196 replies to this topic

[Xythius]

Monkey Lover, on 15 December 2014 - 07:57 AM, said:

Biggest problem I run into is the zerg from 12 timbers coming at you. I have two 30 score games because we couldn't hold them back. I started bring an assault but I keep getting "attack mode" even when its a planet defence.


Crows and timbers being the only mechs you fight is boring too.

It's not our fault that these are the only two -real- viable 'mechs we have for CW. Some of us want to bring others from our stable, but there is nothing they can do that the SCR/TBR simply do not do better. We just use what we are given.

[Lucky Noob]

Its hard to attack if the Defenders can build an Circle Defense and be able to Fire at all Sides with the Range Advance.

As IS you need to get into an Closer Distance but the Open makes it an Slaughterfest because all Clans simply kill you if you try to get close.

[AlmightyAeng]

LordKnightFandragon, on 15 December 2014 - 07:57 AM, said:

What 80 points?

80 match points for the weekend challenge.

[Johnny Z]

Well they still have to finish the second round of twerks and the havnt even started on the Omni Xl vrs IS XL mess yet. Someone said Light Fusion engine somewhere. Not sure if thats it or what it will be.

Anyone know about the Light Fusion engine and the stats? Cause I dont.

Edited by Johnny Z, 15 December 2014 - 08:14 AM.

[Mystere]

LordKnightFandragon, on 15 December 2014 - 08:04 AM, said:

Ill take a removal of clan range..or atleast some nerfs to it.

And I won't. Carried to its logical conclusion, that will just eventually lead to perfect symmetry, with Clan Mechs becoming nothing more that reskinned versions of IS Mechs.

I'd rather tonnage and number adjustments be made and determined by planet, match role (i.e. attacker vs. defender) and which faction is doing what role. Heck, this might even be the perfect opportunity to revisit 10vs12 and asymmetric warfare in general.

[Vincent V. Kerensky]

Vassago Rain, on 15 December 2014 - 07:57 AM, said:

They should just release IS mirror versions of clan weapons already, or remove the clan range advantage. Something has to give, and it'll be one of them.

Right, I am getting a bit tired of seeing posts like this. As it stands right now, Clan weapons has been nerfed quite hard compared to how good they are supposed to be. Our LRMs have a steep curve when it comes to damage within 180 meters which should not be there. Our lasers generate more heat, have a longer burntime, longer cooldowns and so forth. Even our AutoCannons are behaving like AutoCannons should while you have that one shot shell.

The Nova for instance is supposed to use ALL weapons and not overheat... But there you got Ghost Heat... Hell, Inner Sphere even has solid quirks on their 'Mechs. Quirks that make your 'Mechs equal (if not better) that ours. We have a few speed quirks and our Novas have that -10% Heat Generation. (Not that it helps that much...)

Instead of complaining about our weapons and remove the few good things we have left, why not try to find tactics that work against us? Step up to the challenge of beating the Clan 'Mechs on the footing they are supposed to be at.

LordKnightFandragon, on 15 December 2014 - 08:04 AM, said:

Ill take a removal of clan range..or atleast some nerfs to it.

Again...?

PGI are already strong Great Houses supporters. Do not give them any ideas Trothkin... I am tired of having my Omnimechs nerfed. Clan Technology is supposed to be better. Let it be.

Edited by Vincent V., 15 December 2014 - 08:19 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

They should just release IS mirror versions of clan weapons already, or remove the clan range advantage. Something has to give, and it'll be one of them.

id rather just see IS get a tonnage advantage. so like 250 tons for IS vs 240 tons for clans.

[Mawai]

Rhaythe, on 15 December 2014 - 07:38 AM, said:

That would basically require PGI to admit that clan-tech is overall superior to IS tech, which is what killed the 3 lance versus 2 star idea a few months back. Given history,if anything is done I expect another series of buffs/quirks instead.

The 3 lance vs 2 star idea was killed by the issues in trying to make balanced matches in PUG and Group queues.

1) Do you require the 10 clan mechs to be 2 assault, 3 heavy, 3 medium, 2 light or some other variation?
2) How do you allow for mixed clan/IS groups in the public queues? Constraints of clan vs IS only are for CW ... public is for any mech you feel like dropping in ..

These constraints lead to the requirement that 1:1 clans and IS should be roughly equal. The problem is that they are not equal ... particularly the stormcrow and the timberwolf ... fast, well armored, high dps, long and short range effectiveness.

Anyway, the current situation of clan effectiveness in CW was completely predictable and was predicted ... even with the IS quirks, clans on average still appear to be better than IS .. particularly in speed and range .. which matter quite a bit on these particular maps.

[Lily from animove]

Rhaythe, on 15 December 2014 - 07:38 AM, said:

That would basically require PGI to admit that clan-tech is overall superior to IS tech, which is what killed the 3 lance versus 2 star idea a few months back. Given history,if anything is done I expect another series of buffs/quirks instead.

No, russ said the 10vs12 thingy woul ahve caused issues with the elo and its rankin if an uneven amount of people paly vs each other. Tonnage difference would work fine with such a concept. But maybe also 12 vs 10, because stats ren't counted on CW and so probably elo as well.

yet we still ahve the issue that clans are not stronger than IS, its simply the SCR and TBR beign that much stronger and being the main fielded force in CW.

[Monkey Lover]

Xythius, on 15 December 2014 - 08:08 AM, said:

It's not our fault that these are the only two -real- viable 'mechs we have for CW. Some of us want to bring others from our stable, but there is nothing they can do that the SCR/TBR simply do not do better. We just use what we are given.

Ya the last clan quirk pass were kind of worthless.

[Rhaythe]

Lily from animove, on 15 December 2014 - 08:24 AM, said:

No, russ said the 10vs12 thingy woul ahve caused issues with the elo and its rankin if an uneven amount of people paly vs each other. Tonnage difference would work fine with such a concept. But maybe also 12 vs 10, because stats ren't counted on CW and so probably elo as well.

</p>
I'm referring to this post, and the paragraph right after the bulleted points on the topic:http://mwomercs.com/forums/topic/169895-clan-balance-update/

Quote

But perhaps more importantly than that, if we went down this path the overall message to the community is basically “Yes your IS mech’s are weaker, but if you put lots of them together you might win”. This is not what we communicated to the MWO community as to our plans for the Clan mech’s and how they would balance within MWO.

[Tezcatli]

Only way you'll see mechs other then Stormcrows and Timberwolves is they give them negative quirks and the other clan mech positive quirks.

Also the range issue. But I think that instead nerfing. They could just add more cover to the map's approach. Also something needs to happen to the terrrain in base so they can't shoot both gates from one spot.

[Mawai]

Vincent V., on 15 December 2014 - 08:17 AM, said:

Right, I am getting a bit tired of seeing posts like this. As it stands right now, Clan weapons has been nerfed quite hard compared to how good they are supposed to be. Our LRMs have a steep curve when it comes to damage within 180 meters which should not be there. Our lasers generate more heat, have a longer burntime, longer cooldowns and so forth. Even our AutoCannons are behaving like AutoCannons should while you have that one shot shell.

The Nova for instance is supposed to use ALL weapons and not overheat... But there you got Ghost Heat... Hell, Inner Sphere even has solid quirks on their 'Mechs. Quirks that make your 'Mechs equal (if not better) that ours. We have a few speed quirks and our Novas have that -10% Heat Generation. (Not that it helps that much...)

Instead of complaining about our weapons and remove the few good things we have left, why not try to find tactics that work against us? Step up to the challenge of beating the Clan 'Mechs on the footing they are supposed to be at.



Again...?

PGI are already strong Great Houses supporters. Do not give them any ideas Trothkin... I am tired of having my Omnimechs nerfed. Clan Technology is supposed to be better. Let it be.

Clan weapons have been nerfed because this is not tabletop.
- There is no battle value system.
- The game is not played with a fewer number of clan mechs vs a larger number of IS mechs.
- The game is a real time first person shooter where the damage dealt by the weapons is AIMED by the player and not assigned randomly by dice roll.
- Clans are not constrained by honour.

Do I have to go on? Folks who envisage the clans as stomping all over the IS mechs because they have better tech ... which is exactly what happens in the board games and the books ... are out to lunch in a multiplayer on-line shooter that is called "MechWarrior Online" and not "Clans Online" ... which has to achieve a certain balance in order for folks to be interested in playing it.

PGI had two choices with clans ... use IS numbers and tonnage to try to balance clan weapons (which with the FPS nature of MWO) might require far MORE mechs than in TT ... OR ... they try to make the clan weapons similar to IS ... more powerful in some ways, less in others, so that overall they are equally effective.

This has only worked part way. Clan weapons are still more powerful generally though they do require a steady hand and longer time on target to be effective.

If I had to guess, I think the next step in balancing might be a general durability increase for IS mechs ... structure and armor quirks applied to every IS mech so that the time to kill from the clan weapons with higher dps against IS mechs vs IS weapons with lower dps against clan mechs are about equal. This will let clans retain their higher dps while balancing the battlefield a bit. Unfortunately, it does nothing for the clan speed and range advantages which are still an issue for the type of battles on the current cw maps.

[Vincent V. Kerensky]

Mawai, on 15 December 2014 - 08:32 AM, said:

Clan weapons have been nerfed because this is not tabletop.
- There is no battle value system.
- The game is not played with a fewer number of clan mechs vs a larger number of IS mechs.
- The game is a real time first person shooter where the damage dealt by the weapons is AIMED by the player and not assigned randomly by dice roll.
- Clans are not constrained by honour.

- There is no battle value system but there is an ELO. This pits the same level of players against eachother. The battle value is per say the different builds of the 'Mechs.
- Second one is true, though I would have loved to see that feature myself. I do however see why they cannot do this.
- The point of the third one eludes me (And you are allowed to aim in tabletop.)
- Zellbrigen is not reserved for Inner Sphere.

Mawai, on 15 December 2014 - 08:32 AM, said:

Do I have to go on? Folks who envisage the clans as stomping all over the IS mechs because they have better tech ... which is exactly what happens in the board games and the books ... are out to lunch in a multiplayer on-line shooter that is called "MechWarrior Online" and not "Clans Online" ... which has to achieve a certain balance in order for folks to be interested in playing it.

Yet... It seems that we are doing just that despite having worse tech than in tabletop. What it seems you are saying to me is that you want us to be on equal footing techwise so it is fair.

What if the ones playing the Clans acually, god forbid are better players in some aspects? Is it right to say to people who do well in the game "You are doing too well so we are gonna make your 'Mechs even worse to make it easier for everyone else"? Does not seem very fair to me.

Mawai, on 15 December 2014 - 08:32 AM, said:

PGI had two choices with clans ... use IS numbers and tonnage to try to balance clan weapons (which with the FPS nature of MWO) might require far MORE mechs than in TT ... OR ... they try to make the clan weapons similar to IS ... more powerful in some ways, less in others, so that overall they are equally effective.
This has only worked part way. Clan weapons are still more powerful generally though they do require a steady hand and longer time on target to be effective.

Yet the Inner Sphere is still complaining about "op" clan weaponary.

Mawai, on 15 December 2014 - 08:32 AM, said:

If I had to guess, I think the next step in balancing might be a general durability increase for IS mechs ... structure and armor quirks applied to every IS mech so that the time to kill from the clan weapons with higher dps against IS mechs vs IS weapons with lower dps against clan mechs are about equal. This will let clans retain their higher dps while balancing the battlefield a bit. Unfortunately, it does nothing for the clan speed and range advantages which are still an issue for the type of battles on the current cw maps.

So you really want to make it harder for us to bring down 'Mechs. Increasing the durability on all IS 'Mechs would effectivly nerf our weapons in every single aspect but actually nerfing them. This is not fair at all.

[Mystere]

There is still too much one-dimensional thinking going on in here.

People are complaining about the Clan's range advantage. Well there are many ways to deal with it. The most obvious choice, and probably the only one that a large chunk of the player base can think of, is to alter weapons, either by nerfing the Clans or buffing the IS.

Well, another way is to make terrain actually matter. Alter some maps so that terrain allows the IS to compensate for their range disadvantage.

Now having said that, how should ballistic weapons be altered to deal with the IS versions' obviously overly massive single-shell advantage?

Edited by Mystere, 15 December 2014 - 09:03 AM.

[KraftySOT]

I enjoyed myself.

[Kraven Kor]

I dunno, other than one match against a particularly talented bunch of Ghost Bears, the IS vs Clan matches I fought in over the weekend seemed... not so bad. Even on the attack. It certainly wasn't easy, and the only attacking win I was part of was IS vs. IS, but the IS vs. Clan attacks I was on were not wholly one-sided, even with my team being a hodge-podge of smaller units and PUGs and the clan teams generally being 12-man on TS.

The larger part of the equation seems to be the attack vs. defense disparity. The only way the attackers win is to ignore the defenders (more or less) and hit the main generator.

[Veritae]

I completely disagree with the OP. I think there is almost nothing in this game that is more fun than being in an attacking IS pug group and taking out a 12 man of Clan defenders on the other side due to planning and coordination via in game chat. We beat a defending CWI 12 man, and had 44 dead mechs on our team when we finally dropped the generator.

Don't let all the complaining about Clans are OP confuse you. Plan, fight well, and you can win.

If it's too hard, go fight on your IS border so you don't have to fight the scary Clanners. I don't know what else to say. All the nerf X threads have got to stop.

[ContingencyPlan]

Mystere, on 15 December 2014 - 09:01 AM, said:

There is still too much one-dimensional thinking going on in here.

People are complaining about the Clan's range advantage. Well there are many ways to deal with it. The most obvious choice, and probably the only one that a large chunk of the player base can think of, is to alter weapons, either by nerfing the Clans or buffing the IS.

Well, another way is to make terrain actually matter. Alter some maps so that terrain allows the IS to compensate for their range disadvantage.

Now having said that, how should ballistic weapons be altered to deal with the IS versions' obviously overly massive single-shell advantage?

Nerfing and buffing weapon systems is not the answer. The lore gave us the answer already. In the lore, the clanners' warped sense of honor meant they REFUSED to drop equal numbers vs. lesser-armed opponents. They DELIBERATELY fought at a numbers disadvantage. Give clanners a numbers disadvantage or increase drop deck size for IS so that they can viably field more than one assault. Problem solved.

[Bhael Fire]

Rhaythe, on 15 December 2014 - 07:38 AM, said:

That would basically require PGI to admit that clan-tech is overall superior to IS tech, which is what killed the 3 lance versus 2 star idea a few months back. Given history,if anything is done I expect another series of buffs/quirks instead.

The primary motivation for scrapping Lance vs Star matches had more to do with the UI and MM rework that would be required to implement it.