - 08:46 AM, said:

Please explain how these changes will make your mechs "less flexible"

I already did. Noone has yet beaten that argument and i'll not repeat myself.

If you do not get it, so be it.

[UnsafePilot]

LT Satisfactory, on 17 October 2014 - 08:49 AM, said:

This is the first time I've ever felt bad for PGI. There is zero chance to please anything close to even a majority of people in this game on their part because, quite frankly, you're mentally handicapped. Original Poster is 100% correct that this is a horrible way to implement certain mechs/variants in a more viable way because it absolutely ruins the mech-building aspect of the game, but the majority of comments on here don't even understand the point the OP was trying to make and instead turn this into a 'meta' argument.

How does adding buffs to some builds absolute ruin the rest?

[Mercules]

Kaeb Odellas, on 17 October 2014 - 08:39 AM, said:

Can we not do this? There is nothing cheesy about putting an LB10X on a hunchback, or lasers on an Awesome, and yet neither of these loadouts are getting any kind of boost.

Because that particular Awesome variant isn't known for it's potent laser potential. It is known for it's awesome PPC potential... pun intended. Same with the classic 4G Hunchback. It was a mech built around carrying an AC/20.

I have NO issue with them reinforcing stock builds.

[DaZur]

Customization is not a right... It's a luxury.

The quirks are intended to reflect the primary role and intent of the base mech design philosophy... If you deviate outside that design philosophy through your personal modifications you risk marginalizing the advantages forded by the quirk.

Quirks do not "kill" customization... it simply emphasizes the inherent advantages in the base design philosophy.

​Entitlement...

[Tarzilman]

JozefK, on 17 October 2014 - 08:29 AM, said:

Someone who didn't play game in the last two weeks can't argue about the game changes for some reason?

No.
But someone who plays the the game since a bit more than a month can't.
It's enough now with your inexperienced talk!


You're discussing here with ppl who are playing this game for years. They've gone through a lot of **** and bought a lot of mechs. As time passed many of those mechs became just useless, best example imho is the awesome. You seem not to know at which state this game is at the moment. You're NOT ABLE to know, when you really play it for just a month.
I personally have a bunch of mechs in my mechlab that are getting dusty (the quickdraw for example) and I'm looking forward to not only play this mech again, but also see more of them on the battlefield again!
The point is, we dont have a balanced variety of mechs in our stables. A hell lot of mechs are left untouched at the actual state and THAT IS WHY this quirk system in the end WILL ensure a greater diversity where it fn belongs, namely, on the battlefield!
Let me make this perfectly clear. You don't have a fractional part of a clue WHAT is going on here! So please go and troll around somewhere else!

Edited by Tarzilman, 17 October 2014 - 08:56 AM.

[UnsafePilot]

JozefK, on 17 October 2014 - 08:49 AM, said:

I already did. Noone has yet beaten that argument and i'll not repeat myself.

If you do not get it, so be it.

Your earlier argument seemed based on the flawed premise that the currently competitive mechs (and cars at some points) will be receiving quirks that will widen the gap between the good and the bad.

That's not the case.

Edited by UnsafePilot, 17 October 2014 - 08:55 AM.

[Elizander]

Edited by Elizander, 17 October 2014 - 08:55 AM.

[Mercules]

LT Satisfactory, on 17 October 2014 - 08:49 AM, said:

This is the first time I've ever felt bad for PGI. There is zero chance to please anything close to even a majority of people in this game on their part because, quite frankly, you're mentally handicapped. Original Poster is 100% correct that this is a horrible way to implement certain mechs/variants in a more viable way because it absolutely ruins the mech-building aspect of the game, but the majority of comments on here don't even understand the point the OP was trying to make and instead turn this into a 'meta' argument.

I think you don't understand... They could force you to use stock mechs. Then you would have 0 customization. That would turn many Meta Mechs into absolute crap and raise a different set of meta. Instead of doing that it looks like certain variants are going to have a few general buffs and then even better buffs for their Iconic loadouts. Which in turn brings it back closer to BT/MW that many of us are here to play.

[Mawai]

shad0w4life, on 17 October 2014 - 07:00 AM, said:

If you're going to piss moan and whine about them putting in this quirks system then at least propose an alternative fix. So what's the fix for Dragon's huh? And Locust, I'm dying to know what your idea is to make the locust a usable mech on the battlefield.

...

Honestly, I don't think there is any quirk that can make a Locust a usable mech on the battlefield

They could increase the Locust armor everywhere as a quirk ... but all this does is give it armor comparable to heavier mechs at the expense of weapons tonnage.

On the other hand, they don't seem to have mentioned whether the armor and structure hit point changes will actually affect the mech tonnage available. Is the extra hunchback armor actual (meaning the section has a minimum value that costs no tonnage) or do you have to allocate armor points to fill it at the expense of other equipment?

[Alek Ituin]

Kaeb Odellas, on 17 October 2014 - 08:35 AM, said:

PPC boat is not a role. An Awesome can fill a long-range fire support role just fine withstandard and ER large lasers. Why does it need to carry PPCs?

AC20 carrier is also not a role. A HBK-4G can still brawl with LPLs and MGs, or an LB10X with MGs and lasers. Why does it need an AC20?

Because the canon loadouts are what the Mech was built for, and what quirks will reinforce.

Either respect BT lore, or don't play a BattleTech/MechWarrior game. It really is that simple.

[Mercules]

JozefK, on 17 October 2014 - 08:49 AM, said:

I already did. Noone has yet beaten that argument and i'll not repeat myself.

If you do not get it, so be it.

No, we get it. We also understand it comes from a flawed basis and understanding and are trying to explain to you why your basis for your argument is flawed... which you do not get.

[Abisha]

hmm getting clear now, lower the Tier the bigger the bonus.

also they neglected to state that Top tier mech's not get quarks.
in this case those in the tiers are indeed in need of a buff. (bonus)

miss communication is really a nasty thing.

[AlmightyAeng]

When you have so many chassis that have nearly identical hardpoints this becomes a FANTASTIC way to ENCOURAGE diversity among mech loadouts.

So all HBK 4G's will be rocking an AC-20? Wow...at least there's a reason to actually TAKE one now, instead of nearly ANY other mech with the same hardpoints and better hitboxes.

[Alek Ituin]

Abisha, on 17 October 2014 - 08:57 AM, said:

hmm getting clear now, lower the Tier the bigger the bonus.

also they neglected to state that Top tier mech's not get quarks.
in this case those in the tiers are indeed in need of a buff. (bonus)

miss communication is really a nasty thing.

For reference:

Quarks are sub-atomic particles that come in six "flavors". Along with Leptons, Quarks bond together to form the basic particles that form atomic structures. And thus, Quarks/Leptons are the most basic known building blocks of all matter.

Quirks are simply an odd behaviour or habit.


There's a difference... >_>