330 replies to this topic

[Rebas Kradd]

Deathlike, on 30 December 2014 - 03:08 PM, said:

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.

Awkward misstep, yes. Not an outright scam. Two different things.

And there's also the part where a developer having two sources of income can actually help both games. Russ mentioned in a town hall about how having only game is the worst thing that can happen to a dev house.

[Mystere]

Rebas Kradd, on 30 December 2014 - 04:08 PM, said:

Awkward misstep, yes. Not an outright scam. Two different things.

And there's also the part where a developer having two sources of income can actually help both games. Russ mentioned in a town hall about how having only game is the worst thing that can happen to a dev house.

I don't understand why people can't seem to grasp this very important concept.

[Roadbeer]

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.

[RG Notch]

Rebas Kradd, on 30 December 2014 - 04:08 PM, said:

Awkward misstep, yes. Not an outright scam. Two different things.

And there's also the part where a developer having two sources of income can actually help both games. Russ mentioned in a town hall about how having only game is the worst thing that can happen to a dev house.

I would say having a reputation so bad that your attempt to crowd fund a non hostage IP crashes and burns would be the worst thing and Russ would know a thing or two about that.

[Tumbling Dice]

Sooooooo, why doesn't my quote button allow me to quote instead of just posting a reply to the entire thread?

[pwnface]

Strikeshadow, on 30 December 2014 - 03:16 PM, said:

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...

2ERLL + 5xERML
2LPL + 5xERML
5ML + Gauss
2ERPPC + Gauss
4ERML + 4xSRM4/6
6SPL + 4xSRM4/6

These are all great builds that are popular with good players today. Clan AC10 sucks bad, especially when using just one.

Edited by pwnface, 30 December 2014 - 04:39 PM.

[Strikeshadow]

pwnface, on 30 December 2014 - 04:39 PM, said:

2ERLL + 5xERML
2LPL + 5xERML
5ML + Gauss
2ERPPC + Gauss
4ERML + 4xSRM4/6
6SPL + 4xSRM4/6

These are all great builds that are popular with good players today. Clan AC10 sucks bad, especially when using just one.

So the sniper build must use a Gauss to be effective & most of those builds are brawler builds. Is the TB a good brawler despite being clan? I went ahead and bought the Gauss, but it sure seems awkward to use.

Edited by Strikeshadow, 30 December 2014 - 06:17 PM.

[pwnface]

Gauss is an excellent sniper weapon for clans and generates no heat, it complements clan hotter energy weapons nicely. The laser vomit builds are more medium/long range poke mechs and not exactly suitable for sniping or brawling.

[Strikeshadow]

pwnface, on 30 December 2014 - 06:26 PM, said:

Gauss is an excellent sniper weapon for clans and generates no heat, it complements clan hotter energy weapons nicely. The laser vomit builds are more medium/long range poke mechs and not exactly suitable for sniping or brawling.

Now if it weren't for the random maps, it sure would be easier to choose a good build.

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

Strikeshadow, on 30 December 2014 - 06:56 PM, said:

Now if it weren't for the random maps, it sure would be easier to choose a good build.

Gauss and ERMLs for the clans are the best weapons in the game because the Clan Gauss is ton for ton the best ballistic in the game and the ERMLs are 1 ton, 1 crit IS larges.


TBR-C
TBR-S
TBR-PRIME

Those are my three builds. Those are also my three top builds in terms of performance.

Edited by Lord Scarlett Johan, 30 December 2014 - 07:28 PM.

[ice trey]

I too, would rather see a more canonical Trinary/Binary versus Company fights, though on tabletop, a Company of inner sphere mechs is usually about equal to a Star of clan mechs (5) of equal tonnage. Of course, canon goes both ways, so the drop bay should be bumped up to five mechs for clanners.

A different course of action I'd like to see is offer clan players the option to "Bid Down" the number of mechs they can use in a fight. Sure, they start with five, but taking all five slots would reap them very few rewards. Instead, offer the option to "Bid down" and reduce the number of drops that they can have in a given game, so a mechwarrior dropping with all 5 Omnimechs will not reap many loyalty points, experience, match points, or C-bills. It should be enough of a handicap that it makes it undesirable for anything but "Taking one for the team", even when the match is won. A mechwarrior dropping with 4 should break about even with the inner sphere. However, from that point forward, the benefits reaped should be enough that even experienced players should want to reduce their drop decks to what they think is the minimum safe value.

Though this mechanic would be meaningless in the event of a ghost drop, so no effect in order to prevent ghost drop exploits..

Edited by ice trey, 30 December 2014 - 08:23 PM.

[Wildstreak]

Wolfiac, on 30 December 2014 - 04:27 PM, said:

Sooooooo, why doesn't my quote button allow me to quote instead of just posting a reply to the entire thread?

If this happens, F5 to reload the page and try again.

[GutterBoy5]

I think a good way to simulate IS greatly out number CLAN would be give clan 3waves not 4 at a slight weight tonnage decrease .& IS should have air strike & artillery avail (home ground advantage) . But clans should then get some cbill bonus if still win under some "invader bonus".
I personally have no issue with current set up , but I know a lot of ppl not happy with 12v12 as lore would be 10 v12 or something like that. Just thought this may be easiest/fairest way around it.

Just a thought

[Threat Doc]

I'll also join you in boycotting it, this time for the Clan 'Mechs being way overpowered, but the maps are borked, the premise behind the fight, whether on offense or defense is borked, and there's much more that could be done, here. I have played a few matches where my team came out on top, but the fight was so difficult to deal with. The premise of forty-eight 'Mechs per side, as opposed to a specialized force performing objective-based missions with fewer 'Mechs and a more straight-forward premise to the missions, is silly. I had hoped for a lot more from both Phase One and Phase Two; what I have found, instead, is a newfound love for the PUG matches, and a greatly reduced time in-game and a greatly reduced desire to spend anything. PGI needs to get into the books -especially Mercs Handbook and MH: 3055- and find out how Community Warfare really needs to be done. If they're going to have their logo, with the words "A BattleTech Game" beneath it, and they want to live up to the moniker of "A thinking man's game", they're going to have to impress me with Phase Three.

[xe N on]

The only thing that is overpowered in this game is hit detection ... if you have the luck to get some

Edited by xe N on, 30 December 2014 - 11:36 PM.

[EvilCow]

In my opinion clan mechs should not be nerfed anymore, probably some limitations could be lifted.

What should be done is to balance CW, not technology, and this could be obtained in several ways, my preferred one would be tonnage balance. Imagine (numbers thrown there as example) that IS would keep 240tons while clans would get 200tons BUT clans would have the option to drop 3 mechs instead of 4 in order to not cut assaults out of the battlefield.

This way they could have their tech and have all the options available for drops. The tonnage balance has an additional advantage, it could be tweaked relatively easily in case it is overdone or insufficient.

[Deathlike]

Rebas Kradd, on 30 December 2014 - 04:08 PM, said:

Awkward misstep, yes. Not an outright scam. Two different things.

Some people may consider it different. I do not "share" in the scam idea... as I said, it depends on your outlook on the game.

Quote

And there's also the part where a developer having two sources of income can actually help both games. Russ mentioned in a town hall about how having only game is the worst thing that can happen to a dev house.

That only can be true if the potential is there. Having seen the "fundraising" for that, it wasn't even close to happening. Also hiring those people for the job, then soon after firing them, does actually cost the company money. All of which isn't exactly the most rectifiable in any sort of immediacy.

Edited by Deathlike, 31 December 2014 - 01:25 AM.

[G SE7EN7]

The only thing that is wrong with CW is the maps. Sulfur Rift is ok, needs a few tweaks but Boreal is a terrible design.

Ive been beaten and have beaten both clans and IS on both maps and done it in a group and solo. Its not the tech its the maps, maybe even the objectives need reworking. I dont have the data.

[Bregor Edain]

Strikeshadow, on 30 December 2014 - 03:16 PM, said:

I am using the CAC10, not the CUAC10.

I do not see one reason to prefer the regular C-AC over the C-UAC. The are the same in regards of tonnage, slots and firing rate. The only thing the normal AC does not do is jam if you double tap but the abillity to double tap more than makes up for occasional jamming. The normal AC is a placeholder for swapable ammo in the LBX weapons anyway.

[ice trey]

G SE7EN7, on 31 December 2014 - 01:46 AM, said:

The only thing that is wrong with CW is the maps. Sulfur Rift is ok, needs a few tweaks but Boreal is a terrible design.

Ive been beaten and have beaten both clans and IS on both maps and done it in a group and solo. Its not the tech its the maps, maybe even the objectives need reworking. I dont have the data.

I think I agree with this one.

For Boreal, you have vast open terrain with little cover on the approach, few approach options that can both be watched at the same time, all attacker movement is uphill, and to boot, you have reduced heat concerns. It's like a recipe for success for the Clans if they're put on defense, and a recipe for failure for the Inner Sphere when pitted against the clans.

On the flip side, on Sulfrous, you have noticible cover options, more approach options, you need to send mechs to watch the various entry points, and the map is hotter. Overall, this is the best chance you have at success if you're on the offensive as an Inner Sphere player, and helps to reduce clan mech effectiveness by reducing the ranges the clans can hit from.

Now, that's not to say that the clans are guaranteed success on Alpine defense, but they certainly are starting with a good hand. With a 50-50 chance of being put on a map where they're at a distinct advantage over IS players, it's no surprise why so many groups and players just outright refuse to play against the clans right now.