444 replies to this topic

[KraftySOT]

Its a complicated issue. Complicated by the fact that some mechs just arent terribly competitive.

Is a Kintaro, Treb, Victor, and Atlas superior to a Hellbringer, Kitfox, Timber and Dire? Absolutely not.

Is a Wubshee, Thunderwub, Wubstarter and DDC superior to the same collection of Clan mechs? Absolutely yes.

While theres some "DOA" Clan mechs, and some "DOA" IS mechs...theres simply more DOA per capita Clan mechs, than IS. If you take a random spattering of people with not much knowledge of the game and throw them together with a random assortment of mechs. Clans win most of the matches.

Take experienced players and the clan mech options tighten up very quickly to two or three chassis. While the IS still have a plethora of great choices.

Its a very very hard question to answer without any context. I would say "no" to the OP simply because without context, its not really a question that can be accurately answered.

[Timuroslav]

I'm surprised at the lack of other Clan mechs to mention. People seem to be arguing pretty dang hard for the Dire Wolf and Timberwolf to remain as is.

The Summoner, Myst Lynx and Hellbringer Pilots are not really saying anything. Personally, I think the Clan mechs are close to balanced. Some do need a quirk pass though.

I'm still seeing a lot of. Timberwolf still has Assault Mech fire power with light/medium mech speed, and Heavy hitboxes.
Comparing to its Equal Inner sphere counter part. the Orion has to Sacrifice a lot of fire power to get the same speed, and it will never have the range or the Damage of the Timberwolf.
Also, the idea that not being able to change the engine is not really a disadvantage when you get that advantage back in lighter-Stronger-farther, reaching weapons. Even though they are hot
Inner sphere gets heavier-weaker-cooler weapons

Dire Wolf has a lot of limitations, as stated it has the "I see you first you die " but if you can sneak up on it, you're going to botch it up. I've brawled a Dire Wolf in a Hunchback at point blank spinning and rotating it. I still died, but I botched the crap out of its armor. It's low arms aid in its balancing factor. If that thing had High mounted arms. I'd freak the heck out.

Edited by Timuroslav, 01 December 2014 - 09:24 AM.

[Revis Volek]

Rossario x Vampire, on 29 November 2014 - 02:58 PM, said:

Probably OP is unaware that most of IS mechs are insta-nerfed by adding some silly stuff like some "joints" in some body parts and can't even use nearly equivalent tonnage of fire power as clans. And after JJ's nerf IS mechs are become an just random walking garbage with random amount of hardpoints.

I'm not trying to compare MadCat with IS heavies cause he is uncompareable. Clear 40+ tons of weapons equal to top IS assault moving "in stock" 81kmph is just nothing to compare. "Suckoner" is the only fast moving "zombie" except Tunderwub-5SS, but "Suckoner" can fly, TDR can't. Mobility does matter. C-LRM20 despite of "shovering" throw also is nearly twice precisle than LRM20. There is just no IS assault mech who can "frontload" more than 52 damage superfiring. What about clans? Yes, "eye" can! Just SCR-PRIME/2C can mount nearly 70+ "frontloaded" weapons superfiring and do 3xsemi-alpha before shotdown, which means 210 damage pinpoint. Does any IS heavy or assault can do this, and I'm not talking about mediums.

Oh poor clan lights. Especially "badder" ot "OP-Fox". 2, 3 or 4x C-LPL with each 13 damage and range 1200 metres allow ya to camp "a *****" or "camp-tart" anything beeing safe from LURM's. You didn't know? Oh dear... might be you just don't have a Clan-Mech that's why you make such adorable dumb topics.

Clan mechs are still 2/3 OP compare to IS mechs. But, if you don't know how to cook them, leave them alone.

P.S. There is no more inferrior thing than SCR-PRIME with 5xC-SPL+2xC-LPL which can whipe any brawl azz. Fo-Sho.

Did you really just say the guy with over 20,000 post and has posted more information that pertains to this game then Paul, Russ and the others at PGI combined?

You obviously have no idea what you are talking about so keep opening you mouth and making a fool of yourself.

OP....

I like what they have done so far, I dont think ANYTHING has gone to far. I still kill Tunderwubs, Wubstarters and alike just the same. Now they just have the same chance to kill me. When fighting IS mechs in similar loadouts/powered chassis it seems to come down to who makes less mistakes which is directly related to pilot skill and the way it should be. The only thing i dont understand is the silly quirks that dont help good stock loadouts. Or ones that are redundant....Much like the Grid Iron getting AC20 quirks as well as other Hunchies?

Quirk stock loadouts on certain chassis for more flavor! Will keep stock mech monday alive as well. But to answer the OP, no. I do not think IS mechs are more powerful as a whole then the Clan arsenal. On par with 75% ... maybe. But having a few top tiers in your garage goes a long way sometimes.

Edited by DarthRevis, 01 December 2014 - 10:30 AM.

[Phashe]

Summary of 17 pages: Players who want to play clan mechs think IS are OP, and hate clan nerfs, etc, etc. And vice versa for IS mech lovers. :-)

And can one more person please make the 'depends on the pilot' comment?!?? Geez. I can compare two models of cars and discuss which is superior and why without bringing the driver's abilities into the discussion, but GOD FORBID we talk about quality of mech chassis without people going to pilot skill as a "viable" argument...(sorry... Venting done).

[Satan n stuff]

Nik Reaper, on 01 December 2014 - 06:47 AM, said:

Keep in mind that when talking ballance take it as one side are the Lords and the other SJR , can you say you can just like that duel and win agains any of there top pilots in what ever you bring? ( or anything for that matter )

Seriously? They're not significantly better in a duel than most other top tier players, just more coordinated when working as a group. I've played in groups of all skill levels and I can say for certain that coordination between the players is much more important than their individual skill.
I've seen plenty of members of either unit go down and I killed quite a few myself but I only rarely see an entire team of them lose.

[Nik Reaper]

Satan n stuff, on 01 December 2014 - 09:44 AM, said:

"Seriously? They're not significantly better in a duel than most other top tier players"

My point exactly, focusing on TOP TIER players, ones that know every thing about the mech, how to use it best and have put enough practice to be able to do it consistantly so we can throw away the "depends on who is piloting the mechs" argument out when talking about ballance and just assume it's the best possible player.
I'm not saying that every lord or SJR are individualy much better but they represent the current top, the level of standard they have is good for an example of pilotes who will not make simple mistackes and blame it on the mech nor overvalue them based on individual personal preferance ( at least not when they tryhard to win, they might go suboptimal for "fun" drops ) wich is why what they say has some credibility and it fits with what I see.

Edited by Nik Reaper, 01 December 2014 - 10:03 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

KraftySOT, on 01 December 2014 - 09:16 AM, said:

Its a complicated issue. Complicated by the fact that some mechs just arent terribly competitive.

Is a Kintaro, Treb, Victor, and Atlas superior to a Hellbringer, Kitfox, Timber and Dire? Absolutely not.

Is a Wubshee, Thunderwub, Wubstarter and DDC superior to the same collection of Clan mechs? Absolutely yes.

While theres some "DOA" Clan mechs, and some "DOA" IS mechs...theres simply more DOA per capita Clan mechs, than IS. If you take a random spattering of people with not much knowledge of the game and throw them together with a random assortment of mechs. Clans win most of the matches.

Take experienced players and the clan mech options tighten up very quickly to two or three chassis. While the IS still have a plethora of great choices.

Its a very very hard question to answer without any context. I would say "no" to the OP simply because without context, its not really a question that can be accurately answered.

would not the point of the concept of debate, to be to bring a conjecture or hypothesis, then build the context out of the available data pool?

And I do believe I set the context in the experiment. Supposedly, Clans are "better" (though in last surprise test, notably less than before).

My Hypothesis: I say there is an outlier in that, skewing the data pool. The Timberwolf. It is an openly acknowledged, broken, OP; "tier 0" mech. If so, it is not Global Faction nerfs needed, such as weapons, but individual Chassis tuning. Also, when it is removed, in most cases, the IS mechs, with Quirks, are now higher tier than most Clan Mechs.

So the point is as a control group, if the TW was removed as such an obvious outlier, would the remaining Clan Mech still be "OP" in comparison to the post-Quirkening IS Mechs? If so, then it is probable that the weapon nerfs on the clans need to be relaxed/re-tuned, and the TW, as the outlier, skewing all results, need be individually addressed (as does the FS9 for the IS).

I think that is contextual enough, even if it also grossly narrows the scope of the debate.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 01 December 2014 - 10:17 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Nik Reaper, on 01 December 2014 - 10:00 AM, said:

My point exactly, focusing on TOP TIER players, ones that know every thing about the mech, how to use it best and have put enough practice to be able to do it consistantly so we can throw away the "depends on who is piloting the mechs" argument out when talking about ballance.
I'm not saying that every lord or SJR are individualy much better but they represent the current top, the level of standard they have is good for an example of pilotes who will not make simple mistackes and blame it on the mech nor overvalue them based on individual personal preferance ( at least not when they tryhard to win, they might go suboptimal for "fun" drops ) wich is why what they say has some credibility and it fits with what I see.

but they also view them through the narrow scope of minmaxxing, which in the end provides data for what is broken, but not always balanced fixes. Which is why using them alone for data and input is also fallacious reasoning, as they play the game in a manner 95% of the playerbase never will, or will want to play. It was Minmax oriented comp input that got half the mechs quirks that force it into exactly one, meta oriented build. (And since over time, metas change, that is a BAD idea).

A balanced view would be to find ways to use quirks to elevate the non meta aspects, weapons, chassis, to a more competitive level against the meta, and if need be mildly nerf meta aspects to flatten the curve.

The whole point, is that mechs are on a bell curve. You tune the outliers, weapon and chassis, you flatten that curve, and minimize metas, minmax, etc, which is the REAL goal of FPS balance.

To say that because one is a LORD or SJR, one has all the answers to MWOs balancing ills is laughable and incorrect. There are certainly many there who are very good at that. But the truth of comp is most are just really good twitch players, good at following orders and keeping discipline.

They run builds "meta'd" by a small pool of players. And even those builds are not always from comps. MYself and Robin Sage both ran the 2x AC5/ 2x PPC (RT) Dragonslayer form the day it was released....when those sainted Comps said it was either a slow fat CTF-3D, or fragile HGN, and thus, worthless. And then we lived through a year of that build dominating. I'm sure one of them will take credit for the build, of course.

People like Koniving and other non comp players compile most of the data they use to MinMax.

Thus while their input and testing is very valuable, to claim they and they alone know how to balance the game is simply put, ludicrous.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 01 December 2014 - 10:11 AM.

[AlmightyAeng]

Bishop Steiner, on 01 December 2014 - 10:01 AM, said:

would not the point of the concept of debate, to be to bring a conjecture or hypothesis, then build the context out of the available data pool?

And I do believe I set the context in the experiment. Supposedly, Clans are "better" (though in last surprise test, notably less than before).

My Hypothesis: I say there is an outlier in that, skewing the data pool. The Timberwolf. It is an openly acknowledged, broken, OP; "tier 0" mech. If so, it is not Global Faction nerfs needed, such as weapons, but individual Chassis tuning.

So the point is as a control group, if the TW was removed as such an obvious outlier, would the remaining Clan Mech still be "OP" in comparison to the post-Quirkening IS Mechs? If so, then it is probable that the weapon nerfs on the clans need to be relaxed/re-tuned, and the TW, as the outlier, skewing all results, need be individually addressed (as does the FS9 for the IS).

I think that is contextual enough, even if it also grossly narrows the scope of the debate.

+1 for predicting people not reading and replying to the OP.

[Nik Reaper]

@Bishop Steiner

While I agree with some of what you say I am a firm believer that ballance should be attuned to the top most level of play , and as I listened to some of the ideas some of the top players have (like siri and company) I agree that I don't trust then to do the rebalancing , and agree that they do not have all the answers, but what I do trust them is to show the current state of things with little margin of error.

I would also dissagree that this game is about unoptimised builds in inexperianced hands. Such builds shouldn't be used as anything other than stepping stones fowards an optimiesd build , with only variations allowed for personal preferance (some might like pulse some regular, some srm4 some Asrm6) but while keeping the overarching idea intact, because it works for it's intent better than any other alternative and not doing so lowers the chance to win.

And would as usualy suggest that if this game ever had enough of a player base, split it in to ranked and casual, frankenstain builds can be fun but I don't have fun when the team I'm on losses repeatedly due to there unability to preform even under optimal circumstances for them ( good range for all weapons , line of sight , slow moving target... ect ) , or heck I feel sory for the other team when we put down 1-3 of those and clean up the rest of them...

[Bishop Steiner]

Nik Reaper, on 01 December 2014 - 10:36 AM, said:

@Bishop Steiner

While I agree with some of what you say I am a firm believer that ballance should be attuned to the top most level of play , and as I listened to some of the ideas some of the top players have (like siri and company) I agree that I don't trust then to do the rebalancing , and agree that they do not have all the answers, but what I do trust them is to show the current state of things with little margin of error.

I would also dissagree that this game is about unoptimised builds in inexperianced hands. Such builds shouldn't be used as anything other than stepping stones fowards an optimiesd build , with only variations allowed for personal preferance (some might like pulse some regular, some srm4 some Asrm6) but while keeping the overarching idea intact, because it works for it's intent better than any other alternative and not doing so lowers the chance to win.

And would as usualy suggest that if this game ever had enough of a player base, split it in to ranked and casual, frankenstain builds can be fun but I don't have fun when the team I'm on losses repeatedly due to there unability to preform even under optimal circumstances for them ( good range for all weapons , line of sight , slow moving target... ect ) , or heck I feel sory for the other team when we put down 1-3 of those and clean up the rest of them...

many of those optimal situation exist because of too many waves in the curve. PPCs are bad now, so mechs relying on them are bad. Yet a mech based on PPCs can be made competitive (not "Competitive" with the big C, to denote not talking comp crowd....or TRVE KOMPs as I call them).

There is ZERO reason to make the K2 a mech designed around PPCs into a comp ballistic mech. Yes, it minmaxes successfully that way, but the point of balancing is to reduce the efficacy of minmaxing. Had it gotten PPC quirks similar to the AWS-8Q (which also would buff the lasers) and instead of ballistic quirks (for a mech meant to carry MGs) increased projectile speed for the PPCs, now you allow more chassis diversity because the PPC K2 is now potentially competitive against other similar weight mechs, while you also keep the Jagermech from being relegated to second fiddle as a 65 ton ballistic platform, of which IT should be the premiere.

Forcing minmaxxing to succeed doesn't keep people from making bad builds. It simply keeps diversity of builds, from happening, as "good" players will still simply gravitate to the "good builds". And the other chassis end up ignored, still.

Done right, ALL chassis shine in their roles, and while still fully customizable, are at their best in said roles. Want a PPC Heavy? Grab the K2. Ballsitics? A Jager., Missiles? A C1/A1. etc.

[Nik Reaper]

Ok then, but doesn't that somewhat limit mechs even more , because if you give quirks to a mech based on there role ( based on lore ) as some mechs found potential in areas that aren't lore based because of some circumstances like harpoint location or hitboxes.
Not saying I dislike the idea but it seems that if jagger had a balistic cooldown quirk and K2 had PPC quirks we would never again see 2 x gauss cat , on the other hand we already never see a ppc jagger.

Also you'r idea of balance as a means to minimise the effect of minmaxing confuses me, a min maxed mech that is optimised for long range should be better than a mech with some long range at long range, if you minimize the effect of minmaxing instead of a rock paper shotgun relationship of role specific mech ( brawler, sniper , lrm boats ) you end up with rock, bigger rock, even bigger rock.
But I do agree that many mechs need help to become a viable rock , paper or shotgun.

Edited by Nik Reaper, 01 December 2014 - 11:11 AM.

[Andi Nagasia]

Personally i feel some Clan are lacking,
and i see everyone keeps refrancing the Trinity (SCR TBR DWF),
and yes if you are balancing factions you cant leave out any Mech,
but i think the debates are getting abit heated,

in another forum i was told my opinion was wrong, my Opinion!
the thing is when some one says that some Clans are weak,
-
people always bring up the Trinity (SCR TBR DWF),
or they Say im Bias (im a Clan Supporter just look at my Faction)
or they Blame Skill (im a bad Clan Pilot, or a Amazing IS Pilot),
-
some times they just see clan in the Topic and Complain,
OP "so the Nova seems weak, it needs Quirks and more Omni-pods,
Poster "well the TImberWolf is God Tier! Clans dont need Buffed,
OP "but im not talking about the TBR but the NVA being sub-par,
Poster "well just play a Timber and you'll be fine with no Skill,
OP "but i want to drive and pilot my NOVA!!!
Poster "Clans are OP, NERF NOW!

i think we need to step back and actually see how balanced the Forces are to each other,
and unfortunately we will have to wait till CW comes out to see where everyone stands,
of course those who are unhappy with things will post how they feel, and that's ok,
but i think we wont see much change in the 50% for/50% against opinion till then,

personally i feel we need to see Clan Quirks,
after every mech is Quirked out balancing them will be much easier,
as you can easily make a 10% Quirk, a 8% or 12% depending on Balance,

i do feel that Clans need to also get Omni-Pod Quirks,
but since people keep saying that will/may lead to Abuse,
here's an Example,
NVA-P= 30% Heat Displacement(Heat Displacement Quirks)
-HD- 2% Heat Displacement Quirk
-CT- 20% Heat Displacement Quirk
-LT- 2% Heat Displacement Quirk
-RT- 2% Heat Displacement Quirk
-LA- weapon Quirks
-RA- weapon Quirks
-LL- 2% Heat Displacement Quirk
-RL- 2% Heat Displacement Quirk
NVA-B= 10% Turn-Angle (Speed, Angle, Thresh-hold Quirks)
-HD- 10% Heat Thresh-hold Quirk
-CT- 10% Torso Turn-Angle Quirk
-LT- weapon Quirks
-RT- weapon Quirks
-LA- weapon Quirks
-RA- weapon Quirks
-LL- 5% Acceleration/Deceleration Quirk
-RL- 5% Acceleration/Deceleration Quirk
NVA-S= 10% Structure(Structure(Hp) Quirks)
-HD- 10% HD Structure(Hp) Quirk
-CT- 10% CT Structure(Hp) Quirk
-LT- weapon Quirks
-RT- weapon Quirks
-LA- weapon Quirks
-RA- weapon Quirks
-LL- 10% Leg Structure(Hp) Quirk
-RL- 10% Leg Structure(Hp) Quirk
i believe this system would help with Clan Balance,
as well as give Hard-point-less Omni-pods Purpose,

Edit- Spelling

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 01 December 2014 - 11:37 AM.

[SaltBeef]

They are close to Clans with Quirks not as hot some very fun to play. Clans toughest lesson is heat management. The more Mechs they put in the game and the more people buy them the game will spread balance out I think.The clan need more mechs for more options right now. More mechs diversification means less timbers, dire, hellbringer, bigger spread.

[Bishop Steiner]

Nik Reaper, on 01 December 2014 - 11:01 AM, said:

Ok then, but doesn't that somewhat limit mechs even more , because if you give quirks to a mech based on there role ( based on lore ) as some mechs found potential in areas that aren't lore based because of some circumstances like harpoint location or hitboxes.
Not saying I dislike the idea but it seems that if jagger had a balistic cooldown quirk and K2 had PPC quirks we would never again see 2 x gauss cat , on the other hand we already never see a ppc jagger.

Perhaps....but we also never see a PPC K2 either. (Largely because unless quirked to 8Q levels, they suck).

But by having the "base tier" quirks generic by type (+12.5, 15, 25% Energy, Ballistic, Missile) and the "stacked tiers" based on Stock/Role, you not only see people using mech sin build close to what they were intended to be, thus giving almso tall chassis an active place in the mechbay, but you make them more viable in multiple roles. You could still be effective running pulse lasers or 4 large on the K2, if desired. But if you WANT heavy ballistic, you SHOULD be naturally gravitating toward the Jager, because it is a mech designed around Ballistics.

Just think if you were to "comp" quirk a Victor (ignoring it being tier1, etc). Lets go the old DS build (since they are meta focusing them, and metas shift, current meta mechs will obsolete too, so using an obsolete meta is just facing the future honestly, lol) it would be quirked for PPCs and AC5s.

And again the Awesome becomes obsolete. Or if it was oriented as a Ballistic mech (it's primary role) suddenly, the Awesome still has it's role. The VTR can pack PPCs...but the AWS does it BETTER, making both useful.

Also, would point out over half my mechs either totally ignore the quirks in their builds only make use of maybe half of them...because my preference and playstyle means those quirks don't actually make me better in that chassis. For instance, the VND-1AA has a PPC Quirk (as it should). I run a huge engine, 4 mediums and an aLRM15 on mine. Tried the PPC. On the mech, can't really make it work, for me. I'm back to the LRM15, and doing great in it.

Quirks should be to elevate the mech as a whole, and make them more versatile, not force them into a singular meta defined role.

[MeiSooHaityu]

Nik Reaper, on 01 December 2014 - 11:01 AM, said:

Ok then, but doesn't that somewhat limit mechs even more , because if you give quirks to a mech based on there role ( based on lore ) as some mechs found potential in areas that aren't lore based because of some circumstances like harpoint location or hitboxes.
Not saying I dislike the idea but it seems that if jagger had a balistic cooldown quirk and K2 had PPC quirks we would never again see 2 x gauss cat , on the other hand we already never see a ppc jagger.

Sometimes it seems like people forget that quirks help a certain build, not prevent other builds. Just because a K2 might get PPC quirks, doesn't mean a dual gauss build is now hampered or impossible, it is still as viable as it always was, it just doesn't get boosted. Really, it is a win/win. Not only could you now run boosted PPCs, but if you don't want to, just run a dual gauss. If anything, the quirk system added build variety to the Catapult K2.

Now, some mechs don't benefit from the quirks as universally, but they still benefit.

Example: You might not like pulse lasers for a certain mech even though that might have pulse laser quirks. Despite that, the quirks also include a general energy cool down buff and duration buff. Sure you could see a 15% cool down improvement to pulse lasers, buy if you wanted to run standard lasers, you still get a 7.5% boost to cool down (by being an energy weapon).

Again, still a bonus to run that mech it otherwise didn't have before.

Quirks help no matter what (even if yhe y might benefit a very specific build a bit more). No matter what, I just see added variety.

[Sjorpha]

Bishop Steiner, on 01 December 2014 - 10:49 AM, said:

Done right, ALL chassis shine in their roles, and while still fully customizable, are at their best in said roles. Want a PPC Heavy? Grab the K2. Ballsitics? A Jager., Missiles? A C1/A1. etc.

This I agree with, in principle mechs should be quirked to become competitive in a role that makes sense for them. So the K2 should definitely have PPC quirks rather than ballistic for example.

The exception is when the stock loadout for various reasons can not be quirked to make the mech work. For example I'm glad they didn't put flamer quirks on the firestarters, because without fixing flamers so they are competitive weapons in themselves it makes no sense to encourage their use. There are several other examples like this, where the stock loadouts just don't work as a basis for quirking the mech into being viable, and then you instead have to look at what players like to do with that mech and quirk from there instead.

Not an easy call to make I imagine, but IMO they did a lot of it right. With a few exceptions like the K2 etc.

[SaltBeef]

It. Seemed quite a few of the Is quirks were well placed. A lesser few are headscratchers. I have followed the quirkings on alot of the builds for the benifits and they have improved alot of the chassis. The Pirates bane for example to me feels like it needs no changes at all from purchase.

[Timuroslav]

The quirks went a long way, but some of the quirk decisions kind of baffled me.
Off topic:
Why did the Golden Boy get Lrm Quirks when it was advertised strictly as a SRM mech?
Also the Firestarter quirks were out right ridiculous. That thing is an Small Pulse Coring Monster. Not sure if the percentages were correct. Not to mention it was supposed to be a Flamer mech. Now it just poops on people.

On topic:
Yea, I can agree some Clan mechs need Helpful quirks, but right now I have to agree that the Timberwolf is just obnoxiously, benefiting from all Clan tech has to offer. It really is a bad example of how to buff or nerf Clan mechs, because everything affects it because it can fulfill any role in the game. It can be a missile boat or a Direct Fire mech. It can be a Srm Brawler, or a light hunter. It just can't be a scout and it does brawling a little bad. Its massive arms, which were supposed to be a balancing factor, turned into shield arms for the mech.
Other Clan mechs have blatant weaknesses and boons like the Nova. Personally I like the Nova, but it was never meant to be an Alpha monster.
In Theory Battletech, and Mechwarrior are supposed to discourage Alpha Striking, it's supposed to be a risky maneuver not the ******* main stream go to mech build.

It's hard to balance the Clans when the Timberwolf just excels at most roles. Nerfs to the Timber are like taking a sledge to most of the other would be viable Clan mechs. Buffs to Clan Weapons just make the Timber more attractive.

The mech just needs its own negative quirks. Like a lower de-acceleration rate for having Bird-Nose syndrome.

Seriously, Why play an Orion? When Timberwolf does everything?
Timberwolf>other Clan mechs So how are the other Clan mechs? Can't tell because the outlier is just too obnoxious.

Edited by Timuroslav, 01 December 2014 - 11:39 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Sjorpha, on 01 December 2014 - 11:21 AM, said:

This I agree with, in principle mechs should be quirked to become competitive in a role that makes sense for them. So the K2 should definitely have PPC quirks rather than ballistic for example.

The exception is when the stock loadout for various reasons can not be quirked to make the mech work. For example I'm glad they didn't put flamer quirks on the firestarters, because without fixing flamers so they are competitive weapons in themselves it makes no sense to encourage their use. There are several other examples like this, where the stock loadouts just don't work as a basis for quirking the mech into being viable, and then you instead have to look at what players like to do with that mech and quirk from there instead.

Not an easy call to make I imagine, but IMO they did a lot of it right. With a few exceptions like the K2 etc.

largely agree, though I think they COULD have used quirks to give flamers a niche. Give The FS9 50% less heat generated, while increasing the heat on the target by 50%. Pretty extreme, but would still, to me be preferable than the current SPL crap. Though that is also made annoying by the well known FS9 hit reg issues.

Also different ones, like the Mirage variant, would not have flamer quirks at all, but lasers, so you could still encourage variety in the stock roles, potentially, like they did with Hunchbacks, which IMO are a great example of the whole family being "quirked right".

Mind you, it would take testing to be sure, but that is why we have an underutilized test server, lol!