594 replies to this topic

[Fate 6]

Bishop Steiner, on 13 February 2015 - 08:32 AM, said:

It's nice to know I have so much sway that I have singlehandedly changed the whole game and am causing it to crash and burn.

There you go again trying to make this about you and your ego

Bishop Steiner, on 13 February 2015 - 08:36 AM, said:

And that is a pretty narrow way to take what I am saying. Again, believe what you will.

Why does a mech being focused on what it came from have to mean alternate armaments have to be excluded? Oddly, I run an LRM15 on my Vindicator instead of the HEAVILY quirked PPC. Because I find for my playstyle, it works better. Despite the quirks. My SIB, I run Pulse LAsers on. The Quirks are for Large LAsers. Again, don't see me campaigning for Pulse lAsers on it, do you?

So tell me why the Centurion AL should be BETTER with PPCs or LPL than with the Large LAser it comes with? Or, why the thought of it being good with a PPC or LPL; but REAL good with a LArge LAser scares you?

And once again you just make your argument make less sense than it already does

[Bishop Steiner]

Fate 6, on 13 February 2015 - 08:36 AM, said:

What you're describing is what weapon modules do anyway. It doesn't create noticeable differences in mechs. 3SRMs+6ML with extra range on one mech doesn't feel different compared to 3SRMs+6ML with reduced heat on another mech. Sure it functions slightly differently but ultimately it's the same build and you're going to find that one is just better (SRM range is a bit of a joke) so you go with the better one 100% of the time now (yay less heat!)

No, I'm not.

Here's a crazy thought? I didn't change the quirks. I just ain't getting my panties in a knot over them. Because unlike apparently the rest of you, I kinda figured out, long ago, they would be changed,probably often, until PGI finds the right blend they thinks work.

Guess what? Their will be a quirkening 3.0, and other things will get changed, some maybe back to how they were.

Now you are just showing, "I want it that way, so I will argue".

HAve fun with that. Seriously.

[Fate 6]

WarHippy, on 13 February 2015 - 08:35 AM, said:

What are you talking about? When did I ever say you have sway of any kind with PGI? Feel free to be flattered all you want, but keep in mind those flattering remarks are products of your own imagination.

^this

[Kinski Orlawisch]

More changes than I thought....and what about the Clanmech Quircks?

[Fate 6]

Bishop Steiner, on 13 February 2015 - 08:39 AM, said:

No, I'm not.

Because unlike apparently the rest of you, I want it that way, so I will argue.

HAve fun with that. Seriously.

This is what I've gotten out of everything you've said in the last 24 hours, regardless of if I agree with your balance opinions or not.

[Torgun]

Fate 6, on 13 February 2015 - 08:29 AM, said:

Using the 5SS as an example, are you upset that building 7 medium lasers is less effective than building 7MPL on the same 5SS? Or are you upset that 7 medium lasers are less effective on the 5SS compared to 7 medium lasers on a HBK-4P?

In competitive play, obviously you will use the 7MPL build because that is the most effective loadout. In a general game, though, I fail to see how running something else isn't viable. Or are you trying to say you want the 7MPL build to literally be the same effectiveness as the 7ML build? Because then you're just saying you want all the weapons to be exactly the same and that's just not gonna happen. Some builds are going to be more effective, no matter what.

I guess I have to repeat my point again. I'm saying we have 5 darn CBill variants of Battlemasters and pushing ML quirks on 4 of them, and not a single Large laser or large pulse laser quirk is terrible for diversity. That is all.

[Bishop Steiner]

Fate 6, on 13 February 2015 - 08:38 AM, said:

There you go again trying to make this about you and your ego


And once again you just make your argument make less sense than it already does

actually, you're the one trying to make it about my ego. I'm the one pointing out the absurdity of arguing with me, since I didn't make the changes, and the narrowness of most of your perspectives and arguments. But since you know the one true way, please, spell it out for us plebian, illiterate masses.

Fate 6, on 13 February 2015 - 08:41 AM, said:

This is what I've gotten out of everything you've said in the last 24 hours, regardless of if I agree with your balance opinions or not.

Good for you. Feel free to add me to your ignore list. Problem solved.

Torgun, on 13 February 2015 - 08:42 AM, said:

I guess I have to repeat my point again. I'm saying we have 5 darn CBill variants of Battlemasters and pushing ML quirks on 4 of them, and not a single Large laser or large pulse laser quirk is terrible for diversity. That is all.

And I don't think I disagreed with the part that putting M lasers quirks on 5 was not good. I did say there are plenty of options BESIDE quirking it for weapons the thing never even came with.

Screw it. SMH.

[Torgun]

Bishop Steiner, on 13 February 2015 - 08:31 AM, said:

That''s not remotely what I said.

Let me try this again.

OK. We have mechs with Homogenous Weapons. The Victor and Battlemaster are two notable examples.
What did PGI do? They focused the Hardpoints to emphasize different weapon groups, thus one has more ballistics, another more energy.


There is no reason at all, they cannot use the same philosophy with the quirks on those homogenous weapons.
1 Battlemaster, the Quirks focus primarily on it's PPC. Another Battlemaster, the quirks focus on the Medium LAsers, ands yet another, the Missiles. All 3 weapons it actually COMES WITH, as opposed to Large Lasers or the like, that NO VARIANT HAS.

And even within those weapons group, different aspects can be emphasized. You have 2 BLRs with Missiles as Primary. MAke one heavily oriented toward Cooldown on those, another more heavily oriented toward heat reduction, or range, etc. One Battlemaster gets more heat reduction for it's weapons, another gets the focus on beam reduction.

The problem, with the forums, AND with PGI, is people really seem over focused and limited on their willingness to look into what the quirks system COULD accompñlish. People seem to get focused on one idea that works really well (they think) on that one build they like to run. Instead of looking at everything as pieces in the puzzle that are going to have to interact if things are ever going to have a semblance of actual balance.

Oh so it's all about what mechs come as stock? That is frankly one of the most meaningless things to focus on, because very few people even run stock mechs anyway. Why should quirks be focused on what mechs have stock, when a huge majority are going to change the build pretty much the moment they buy the mech anyway? Especially when almost all variants then end up with lots of quirks around a single weapon? It's terrible for diversity between variants.

[Bishop Steiner]

Torgun, on 13 February 2015 - 08:47 AM, said:

Oh so it's all about what mechs come as stock? That is frankly one of the most meaningless things to focus on, because very few people even run stock mechs anyway. Why should quirks be focused on what mechs have stock, when a huge majority are going to change the build pretty much the moment they buy the mech anyway? Especially when almost all variants then end up with lots of quirks around a single weapon? It's terrible for diversity between variants.

Sure, so here's a thought. LEts have PGI just sell generic blank chassis. Why have them come with guns or engines or anything, since those weapons are meaningless? Problem solved,.

Peace out.

[Bigbacon]

Bishop Steiner, on 13 February 2015 - 08:48 AM, said:

Sure, so here's a thought. LEts have PGI just sell generic blank chassis. Why have them come with guns or engines or anything, since those weapons are meaningless? Problem solved,.

Peace out.

they should just add quirk modules now....so you can quirk to your own delight (joking,,, please no)

[Fate 6]

Bishop Steiner, on 13 February 2015 - 08:45 AM, said:

actually, you're the one trying to make it about my ego. I'm the one pointing out the absurdity of arguing with me, since I didn't make the changes, and the narrowness of most of your perspectives and arguments. But since you know the one true way, please, spell it out for us plebian, illiterate masses.

Aaaaand here comes the massive ignorance and hypocrisy again. Do I really need to go quote you again bringing up how you think you have "so much sway with PGI"? You did it twice in the last 2 pages. You keep telling us we're wrong and you're right, too, most of the time without even a cohesive argument. And we didn't make the changes either, we're having a discussion, but you have to make it about you. We don't care about you, we're talking about the changes here, so stop bringing your own personality into our otherwise useful debate. If you want a thread that's "Bishop knows best, come here and tell me how I'm so important" make a thread for it.

Torgun, on 13 February 2015 - 08:42 AM, said:

I guess I have to repeat my point again. I'm saying we have 5 darn CBill variants of Battlemasters and pushing ML quirks on 4 of them, and not a single Large laser or large pulse laser quirk is terrible for diversity. That is all.

I mean, I completely agree with that. I'm not sure how what I thought you were saying is so different than that lol.

[FupDup]

Bigbacon, on 13 February 2015 - 08:50 AM, said:

they should just add quirk modules now....so you can quirk to your own delight (joking,,, please no)

Something tells me reduced energy weapon heat would be the quirk of choice on basically everything...

[Fate 6]

Bishop Steiner, on 13 February 2015 - 08:48 AM, said:

Peace out.

Please do. Your comment added nothing useful.

[WarHippy]

Bishop Steiner, on 13 February 2015 - 08:45 AM, said:

actually, you're the one trying to make it about my ego. I'm the one pointing out the absurdity of arguing with me, since I didn't make the changes, and the narrowness of most of your perspectives and arguments. But since you know the one true way, please, spell it out for us plebian, illiterate masses.

These are forums people are going to argue/discuss about one thing or another because that is what they are for. It isn't absurd to debate something with some just because they are not devs, or there would be no point for anyone to say anything to anyone that isn't a dev. On the other hand devs can see a discussion between two non-devs and it may cause them to rethink something, or even interject when they see something they can clear up. People are arguing with you because they disagree with you, and because your manner of posting as of late is needlessly hostile. I know you are a good guy, but seriously you need to chill out a bit.

[MikeBend]

23 pages of arguing, like nobody ever played without the quirks. They are a nice bonus, sure, but they are not an instawin, and they shouldnt be. Take a mech you like, put weapons that you like on it and go shoot some mechs.

[Fate 6]

WarHippy, on 13 February 2015 - 08:55 AM, said:

These are forums people are going to argue/discuss about one thing or another because that is what they are for. It isn't absurd to debate something with some just because they are not devs, or there would be no point for anyone to say anything to anyone that isn't a dev. On the other hand devs can see a discussion between two non-devs and it may cause them to rethink something, or even interject when they see something they can clear up. People are arguing with you because they disagree with you, and because your manner of posting as of late is needlessly hostile. I know you are a good guy, but seriously you need to chill out a bit.

You said it much better than I could.

I think what we're kind of looking for in spirit here is the Locust 1E and 3M changes, but obviously not to the point where suddenly one mech (3M) is bad by comparison.

[Deathlike]

Torgun, on 13 February 2015 - 08:47 AM, said:

Oh so it's all about what mechs come as stock? That is frankly one of the most meaningless things to focus on, because very few people even run stock mechs anyway. Why should quirks be focused on what mechs have stock, when a huge majority are going to change the build pretty much the moment they buy the mech anyway? Especially when almost all variants then end up with lots of quirks around a single weapon? It's terrible for diversity between variants.

I think a compromise in between can be had here.

Any sort of generic quirk tends to be useful across the board, but you can't really primarily rely on as that is sensitive to other changes in balance. Unless this is an underwhelming aspect (limited number of hardpoints on said mech), then it can be acceptable.

I think there is some good to the notion of quirking to part of the base stock chassis... as this can help the new player indirectly a bit while they get better equipment (like DHS) or whatever to rebuild the mech into his own playstyle.

However, when multiple chassis have the same build or so (like the Trebuchet), then it makes sense to diversify the quirks in some meaningful way. Having multiple medium laser quirks for multiple variants of the same chassis isn't what one would consider "interesting". (The Trebuchet quirks currently suffer from "it's LRM15 or meh".)

The question really has to be whether the quirk is meaningful or appropriate and whether it would help out build diversity as a whole.

Having the Vindicator-1X get garbage quirks for the 1 PPC it carries stock is very unmeaningful... whereas if it was an ERPPC quirk, then perhaps it would suck less.

So... it's possible to have both, but let's not be held hostage to one preference over another.

Edited by Deathlike, 13 February 2015 - 09:01 AM.

[Sorbic]

lol my Locust 3m SPL got nerfed right after finally giving them a try.

It will be interesting to see if the 9s goes back to it's never used status. On the flipside hopefully we will see some more Orions now. Never bought one but I like the look of those goofy mechs.

[Fate 6]

Sorbic, on 13 February 2015 - 09:01 AM, said:

lol my Locust 3m SPL got nerfed right after finally giving them a try.

It will be interesting to see if the 9s goes back to it's never used status. On the flipside hopefully we will see some more Orions now. Never bought one but I like the look of those goofy mechs.

9S will still be a useful mech, it just has a more defined role. People won't drop with 3 9S's and a Firestarter in CW, they'll do something like 1-2 9S's, and the whole team won't all want to be using 9S's at the same time unless they make a plan to sit around and snipe for a long time and get a kill advantage.

I totally agree about the 3M I just got mine and was just about to elite it...Now it's back to the trash can, at least I only spent like 2.5 mil on it.

Edited by Fate 6, 13 February 2015 - 09:18 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Deathlike, on 13 February 2015 - 08:59 AM, said:

I think a compromise in between can be had here.

Any sort of generic quirk tends to be useful across the board, but you can't really primarily rely on as that is sensitive to other changes in balance. Unless this is an underwhelming aspect (limited number of hardpoints on said mech), then it can be acceptable.

I think there is some good to the notion of quirking to part of the base stock chassis... as this can help the new player indirectly a bit while they get better equipment (like DHS) or whatever to rebuild the mech into his own playstyle.

However, when multiple chassis have the same build or so (like the Trebuchet), then it makes sense to diversify the quirks in some meaningful way. Having multiple medium laser quirks for multiple variants of the same chassis isn't what one would consider "interesting". (The Trebuchet quirks currently suffer from "it's LRM15 or meh".)

The question really has to be whether the quirk is meaningful or appropriate and whether it would help out build diversity as a whole.

Having the Vindicator-1X get garbage quirks for the 1 PPC it carries stock is very unmeaningful... whereas if it was an ERPPC quirk, then perhaps it would suck less.

So... it's possible to have both, but let's not be held hostage to one preference over another.

kind of the point.

At no point have I stumped for pure stock quirks. I do think the "specific" quirks should be stock oriented, or at least make sense from the stock design. But that's why I also feel that the Specific Quirks should be a much smaller percentage of each set than the current 50% trade off.

And hey, a mech that packs a PPC getting ER PPC quirks? Fine with. It's in the same family, so it MAKES SENSE it would be effective, while still keeping the flavor. Large LAser for ER or LPL? FIne with also. With the Wubverine, it's not that I thought the LPL needed to be taken away, I simply have no issue with it going...or staying.

But for a Battlemaster, which is built around Mlasers, to suddenly become an LPL God? Makes. No. Sense. Yet if they got 20% Energy HEat Reduction, and 10% MLaser Reduction, it still shines with MLasers... but could use LPL or LLasers or PPCs very effectively.

In fact, I would be fine with something like "20% heat reduction: Energy" and "10% Heat Reduction IS Mlaser Family" (Aka, MLasers, MPLs,. and eventually ER; XPulse, etc).

But apparently I am speaking in greek or arabic or something.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 13 February 2015 - 09:25 AM.