330 replies to this topic

[Caustic Canid]

RG Notch, on 30 December 2014 - 02:04 PM, said:

And nobody who wants only strengths for clans and zero weaknesses?

I'm ok with balance for the sake of gameplay. At the moment clans and I.S. are the closest to balanced they've ever been. Even if one side has an advantage, it's entirely situational. Clans suck at brawling, I.S. sucks at sniping. The current maps (esp. Borreal) favor sniping. And thus favor clans.

People calling for lore in these threads seem to think that clan mechs should be = I.S. mechs AND clan pilots should get huge disadvantages, like much less drop weight or fewer mechs.

[pwnface]

ztac, on 30 December 2014 - 02:17 PM, said:

Well here we go again , clans are OP ... look closer at your IS mech's and there is where you will find most of the overpowered mechs these days!

There are countless posts and threads that point out why the IS if anyone has the edge (and in certain areas it is quite a big edge too). If you can't work out a good deck then that's your problem , If the team won't play as a team then that's the whole teams problem.

There are bad matches for both sides and good ones but that's is life (clans certainly have the higher cause to complain though).

I don't think either side should really be complaining right now, it is relatively well balanced right now.

[Splitpin]

Lukoi Banacek, on 30 December 2014 - 02:14 PM, said:

Such a great tool.

And Lukoi gets the double entendre award of the day.

[Demuder]

Strikeshadow, on 30 December 2014 - 12:20 PM, said:

Nice try, but the TB still out classes that by a ton. Not a bad build for what it is though

Funny how you even consider a C-UAC/10 something to be mimicked in an IS mech. It is next to useless, that's why no TBR uses it other than for the fun factor. Unlike of course the IS AC10. And those PPCs on the 3D are infinitely more useful than on a TBR - let alone on a Thunderbolt.

Unless of course by balance you mean exactly the same, in which case I don't see the point in having more than 2-3 chassis in the game.

Edited by Demuder, 30 December 2014 - 02:30 PM.

[pwnface]

Splitpin, on 30 December 2014 - 02:24 PM, said:

And Lukoi gets the double entendre award of the day.

I can't believe I missed that.

[Augustus Martelus II]

Nerf this and nerf that....they already did it enough....a lot of clan mechs would need love now....Take the Nova. Its mostly energy and it cant barely use it. Clan lights are aint made for fast rush, the faster is a med mech the Fenry 142 kph with not a lot of weapons (but i love it, did made a lot of good score with it)

Awesome and thunderbolt got their quirk since they are energy base chassis.

[Soul Brother]

You guys can have it out with all those Ryokens and Mad Cats. I'm just gonna sit here and keep on kicking space china and the blue fisters in the face.

They eat our Firestarters alive. Luckily we got the good old T-bolt 9S, otherwise we'd be in a worse way. Balance needs to be better than this, I mean. It's an FPS game, not TT. We get to choose our hit locations with all those long range weapons... Not to mention double the armor.

[RG Notch]

Caustic Canid, on 30 December 2014 - 02:21 PM, said:

I'm ok with balance for the sake of gameplay. At the moment clans and I.S. are the closest to balanced they've ever been. Even if one side has an advantage, it's entirely situational. Clans suck at brawling, I.S. sucks at sniping. The current maps (esp. Borreal) favor sniping. And thus favor clans.

People calling for lore in these threads seem to think that clan mechs should be = I.S. mechs AND clan pilots should get huge disadvantages, like much less drop weight or fewer mechs.

I'm not disagreeing, I'm just pointing out there are people out there that also want clan be be OP like in TT and 12 v 12. There are extremes of both arguments. Why people even engage with folks on the edge is silly to me, it's like talking synch drops with Mudhut or saying MWO isn't spot on perfect to Heffay. I just ignore them, and actually put the extremes like I mentioned on my ignore list. Nothing good comes from wasting time talking to people who are zealots.

[SickerthanSars]

Parkensis, on 30 December 2014 - 11:36 AM, said:

To follow true lore, the clan should be reduce either in weight drop (less than 240, or augment the IS mechs to 300) or it could be a Drop CW in numbers like 10 clan mech versus 12 IS mechs.

I have been playing CW for weeks now and we can see these battles against the clan mech are not balanced! They are faster, stronger, sturdier and better that any IS mech or group combined and rigthfully so!

But in Battletech (Mechwarrior) lore the clans have ways to respect. Like the Star system of drops, the chalenges, the bids, etc... They were ultimatly vanquished bit their code of honor and disipline and more. Here in this game the players (for most of them) have none of that to follow making this an uneven fight...

So until this is changed, I vote IS side boycotts CW altogether!
For myself I will no longer play CW until this is done proper!

Park.

Cant have your cake and eat it too, you wanna lower the clan tonnage #of mechs, un-nerf them and give them accurate tech advantage over the IS then, but if they did that there'd still be the same handful of posters crying about the clanners being broken OP in some way and that they're gunna boycott cw till its fixed.

[InspectorG]

BT =/= MWO.

[Deathlike]

Rebas Kradd, on 30 December 2014 - 01:34 PM, said:

10v12 is infeasible for a number of reasons, beyond the "PGI is lazy" excuse that's being vomited all over the Star Citizen forums right now.

Well, technically the graphics stuff shouldn't be that hard. The other stuff (actual balance) is a bit more complicated. I can excuse the latter a bit (it shouldn't even be considered because they have trouble as it is with existing stuff and it isn't going to solve things, but make the non-CW queues worse arguably).

Quote

It's a shame that there are so many individuals in the world with bad reasoning, who can't tell a scam from a slow-developing video game.

It could actually be both, depending on how you look at it.

[Revis Volek]

Zepster, on 30 December 2014 - 11:59 AM, said:

It's not that clan mechs are OP it's the numbers. Until they either put clans in stars or nerf the mechs it will never be balanced. Builds are traditional (as they should be) but the sheer number at the current 12v12 is the problem.

What numbers?

10v12 WONT WORK with the current Match Maker..... I dont know HOW MANY TIMES people will say this. Please research SOMETHING!

In fact since all you "Clams is OP" agenda fools are around why dont you start researching some threads before you make 700 of the same one. For starters if there is an issue and someone has brought it up the rest of you with no data and no real reason why are just spamming the **** out of everyone else with legitimate claims and reason even DATA!

If there is a problem im SURE they will address it. But like it was stated previoulsy no one had these complaints since the quirks and before CW came out. So what changed.....The game mode yes but not really Still shooting mechs and using cover just a few more things to blow up. But the real CHANGE and the real PROBLEM isnt the Clan mechs its the MAPS!

[ztac]

Said this before ... probably another one of the crowd that thinks it would be a good idea for the clans to start matches with one leg!

[Wildstreak]

Parkensis, on 30 December 2014 - 11:36 AM, said:

To follow true lore, the clan should be reduce either in weight drop (less than 240, or augment the IS mechs to 300) or it could be a Drop CW in numbers like 10 clan mech versus 12 IS mechs.

I have been playing CW for weeks now and we can see these battles against the clan mech are not balanced! They are faster, stronger, sturdier and better that any IS mech or group combined and rigthfully so!

But in Battletech (Mechwarrior) lore the clans have ways to respect. Like the Star system of drops, the chalenges, the bids, etc... They were ultimatly vanquished bit their code of honor and disipline and more. Here in this game the players (for most of them) have none of that to follow making this an uneven fight...

So until this is changed, I vote IS side boycotts CW altogether!
For myself I will no longer play CW until this is done proper!

Park.

I cannot agree because for this to be true, the maps have to be fine and they are not.
Sulforous seems OK, Boreal is too much of a shooting range design.
I do thank you for trying to treat this Beta as people should.

[Rebas Kradd]

Deathlike, on 30 December 2014 - 02:43 PM, said:

It could actually be both, depending on how you look at it.

I haven't seen a shred of real evidence for the case of MWO being a scam. At least nothing that couldn't be explained away by more credible theories, like PGI being understaffed, inexperienced, and hampered by a meddling developer.

Their biggest error thus far was the CW fiasco. That's now corrected.

[Deathlike]

Rebas Kradd, on 30 December 2014 - 02:53 PM, said:

I haven't seen a shred of real evidence for the case of MWO being a scam. At least nothing that couldn't be explained away by more credible theories, like PGI being understaffed, inexperienced, and hampered by a meddling developer.

It does't explain about "expanding" for Transverse, instead of expanding for MWO. Regardless of what you think about that situation, it's an awkward misstep that happened.

Quote

Their biggest error thus far was the CW fiasco. That's now corrected.

Not really.. there's a lot of things that have to be addressed on CW alone (there are plenty of obvious examples) so you can't quite claim that outright.

[Strikeshadow]

Demuder, on 30 December 2014 - 02:30 PM, said:

Funny how you even consider a C-UAC/10 something to be mimicked in an IS mech. It is next to useless, that's why no TBR uses it other than for the fun factor. Unlike of course the IS AC10. And those PPCs on the 3D are infinitely more useful than on a TBR - let alone on a Thunderbolt.

Unless of course by balance you mean exactly the same, in which case I don't see the point in having more than 2-3 chassis in the game.

I am using the CAC10, not the CUAC10. BTW, since you all think the build is bad, what is a good "sniper" or "mid-range" TBR build? Ya'll say clan mechs are poor at brawling and LRM boating, so that leaves sniping or mid-range fighting.

I can see using 2CERLLs, but the long duration of their fire makes them worse than CERPPCs imo. 3CERPPCs runs too hot. I don't like gauss rifles b/c of their charge up time. I'm thinking of using two CAC/5s and 4 CMPLs...

Edited by Strikeshadow, 30 December 2014 - 03:38 PM.

[ztac]

One other thing that escapes the OP is that he is trying to find a like for like in mechs..... So he has a problem there right away due to the mechs all being different and their WEIGHT!

Look at it this way ... you won't get a 3 TBR deck (2 at best) however you can get a 3 Thunderbolt deck for instance ,

So he needs to compare the deck for CW ... so maybe 2 TBR 1 SCR 1KFX vs 3TDR and the light of your choice that's 45tons or less..... well we all know that the KFX is nowhere on a par with the IS lights.

There are a lot of combinations for IS players ..... not so many for clans , especially if you didn't have clan wave 2 as well......

[Strikeshadow]

ztac, on 30 December 2014 - 03:46 PM, said:

One other thing that escapes the OP is that he is trying to find a like for like in mechs..... So he has a problem there right away due to the mechs all being different and their WEIGHT!

Look at it this way ... you won't get a 3 TBR deck (2 at best) however you can get a 3 Thunderbolt deck for instance ,

So he needs to compare the deck for CW ... so maybe 2 TBR 1 SCR 1KFX vs 3TDR and the light of your choice that's 45tons or less..... well we all know that the KFX is nowhere on a par with the IS lights.

There are a lot of combinations for IS players ..... not so many for clans , especially if you didn't have clan wave 2 as well......

The clan deck is frequently 3SC and 1 TBR...

[Mystere]

RG Notch, on 30 December 2014 - 02:04 PM, said:

And nobody who wants only strengths for clans and zero weaknesses?

It's called ***-for-tat.

Edited by Mystere, 30 December 2014 - 04:02 PM.