196 replies to this topic

[Rhaythe]

Bhael Fire, on 15 December 2014 - 09:55 AM, said:

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.

I copy/pasted this earlier on - that was the technical side, but PGI also had a moral stance on the issue:

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.

Source: http://mwomercs.com/...balance-update/

[cSand]

In all fairness,

we're not supposed to be attacking the clans

we're supposed to be barely hanging on, scrambling to defend, in a looking-more-hopeless-by-the-second battle

[Mystere]

ContingencyPlan, on 15 December 2014 - 09:48 AM, said:

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.

Oh I'm with you on that one. Hence my earlier suggestion.

But unfortunately, there are more than a few here who will settle for nothing less than 1-on-1 parity.

[TheCaptainJZ]

Switch the climates on the 2 planets. Now snow is too hot for clan lasers and sulfur is cold enough for pulse brawling

Edited by TheCaptainJZ, 15 December 2014 - 10:08 AM.

[Bhael Fire]

Rhaythe, on 15 December 2014 - 09:57 AM, said:

I copy/pasted this earlier on - that was the technical side, but PGI also had a moral stance on the issue:

Source: http://mwomercs.com/...balance-update/

Yeah, pretty sure that was just the justification for not scheduling the rework of the UI and MM.

If it didn't have the technical and labor issues attached, I don't think they would have any problems making Lance vs. Star engagements.

Could be wrong though...

[Clydewinder]

cSand, on 15 December 2014 - 09:57 AM, said:

In all fairness,

we're not supposed to be attacking the clans

we're supposed to be barely hanging on, scrambling to defend, in a looking-more-hopeless-by-the-second battle

I get your point, but this is still a game. Imagine a 2 player game of Panzer General in the 1938 Poland scenario. How many times do you want to take Poland in that game before you go play Elite?

[Vassago Rain]

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.

This is a PVP videogame that at one point styled itself as being fit for e-sports.

One side doesn't get to be better. It leads to everybody with some common sense picking that side, then the other side's empty and might as well not exist.

So if they don't balance it...then everybody will eventually go clan, and we'll all have 'mirrored weapons' anyway. PGI needs to stop sticking their head in the sand.

The maps for CW are also HORRIBLE, and not fun at all. They need to pull them, bin them, and hire some guy who knows how to make maps to create some for them. I don't know about the rest of you, but this isn't the mythical CW I waited 3 years for. This is the chinese bootleg version.

[DONTOR]

Good thing Scrows and TWs are great at killing Firestarters rushing... Oh wait. Dont play long range against us you wont win.

Edited by DONTOR, 15 December 2014 - 03:19 PM.

[Hullen Low]

Much of the IS problems are on the ice map, and mainly due to terrain issues. Today our IS attacking force lost three mechs just trying to open the first gate, Direwolves and TImberwolves sniping them from behind the gate. I often take fire just running from the drop point to the gates in subsequent waves.

Some minor adjustments in the topography can make that map much more balanced for IS vs Clan games, no changes need to the mechs themselves.

[Mawai]

Vincent V., on 15 December 2014 - 08:58 AM, said:

- 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.



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.



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



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.

So .. just to reply.

"- 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."

I would have thought this one obvious ... but battlevalue is for balancing the mechs and not the players ... clan mechs of a given tonnage typically have higher battlevalues due to the better clan weaponry. MWO lacks this ... all mechs are grouped by tonnage which does not take into account loadout or the overall greater effectiveness of clan weapons even after several changes.

"- The point of the third one eludes me (And you are allowed to aim in tabletop.)"

In tabletop ... "To determine the exact location of a hit, the player rolls 2D6 and consults the appropriate column of the 'Mech Hit Location' table." ... as for aimed shots "Players may make aimed shots against units that shut down or whose warrior is unconscious" ... if they score a hit with a -4 for fire against an immobile target then they still have to roll 6,7 or 8 to actually hit the section aimed at. So ... in general ... you are NOT allowed to aim in tabletop ... other than at a specific mech.

The point is that in MWO, I can fire my 6 medium lasers and have ALL of them hit whatever I aim at if I am good enough. This is not remotely like the mechanics of table top .. so table top weapon balance is completely irrelevant to MWO.

"- Second one is true, though I would have loved to see that feature myself. I do however see why they cannot do this."

As was mentioned, if clan mechs are better 1:1 than IS mechs for equal tonnage ... which would be required if you want to have 12:10 being balanced then there are the two issues I pointed out.
1) What 10 weight classes from clans are required to be balanced? 2 assault, 3 heavy, 3 medium, 2 lights? 10 lights? 3 assault, 3 heavy, 3 medium, 1 light? HOW do you come up with a balance such that any 10 clan mechs is the equal of 12 IS?
2) Making clan mechs more powerful makes public mixed drops of clan and IS much more challenging for the matchmaker since it now has to match equal numbers and weight class of clan and IS on each side in addition to Elo and general weight class matching ...

"- Zellbrigen is not reserved for Inner Sphere."

No. Zeilbrigen is solely reserved for the clans ... IS pay it no attention but the clans are supposed to ... it is part of play balance in the game and the books ... but not in MWO.


As for mechs ... rough balance is all that we can ask for ... I have 15 clan mechs as well as a good selection of IS mechs. I am just looking at overall impressions (since I don't have the statistics ... except the last ones issued by PGI which indicated that clan mechs still outperformed IS) ... but clans still seem to outperform IS in CW. Is this just the timberwolf, stormcrow and direwolf? (maybe maddog too) ... or is it overall clan weaponry? Maybe these specific clan mechs need a nerf?

PGI has the numbers ... hopefully they will do what is needed to make a game that is sufficiently balanced that it is fun to play.


"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."

It is called balance. Period. You either nerf the over-performing or buff the under-performing. If PGI has numbers showing over-performance of clan mechs ... you can certainly expect one or the other. Also, keep in mind that IF there is an imbalance THEN there is nothing unfair at all about either nerfs or buffs to improve the balance ... it is a completely normal and natural process in EVERY online multi-player game making the game more fair for everyone.

[MischiefSC]

I'll roll attack Clan units on Sulfur with IS units every day, I'll roll defense against Clan units on Boreal every day. Went 7 for 8 drops of IS pugs vs groups of Clanner organized units last night. It's about tactics, not firepower.

Attacking Clanners on Boreal though is the toughest row to hoe. It plays to all their strengths and you need a lot of coordination to get it done and if even 1 player on the IS side doesn't stick to the plan it can fall apart pretty quickly.

I've seen a lot of people get upset and bail on the IS vs Clan fights. A big part of it is that most the big units who bring the skills and familiarity with the organized tactics involved are sticking to IS vs IS, as defending other factions vs the Clans doesn't pay more and doesn't net my House any other benefit.

Best solution? Pay IS out a crap ton more for IS vs Clan engagements. Call it a 'Comstar Bonus'. Have it pay reasonably even on a loss and like 30% more on a win vs Clans and you'll suddenly see some big boys roll from the back field of the IS and wreck Clanner face.

[Mawai]

cSand, on 15 December 2014 - 09:57 AM, said:

In all fairness,

we're not supposed to be attacking the clans

we're supposed to be barely hanging on, scrambling to defend, in a looking-more-hopeless-by-the-second battle

Unfortunately, the lore of the clan invasion doesn't really work well for a multiplayer online video game.

The time frame is the best for making money ... both IS and clan mechs give you lots of things to sell.

However, in lore, the clans stomp across much of the IS ... they are essentially unstoppable. The IS doesn't even know they are coming and don't mount any effective resistance for the most part.

It makes for a very boring video game playing as either the clans or the IS.

MWO is not that game. MWO uses the setting, the mechs, the names ... but if it was balanced so that the clans would simply win ... why would anyone bother with CW? To have fun you need attackers and defenders ... to enjoy the game you need to be able to win as well as lose. The point of CW is to give folks a reason to play the game beyond the individual match ... so that in game actions have greater consequences and thus motivate folks to play. It remains to be seen whether CW fulfills this goal or not.

This is PGI's beta for CW ... overall, I think it is really good ... the game mode shows a lot of promise. Overall balance needs some work but that is entirely to be expected. So, personally, I will wait and see what it looks like at the end of February before beginning to pass any judgement.

[Thorqemada]

Keep in mind that Elo is DISABLED in CW - there simply is no CW Elo!

[Kutfroat]

Mystere, on 15 December 2014 - 08:13 AM, said:

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.

and this is were, i feel, your wrong. a timberwolf would still pack ASSAULTLEVEL FIREPOWER, because clantech is lighter and needs less slots, still no perfect symmetry, but the range advantage would be gone. still superior, but only in one category. or at least reduce the range advantage to acceptable level like 5%...maybe 10%.

removing the huge clan range advanatge would be the easiest way to bring IS and clans closer, but then maybe IS autocannons would need the clan treatment, too. the clan weapons are allready hot enough, making them hotter would only hurt the allready "underperforming" mechs.

edit: and they still have the clan xl engine advantage...so, still far superior in speed, surviveability, and firepower...no need to give them a huge range advanatge.

Edited by Kutfroat, 15 December 2014 - 12:19 PM.

[Mystere]

Mawai, on 15 December 2014 - 11:44 AM, said:

Unfortunately, the lore of the clan invasion doesn't really work well for a multiplayer online video game.

But that can be simulated by, for example, making battles tougher for clans the deeper in they go into the Inner Sphere, be it by numbers, tonnage, terrain, available defenses, logistics, or some other form of asymmetry.

Now is the perfect opportunity to look into those things.

Kutfroat, on 15 December 2014 - 12:15 PM, said:

and this is were, i feel, your wrong. a timberwolf would still pack ASSAULTLEVEL FIREPOWER, because clantech is lighter and needs less slots, still no perfect symmetry, but the range advantage would be gone. still superior, but only in one category. or at least reduce the range advantage to acceptable level like 5%...maybe 10%.

removing the huge clan range advanatge would be the easiest way to bring IS and clans closer, but then maybe IS autocannons would need the clan treatment, too. the clan weapons are allready hot enough, making them hotter would only hurt the allready "underperforming" mechs.

edit: and they still have the clan xl engine advantage...so, still far superior in speed, surviveability, and firepower...no need to give them a huge range advanatge.

See above. I usually don't go for just the "easiest" way.

Edited by Mystere, 15 December 2014 - 12:31 PM.

[Whiteagle]

Hullen Low, on 15 December 2014 - 11:25 AM, said:

Much of the IS problems are on the ice map, and mainly due to terrain issues. Today our IS attacking force lost three mechs just trying to open the first gate, Direwolves and TImberwolves sniping them from behind the gate. I often take fire just running from the drop point to the gates in subsequent waves.

Some minor adjustments in the topography can make that map much more balanced for IS vs Clan games, no changes need to the mechs themselves.

Honestly Boreal Vault (Ice Map) is a wash as a map.
The Generators are too low behind the Gate, so you need to be right on top of the Gate to hit them...
...Which leaves you exposed to Sniping...
PLUS, once you get a Gate down, they BOTH funnel into the SAME Bottleneck, which is RIGHT at the foot of the hill the Defenders spawn on.

And once a Gate IS down, the Defenders usually come out to Snipe the Attackers on their long, OPEN walk from their Drop Point.

[MischiefSC]

IS vs IS is switching more planets faster than Clans rolling IS. Biggest losses are for Steiner, that is largely because Steiner is thin on dedicated house units right now and has several Clan fronts to deal with.

IS beats Clans just fine. I expected it to be much worse; it's really not.

[Davegt27]

Clydewinder, on 15 December 2014 - 07:21 AM, said:

I have 12 or 13 drops in CW so far, and the IS vs IS are great. Good tactics, brawling, etc. The battles feel right, which is something the game has been missing.

However, all of the attacks against clanners are total goat ropes. I'll select a Defend mission, it will turn into a counter attack on the ice planet and without fail our team will be down 3 mechs before the gate is even open.

By the time I get to my 3rd mech, the clan mechs have already camped our drop ship spawns.

It's very discouraging to wait that long for a match and then just get slaughtered. Every match is 36 stormcrows and 12 timberwolves with few variations.

I expect the normal barrage of "learn to play L2P" responses that are the automatic reply to every thread on MWO...

...but it's a GAME people, it should be fun.

In the meantime, I'm done with IS vs Clan battles until something changes.

I agree but I really want to talk about how to improve my drop deck and my tactics

So far with my drop deck I can open a gate alone and make it to the gun most times

But it’s getting harder as they nerf LRM's and adapt to the light rush

[Kutfroat]

Mystere, on 15 December 2014 - 12:26 PM, said:

But that can be simulated by, for example, making battles tougher for clans the deeper in they go into the Inner Sphere, be it by numbers, tonnage, terrain, available defenses, logistics, or some other form of asymmetry.

Now is the perfect opportunity to look into those things.





See above. I usually don't go for just the "easiest" way.

doesn´t work in a multiplayer shooter. no one wants to gimp himself. might work in real time strategy or turn based strategy, but not in a shooter. clan players would get more kills, damage, exp. and cbills and they even would have the bragging rights in a loss...

[AlmightyAeng]

Whiteagle, on 15 December 2014 - 12:29 PM, said:

Honestly Boreal Vault (Ice Map) is a wash as a map.
The Generators are too low behind the Gate, so you need to be right on top of the Gate to hit them...
...Which leaves you exposed to Sniping...
PLUS, once you get a Gate down, they BOTH funnel into the SAME Bottleneck, which is RIGHT at the foot of the hill the Defenders spawn on.

And once a Gate IS down, the Defenders usually come out to Snipe the Attackers on their long, OPEN walk from their Drop Point.

So...there are places to shoot the generator from where you can't be hit on Boreal.

And if you're funneling to the MIDDLE after exiting the gates you're doing it wrong.

MischiefSC, on 15 December 2014 - 11:40 AM, said:

I'll roll attack Clan units on Sulfur with IS units every day, I'll roll defense against Clan units on Boreal every day. Went 7 for 8 drops of IS pugs vs groups of Clanner organized units last night. It's about tactics, not firepower.

Attacking Clanners on Boreal though is the toughest row to hoe. It plays to all their strengths and you need a lot of coordination to get it done and if even 1 player on the IS side doesn't stick to the plan it can fall apart pretty quickly.

I've seen a lot of people get upset and bail on the IS vs Clan fights. A big part of it is that most the big units who bring the skills and familiarity with the organized tactics involved are sticking to IS vs IS, as defending other factions vs the Clans doesn't pay more and doesn't net my House any other benefit.

Best solution? Pay IS out a crap ton more for IS vs Clan engagements. Call it a 'Comstar Bonus'. Have it pay reasonably even on a loss and like 30% more on a win vs Clans and you'll suddenly see some big boys roll from the back field of the IS and wreck Clanner face.

I'm gonna disagree with you here. Defending against Clans on Boreal isn't the toughest. It's FUN. You can cover both gates easily and just leg the day away.

Defending against IS light packs the jump over Alpha on Sulfur. That's probably the worst case scenario.

Edited by Ghost Badger, 15 December 2014 - 12:53 PM.