36 replies to this topic

[Lexx]

I think CW drop decks should have a limit of one of each chassis max.

The problem of certain mechs being OP would be reduced if you could only take one of them instead of "maxing the meta" and taking duplicate mechs. No more 3 Thunderbolt or 4 Storm Crow or more than 2 Timber Wolves per drop deck. Players would actually have to be creative and use something other than the top few mechs.

Groups could still spam 12 of the same mech, but only for one drop instead of the 3+ drops like they are doing now.

[Lord Ikka]

Thats actually a pretty good idea. Definitely would shake up some of the drop decks.

[ApolloKaras]

I would support this idea. It would hit the clans pretty hard atm. I would implement this after the wave 2 mechs are out for cbills.

[Lukoi Banacek]

I vote no.

A horrible idea.

Dropdecs being limited are due to a number of balancing factors and availability factors (espcially on the Clan side -- if we had more mechs to choose from that were not so polarizing, you would see more variety).

Limiting to 1 of each chassis with the current tonnage limits would restrict people to largely the best meta mech available in each class. Not an any better scenario...then it just becomes a rock-paper-scissors match of guess which of your 12-best synergized weight groups to bring and hope they bring the wave of mechs you have the best chance against. That's actually less choices than we have now.

Limiting to 1 of each chassis without the tonnage limits will make it even worse. How many DWF's do you see now? Well...that number is about to go up dramatically. Why take any other assault for the most part. TBR's will completely rule the heavy class for Clans (they almost do now, this will again, only make it worse). Only SCR's and then the KTF/MLX silliness we all know and love.

Right now, you see mostly SCR's because the other Clan mediums are so bad in comparison. We need another one or two that while not SCR level awesome, might be decent in comparison to some of the lesser, but heavily quirked IS mechs. Same with the TBR/HBR situation, the assaults etc.

If you limit by chassis, you will coerce IS players into playing ONLY the best option available, not expand what we see on the field.

If there's been one thing worth noting about IS players is that they make full use of their variety with the quirkening (which is why they share alot of chassis, especially in the medium/light and assault categories), which is often to their detriment when people insist on taking LRM-centurions and XL-engine atlas. Some chassis are just not forgiving of "frankenmeching" in community warfare.

This would remove even that level of variety imo. Prepare for FS9, Quirked-55's (SHD, GRF, WVR), the TDR-9S (oh by the way, you're killing their opportunity to use the great 5SS here or vice versa) and a Stalker...misery or missile boat.

Variety on the field gets worse with this suggestion imo.

And it does nothing, NOTHING to remove the meta-game/min-maxer boogie-man. Because the min-maxers will merely take the best 12 of what remains under your more restrictive rules and continue to play to win.

[ApolloKaras]

Lukoi I believe he intends to keep the tonnage limit.

I mean currently my IS desk is 3 Tbolts and a Firestarter, my clan Deck is 3 Crows and a Timber. While I agree that you will see other mechs I would agree also that you will see min max in another way. However I think the basis for the compliant (all the Tbolts and crows) is that we would see other mechs with this suggestion.

Edited by Saxie, 07 February 2015 - 11:04 AM.

[TercieI]

"Hardcore mode."

No.

[Lukoi Banacek]

You will see the same proportionality of OP mechs as you do now, if not worse.

With tonnage limits, it's just as bad. Remove the tonnage limits, even more so.

Restriction such as this does NOT increase variety. Balanced options does.

So my IS DROPDEC is similar. 3 x TDR and a 5D for the ECM. With this rule, I will merely take the same top tier mech in each weight class and when we run our 12 man it will be the same experience for opponents.

Still a wave of 5D/FS9
One less TDR wave, but now a wave of quirked 55T's based on our strategy.
Then a wave of TDR 9S or 5SS
Then a wave of the best Assault remaining.

You are pigeonholing EVERYONE in the hopes of breaking the play-2-win mentality of min-maxers and you will not do that. Casual players will get lambasted much as they do now for bringing the "wrong" mechs just as badly or worse and the gen-rushing/attrition techniques we see currently will not change much. This does not promote variety really and instead penalizes all of the "casual" player base even further.

There's a couple of decades of proven online gaming that demonstrates this repeatedly.

More balanced options promotes variety better than restrictions. It's part of the reason I was reasonably in favor of the quirkening. I mean, I felt they could have gone another way to promote IS "non-meta" mechs, but they chose this route and it opened up the game.

[Lily from animove]

what would tio change? the diversity would now be 4 different chassis, yet it would not change the fact that nearly every dropdekc looks the same. And thats the initial issue: mechs obsoleting others being a no brianchoice over others. mech balance is needed anything else is a band aid fix.

you will on clanside now start to see: TBR, SCR, MDD/HBR something else.

[ApolloKaras]

Lukoi Banacek, on 07 February 2015 - 11:11 AM, said:

You will see the same proportionality of OP mechs as you do now, if not worse.

With tonnage limits, it's just as bad. Remove the tonnage limits, even more so.

Restriction such as this does NOT increase variety. Balanced options does.

So my IS DROPDEC is similar. 3 x TDR and a 5D for the ECM. With this rule, I will merely take the same top tier mech in each weight class and when we run our 12 man it will be the same experience for opponents.

Still a wave of 5D/FS9
One less TDR wave, but now a wave of quirked 55T's based on our strategy.
Then a wave of TDR 9S or 5SS
Then a wave of the best Assault remaining.

You are pigeonholing EVERYONE in the hopes of breaking the play-2-win mentality of min-maxers and you will not do that. Casual players will get lambasted much as they do now for bringing the "wrong" mechs just as badly or worse and the gen-rushing/attrition techniques we see currently will not change much. This does not promote variety really and instead penalizes all of the "casual" player base even further.

There's a couple of decades of proven online gaming that demonstrates this repeatedly.

More balanced options promotes variety better than restrictions. It's part of the reason I was reasonably in favor of the quirkening. I mean, I felt they could have gone another way to promote IS "non-meta" mechs, but they chose this route and it opened up the game.

Then the only thing you could do is quirk the 9S differently, and you would have to do something with the Nova to make it comparable to the crow. Even then it's a competitive game, we will find the min max no matter the conditions. Think back to the 3/3/3/3 setup that they pushed out. There were quite a few folks against that too, saying that it was restrictive etc. Before that we never saw a light in a pug drop, we'll maybe one, definitely not 3 on a regular basis. It promoted play of different mechs. Though it means you will see 3 Firestarters lol.


In any case you have to pick your poison, nothing in this game will be completely balanced. There will always be that preference of one mech over another.


Edit autocorrect lol

Edited by Saxie, 07 February 2015 - 11:21 AM.

[Lukoi Banacek]

Saxie, on 07 February 2015 - 11:20 AM, said:

Then the only thing you could do is quirk the 9S differently, and you would have to do something with the Nova to make it comparable to the crow. Even then it's a competitive game, we will find the min max no matter the conditions.

You literally just made my point. Bring more mechs into a competitive state and people will choose variety naturally. I have one of the best pilots in the game, McGral18 in SA. He loves his damned Novas. Can make them work under almost any conditions. Needless to say, he realizes they are a gimped mech. So sometimes he pilots them in CW, but when the real competition shows up into queue, he knows to goto something else. Make the Nova just better enough, and poof, it's less of an albatross around folks necks and suddenly they get played. Ala the quirkening.

Saxie, on 07 February 2015 - 11:20 AM, said:

Think back to the 3/3/3/3 setup that they pushed out. There were quite a few folks against that too, saying that it was restrictive etc. Before that we never saw a light in a pug drop, we'll maybe one, definitely not 3 on a regular basis. It promoted play of different mechs. Though it means you will see 3 Firestarters lol.

Really, because I don't remember it that way at all. How long did 3x4 last? Because the light queue is still amazingly low and 3x4 broke almost upon implementation. It's certainly not followed now. So pointing to a failed experiment as a lesson in balance is probably a bad idea Sax .

More restrictions in this game will not remove min-maxers or their tactics and builds. MORE options give greater flexibility and reduce the relevance of min-maxing. That's the point.

Yer right, perfect balance is unattainable. More parity is approachable. Work to parity, expand the options of players. That creates the variety in DROPDECs folks seek. Not more restrictions.

Edited by Lukoi Banacek, 07 February 2015 - 11:29 AM.

[Monkey Lover]

Terciel1976, on 07 February 2015 - 11:07 AM, said:

"Hardcore mode."

No.

we can't really call.this hardcore mode. They already limited us as I can't bring 4ddc mechs.


I would like to see planets with weird requirements. Maybe only 4lights, 1of.each class,unlimited,150ton,300ton and so on. This would mix it up and you could still play what you wanted at some point.

[Screech]

Been mentioned many times and I have never liked it. Forcing people to play mechs they do not want is not a good idea. I do not want to play in an Assault in CW and forcing me to would greatly reduce my desire to play CW.

[wanderer]

Doing this would vastly increase the grind time for many pilots, especially Clan ones. You'd have to get four different chassis types (minimal) to master, meaning each would take 3 'Mechs worth of building to get there.

That's downright sadistic.

[Monkey Lover]

wanderer, on 07 February 2015 - 11:56 AM, said:

Doing this would vastly increase the grind time for many pilots, especially Clan ones. You'd have to get four different chassis types (minimal) to master, meaning each would take 3 'Mechs worth of building to get there.

That's downright sadistic.

If I was selling mechs and mechbays I know I would have other feelings about that haha.

[Wing 0]

Lexx, on 07 February 2015 - 10:31 AM, said:

I think CW drop decks should have a limit of one of each chassis max.

The problem of certain mechs being OP would be reduced if you could only take one of them instead of "maxing the meta" and taking duplicate mechs. No more 3 Thunderbolt or 4 Storm Crow or more than 2 Timber Wolves per drop deck. Players would actually have to be creative and use something other than the top few mechs.

Groups could still spam 12 of the same mech, but only for one drop instead of the 3+ drops like they are doing now.

Right now PGI had expanded its BAD flaws with the new mode. I am personally not seeing any more fun out of this game untill the nerfs have been taken place. yes PGI is at fault for this and they know it. They made it worse. Right now I honestly DGAF about someone from NGNG stating that Clans or I.S being OP but they really need to look at the game from the other perspective than looking at it from a so called competative gaming.

[Malcolm Vordermark]

The Clans could easily switch to something like Timber Wolf, Stormcrow, Hellbringer, and have 45 tons left over for whatever 4th they want.

Essentially, my concern is that the IS would be hurt more by being limited to how many Thunderbolts they can bring than the Clans would by making them take a different combination of their fantastic heavy and medium mechs.

[TercieI]

Monkey Lover, on 07 February 2015 - 11:52 AM, said:

we can't really call.this hardcore mode. They already limited us as I can't bring 4ddc mechs.


I would like to see planets with weird requirements. Maybe only 4lights, 1of.each class,unlimited,150ton,300ton and so on. This would mix it up and you could still play what you wanted at some point.

X tons, no holds barred. Even RHOD doesn't allow unlimited tonnage. Hardcore mode fits, IMO. I don't think anyone really wants AssaultWarriorOnline.

[Ax2Grind]

Bad idea OP. Limiting the drop deck to only 1 of each chassis does nothing to help game play, nor will it ever stop folks from maxing out whatever is available if they want to to take the time to do so. Instead it would be much more interesting to see planetary restrictions or various tonnage restrictions. With more game modes and map types, folks will be inspired to run with different mechs. Part of the reason certain mechs get spammed is the very limited available game play for CW. As that changes so will the drop decks to match it. As more weapon balancing is done, and quirks added or adjusted, you will naturally see a change in drop decks.

[Lukoi Banacek]

Rouken, on 07 February 2015 - 12:19 PM, said:

The Clans could easily switch to something like Timber Wolf, Stormcrow, Hellbringer, and have 45 tons left over for whatever 4th they want.

Essentially, my concern is that the IS would be hurt more by being limited to how many Thunderbolts they can bring than the Clans would by making them take a different combination of their fantastic heavy and medium mechs.

You guys realize TBR and HBR are in the same weight class, so no they could not

Either HBR or TBR but not both in OP's version of the game.

[Gorgo7]

Lexx, on 07 February 2015 - 10:31 AM, said:

I think CW drop decks should have a limit of one of each chassis max.

The problem of certain mechs being OP would be reduced if you could only take one of them instead of "maxing the meta" and taking duplicate mechs. No more 3 Thunderbolt or 4 Storm Crow or more than 2 Timber Wolves per drop deck. Players would actually have to be creative and use something other than the top few mechs.

Groups could still spam 12 of the same mech, but only for one drop instead of the 3+ drops like they are doing now.

I don't like it. As I type this i am putting together 3 Wolverines and a Catapult for a drop deck. You are trying to tell me that I may only take one of my three different Wolverines?
Forget it. It is a terrible idea.
If you buy three of anything you should be allowed to take it. They are after all yours. Plus, you paid for the Mech bays.
Again, bad idea.