594 replies to this topic

[Bishop Steiner]

beerandasmoke, on 12 February 2015 - 10:32 PM, said:

Does PGI not understand that people bought and ground out the Wolverine 6K specifically for those LPL quirks? Why would I even bother with this mech with LL quirks? The Shadowhawk K does everything better with JJs in the same weight class. Not even going to mention the money invested to put modules on this thing for CW.

PGI should be quirking mechs according to what makes them viable and competitive ingame not according to the "stock" loadout. Most of the mechs that had decent stockloadouts were the Unseen which arent allowed ingame. The vast majority of the player base will not drive a subpar mech that gets you blown away no matter what people on twitter say.

I would seriously consider not dropping this quirkening and rethinking the whole "stock quirks" mentality. Give the 9S a heat reduction to 35% and adjust accordingly. Spend your time working on hitreg, hitboxes, and more content for players ingame instead.

And you speak for them, do you?

Ace Selin, on 12 February 2015 - 10:33 PM, said:

It already couldn't handle quick, close up engagements, now the Clans rule from long to close range again.

No offense, but bull crap.

@7.5 heat, it was knocking out 20 then 10 pp-fld every 2seconds, with more than enough heat endurance even on hot maps. It was fang good at any range, any map.

Adiuvo, on 12 February 2015 - 10:32 PM, said:

Do you honestly think that's possible to do while maintaining viability? The differences between certain mech variants are too small for that, and if you want things to reflect stock there's even less that you can do. Certain stock loadouts will never be viable either without changes to weapon mechanics. This is most obvious when comparing stock loadouts of the various Battlemasters. How are you going to differentiate the 1D and the 1G while keeping their stock loadouts in mind?

yeah, I do.

Just like mechs with homogenous stock weapons had hardpoints differentiated by inflating different aspect of the armament, so to, you simply focus the quirks on different aspects of the weapons or focus on differing weapons systems as the primary focus.

Is it perfect? Nope. But better than the alternative.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 12 February 2015 - 10:41 PM.

[beerandasmoke]

Bishop Steiner, on 12 February 2015 - 10:40 PM, said:

And you speak for them, do you?



No offense, but bull crap.

@7.5 heat, it was knocking out 20 then 10 pp-fld every 2seconds, with more than enough heat endurance even on hot maps. It was fang good at any range, any map.


yeah, I do.

Just like mechs with homogenous stock weapons had hardpoints differentiated by inflating different aspect of the armament, so to, you simply focus the quirks on different aspects of the weapons or focus on differing weapons systems as the primary focus.

Is it perfect? Nope. But better than the alternative.

You think you do Stock guy? Seems to me that the evidence is on my side on what the playerbase wants. Afterall who ran Wolverines and Thunders before the quirkening? The quirks made them viable and competitive even with subpar hardpoint placement. Therefore they were used more. Now if this comes to pass they will be garaged again and all that time and effort the devs spent on bringing them ingame will be wasted.

[Adiuvo]

Bishop Steiner, on 12 February 2015 - 10:40 PM, said:

Just like mechs with homogenous stock weapons had hardpoints differentiated by inflating different aspect of the armament, so to, you simply focus the quirks on different aspects of the weapons or focus on differing weapons systems as the primary focus.

Is it perfect? Nope. But better than the alternative.

The 1D and the 1G have the same loadout minus 2 medium lasers. Decreasing the cooldown for one and the heat for another isn't likely to create any balance median, nor does the loadout make sense in MWO to begin with.

[Bishop Steiner]

Adiuvo, on 12 February 2015 - 10:48 PM, said:

The 1D and the 1G have the same loadout minus 2 medium lasers. Decreasing the cooldown for one and the heat for another isn't likely to create any balance median, nor does the loadout make sense in MWO to begin with.

yes in your Minmax opinion.

Perhaps some people think it's time to change that broken tune?

beerandasmoke, on 12 February 2015 - 10:45 PM, said:

You think you do Stock guy? Seems to me that the evidence is on my side on what the playerbase wants. Afterall who ran Wolverines and Thunders before the quirkening? The quirks made them viable and competitive even with subpar hardpoint placement. Therefore they were used more. Now if this comes to pass they will be garaged again and all that time and effort the devs spent on bringing them ingame will be wasted.

You're Making the claim. Prove it. If you do, I'm sure Russ will listen.

I don't think he is just deciding to make theses changes on a whim, or because I asked him nicely. Not a good marketing strategy. Last 2 quirk passes where to appese Metawhores. Since he decided to adjust a different way, that would imply that likely their marketing said the previous way wasn't working. Because if it was making them money? They wouldn't change.

[Gas Guzzler]

So what do you guys think would make Highlanders viable for competitive play again?

How about the CTF-3D?

[Mcgral18]

Gas Guzzler, on 12 February 2015 - 10:52 PM, said:

So what do you guys think would make Highlanders viable for competitive play again?

How about the CTF-3D?

Fixing the HoverJets™?

It would help a little bit, at any rate.

[Adiuvo]

Bishop Steiner, on 12 February 2015 - 10:52 PM, said:

yes in your Minmax opinion.

Perhaps some people think it's time to change that broken tune?

...what?

What in the world do you think viability is based on?

[Piney II]

I would love to see the CTF-3D brought back to being viable. Looks like I'll just have to try it out.

[beerandasmoke]

Gas Guzzler, on 12 February 2015 - 10:52 PM, said:

So what do you guys think would make Highlanders viable for competitive play again?

How about the CTF-3D?

The only thing its good for is poptarting. Some kind of mobility or JJ quirks would possibly make people use it again.

[MikeBend]

I still wont drop LPL from my Raven-2X. Screw the tonnage, screw range nerf, scew the heat, we are talking about LPL that has a shorter duration than unquirked SPL!

[Bishop Steiner]

Adiuvo, on 12 February 2015 - 10:55 PM, said:

...what?

What in the world do you think viability is based on?

it CAN be based on any number of things. See that's kinda the point of balance. If the only viable builds are those that boat only one weapon? Not balanced. If only weapon X is "viable"? Not balanced.

Since any number of things can be tweaked, depending on what the Devs feel the desired goal is, believe it or not, "minmaxxing" is not the end all be all of all things.

[Adiuvo]

Bishop Steiner, on 12 February 2015 - 10:58 PM, said:

it CAN be based on any number of things. See that's kinda the point of balance. If the only viable builds are those that boat only one weapon? Not balanced. If only weapon X is "viable"? Not balanced.

Since any number of things can be tweaked, depending on what the Devs feel the desired goal is, believe it or not, "minmaxxing" is not the end all be all of all things.

Based off of what things if not the quality of the weapons and how the loadout synergizes as a whole?

Furthermore why is boating innately unbalanced? Who made this call exactly?

Edited by Adiuvo, 12 February 2015 - 11:04 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Adiuvo, on 12 February 2015 - 11:02 PM, said:

Based off of what things if not the quality of the weapons and how the loadout synergizes as a whole?

Furthermore why is boating innately unbalanced? Who made this call exactly?

why is boating desirable as the only way? Who made THAT call, exactly?

More to the point, why should boating being innately more desirable to a mixed loadout? Please, oh master of how I should play MWO, tell me?

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 12 February 2015 - 11:04 PM.

[Kodyn]

Gas Guzzler, on 12 February 2015 - 10:52 PM, said:

So what do you guys think would make Highlanders viable for competitive play again?

How about the CTF-3D?

For both they experience hitbox issues..each can be tanky with skilled piloting and the right builds, but they have magnetic spots that suck in enemy shots at an alarming rate. Either or both could use some CT or RT/LT armor, to either give an advantage to STD or XL builds, because right now, neither is really preferential based on hitboxes and quirks.

The HGN in particular could use some interesting weapons buffs as well, as the AC/20 build really can't compete that well, so maybe some overall ballistic and energy, nothing too extreme. LPLs and AC/5s are a decent build nowadays, could be competitive with the right quirks.

And the obvious, JJ being more useful, and providing better thrust at 1 JJ would be great for both, as that's usually all that either can fit.

[beerandasmoke]

Bishop Steiner, on 12 February 2015 - 10:58 PM, said:

it CAN be based on any number of things. See that's kinda the point of balance. If the only viable builds are those that boat only one weapon? Not balanced. If only weapon X is "viable"? Not balanced.

Since any number of things can be tweaked, depending on what the Devs feel the desired goal is, believe it or not, "minmaxxing" is not the end all be all of all things.

Viable on one variant. We have a couple of hundred mechs in this game. Having a few that serve a niche role and do it very well doesnt harm anything. Especially when the variant is subpar to start with. Giving a variant subpar quirks when there are better options available in the same weight class means it will not be used. Quirking the mechs ingame according to thier stock loadouts is just nuts.

[Adiuvo]

Bishop Steiner, on 12 February 2015 - 11:03 PM, said:

why is boating desirable as the only way? Who made THAT call, exactly?

You didn't answer the question.

Regardless, it's not the only way. Look at the TImberwolf for a good example of good mechs with good builds that use a variety of weapons in those good builds. Or the Daishi. Or the Stormcrow. Or the King Crab. Or various other things.

[MikeBend]

Thats some unbalanced boating, right there.

[Bishop Steiner]

beerandasmoke, on 12 February 2015 - 11:04 PM, said:

Viable on one variant. We have a couple of hundred mechs in this game. Having a few that serve a niche role and do it very well doesnt harm anything. Especially when the variant is subpar to start with. Giving a variant subpar quirks when there are better options available in the same weight class means it will not be used. Quirking the mechs ingame according to thier stock loadouts is just nuts.

ah. So, can't actually answer, so ad hominem. KTHX.

[Mordin Ashe]

As always there is the good, the bad and the ugly.



Naaaah, just kidding, everything looks solid :-) nice job PGI

[Gas Guzzler]

Mcgral18, on 12 February 2015 - 10:55 PM, said:

Fixing the HoverJets™?

It would help a little bit, at any rate.

It would help, but i think they need a bit more honestly. Especially the 733P that doesn't have a ballistic hardpoint. Typically to get max Jump Jets and a decent loadout you have to have an XL engine, and with all the clan alpha strikes nowadays that is a huge liability for a mech with that kind of mobility.