118 replies to this topic

[Void Angel]

Torgun, on 20 February 2015 - 12:25 PM, said:

You're debating about quirks whether they're corrently done correctly and then claim it does not force you into using any weapons since you can totally ignore quirks and build whatever you want anyway? What the heck are you even doing in this thread of you think quirks don't matter when you build the mechs! The whole point of quirks is to make them less of bad mechs, and by not using the quirks fully you're simply running mechs that are still worse than they should be since you are actually wasting the potential to build the mech into something better. Any quirk that is not used is simply wasted, and to actually give the Battlemasters some diversity the whole medium laser quirk for everyone decision needs to go away, because if some got large pulse laser quirks, you could actually use large pulse lasers and use the quirks that you got to bring them up to a better standard, instead of using lots of weapons with no quirks and thus building mechs with wasted potential. These terrible quirks for Battlemasters need to be fixed ASAP.

Again, You're misrepresenting my point while actually quoting it. My congratulations to the designer of your tin foil hat, but please, take your meds. You're ignoring some unimportant things - some of us call them "facts" - that make your clumsy straw man just a little silly. Nearly all quirks are split between weapon-specific and weapon-class quirks. This was done specifically to alleviate the problem of quirks forcing people to take only the quirked weapons in order to be effective. So, as with the Thunderbolt example you conveniently ignored, the general quirks for a weapon are often sufficiently powerful that alternate weapons can easily be used. Your insane assertion that the existence of medium laser quirks precludes the use of other beam weapons runs counter to that fact - and when we run headlong into the facts of the world, it's not our noses that win.

Now, I know you don't like to be confused by the facts, but lets try looking at my actual position - which is really a critique of bad reasoning being used, rather than a position in itself, but I digress. If, as is known to be true, the default weapon loadouts imported from Classic Battletech are not optimal for MWO, then basing quirks partly (see inconvenient fact about general-use quirks, above) on these loadouts will still not force players to use stock loads to be competitive. The most that will happen is that stock builds might be less disadvantaged. Specialized builds are still superior to stock loadouts, and will still benefit from many of the quirks - and in fact many of the requirked 'mechs have no weapon-specific quirks at all!

Do your homework, have a little lie-down, and please, take your meds!

Rebas Kradd, on 20 February 2015 - 12:37 PM, said:

This conspiracy theory is once again dismantled by the one simple fact that dismantles it every time...

The mechs in question are entirely free.

Oh, but they can be bought for MC! That means that pgi must have decided to damage the quality of their own livelihood and irritated their players for nearsighted, short-term gains! Filthy mammon! Vac truth! ROSWELL, ROSWELL!!

Edited by Void Angel, 20 February 2015 - 01:14 PM.

[Torgun]

Void Angel, on 20 February 2015 - 01:14 PM, said:

Again, You're misrepresenting my point while actually quoting it. My congratulations to the designer of your tin foil hat, but please, take your meds. You're ignoring some unimportant things - some of us call them "facts" - that make your clumsy straw man just a little silly. Nearly all quirks are split between weapon-specific and weapon-class quirks. This was done specifically to alleviate the problem of quirks forcing people to take only the quirked weapons in order to be effective. So, as with the Thunderbolt example you conveniently ignored, the general quirks for a weapon are often sufficiently powerful that alternate weapons can easily be used. Your insane assertion that the existence of medium laser quirks precludes the use of other beam weapons runs counter to that fact - and when we run headlong into the facts of the world, it's not our noses that win.

Now, I know you don't like to be confused by the facts, but lets try looking at my actual position - which is really a critique of bad reasoning being used, rather than a position in itself, but I digress. If, as is known to be true, the default weapon loadouts imported from Classic Battletech are not optimal for MWO, then basing quirks partly (see inconvenient fact about general-use quirks, above) on these loadouts will still not force players to use stock loads to be competitive. The most that will happen is that stock builds might be less disadvantaged. Specialized builds are still superior to stock loadouts, and will still benefit from many of the quirks - and in fact many of the requirked 'mechs have no weapon-specific quirks at all!

Do your homework, have a little lie-down, and please, take your meds!

You actual position is you try to downplay you'd waste 2 quirks on some battlemasters just because you don't want to be chained to medium lasers, as if losing 2 quirks is not important. And the other fluff you write is just that, pointless fluff. Seriously what's the thing with you and meds? You sound like some Prozac-popping pillhead with your obsession about meds.

[Raggedyman]

Jonny Slam, on 19 February 2015 - 01:58 PM, said:

I'm not talking about nerfing quirks, or buffing quirks, I'm talking about when a wholesale quirk change invalidates a entire weapon system the previous quirk version required, thereby screwing the pilots out of all the money and time they put into the mechs being changed.

If they did then they would be mental, as whilst you would get some short-term sales folks would become a lot more weary of making decisions that then change on them so longterm players would spend less and the game would get a rep for being 'unstable'.

My money says they make changes when they need to / are able to, with the aim being to make more money by having a 'better' game for people to play and ensuring that all mechs are viable to use.

[Mirumoto Izanami]

Xetelian, on 20 February 2015 - 01:10 PM, said:

Some of these changes made little sense and they totally missed Victors and Cataphracts...

They didn't quite miss the cataphracts completely. The Cata 1X keeps getting better every quirk pass.

[Void Angel]

Torgun, on 20 February 2015 - 01:27 PM, said:

You actual position is you try to downplay you'd waste 2 quirks on some battlemasters just because you don't want to be chained to medium lasers, as if losing 2 quirks is not important. And the other fluff you write is just that, pointless fluff. Seriously what's the thing with you and meds? You sound like some Prozac-popping pillhead with your obsession about meds.

No, my actual position is what I've explained several times now actually is my position: that simply having some quirks unused does not cripple a build (and thus the requirked chassis are not "requiring" anyone to use stock loadouts,) and that the argument that you're "wasting quirks" by not using a weapon or two has fatal flaws. If you follow that idea to its logical conclusion, you'll find that you're just asking for the 'mechs to be quirked the way you would want to build them - at which point someone just like you would complain that PGI is "forcing" people to play those 'mechs only in the way outlined by their quirks. None of your amateurish attempt to hand-wave all the arguments you didn't understand as "fluff" will avail you - it's like whapping a small, rabid, incontinent, fetid, puppy that's insistent on biting your ankle with a newspaper, but if the puppy won't stop biting... Consider yourself whapped.

PS: One hardly has to be a "Prozac-popping pillhead" to be concerned when an apparent psychotic is obviously not taking their meds. Go ice your nose, have a lie-down and a warm glass of milk, and take your meds; you'll feel better.

[Kristov Kerensky]

Shadow Magnet, on 20 February 2015 - 10:06 AM, said:

Kristov, then please explain to me why the Dragon 5N got UAC quirks? Ok, UAC5 is the stock build. But wait, the mech got 3 ballistic hard points - all in the same arm. That does make sense to you?

I would prefer to replace all weapon specific quirks with generic ones (e.g. UAC cooldown with ballistic cooldown). That would allow you to run any build matching the hard points, including stock and have a good bonus to make the mech more viable.

How about that? Stop forcing any builds on the players. Just boost by the hard points of a mech.

Why did the Dragon 5N get UAC quirks? You mean, the Dragon 5N that comes with UAC5 stock on it? Now, this is JUST a wild eyed, pie in the sky guess here, so do NOT HOLD ME TO IT...but...

Because it comes with a UAC5 stock is the reason it got UAC quirks, that's just a guess remember!

Quirks are supposed to be based on the stock build of the variant, which part of that are you not quite getting here?

[TERRIB AL]

Time to re-familiarise with the t&c.

/endthread.

Edited by TERRIB AL, 20 February 2015 - 03:45 PM.

[Vocis]

Tennex, on 19 February 2015 - 02:09 PM, said:

don't give them ideas

an evolving meta keeps the game interesting. But we don't want it too turbulent. Changes are good but over a very gradual time. Plus if there are drastic changes it will become a barrier for older players coming back to having to learn a completely different game

The Meta Evolves?

It has been PPA Central for what? almost a year?

Edited by Vocis, 20 February 2015 - 03:57 PM.

[Void Angel]

Have you... have you met the Clans? You don't seem to have met them...

[Numnuts]

I honestly wont buy another mech pack now with the way they are doing quirks..


it should just be generic quirks nothing more, except for armor.. then they never have to worry about pissing people off.

[occusoj]

Kristov Kerensky, on 20 February 2015 - 03:44 PM, said:

Dragon 5N .... UAC5..

Honest questions:
How many people do you think will play this single UAC5 Dragon?
Why should they choose it over the -1N or a Phract?

[Torgun]

Void Angel, on 20 February 2015 - 02:47 PM, said:

No, my actual position is what I've explained several times now actually is my position: that simply having some quirks unused does not cripple a build (and thus the requirked chassis are not "requiring" anyone to use stock loadouts,) and that the argument that you're "wasting quirks" by not using a weapon or two has fatal flaws. If you follow that idea to its logical conclusion, you'll find that you're just asking for the 'mechs to be quirked the way you would want to build them - at which point someone just like you would complain that PGI is "forcing" people to play those 'mechs only in the way outlined by their quirks. None of your amateurish attempt to hand-wave all the arguments you didn't understand as "fluff" will avail you - it's like whapping a small, rabid, incontinent, fetid, puppy that's insistent on biting your ankle with a newspaper, but if the puppy won't stop biting... Consider yourself whapped.

PS: One hardly has to be a "Prozac-popping pillhead" to be concerned when an apparent psychotic is obviously not taking their meds. Go ice your nose, have a lie-down and a warm glass of milk, and take your meds; you'll feel better.

After reading this tirade of senseless wordcrapping you claim I'm the one that need meds? I don't know if you're high or just drunk and frankly at this point I don't care. If anyone sounds unbalanced it's most certainly you. PGI are definitely pushing medium lasers on everyone that want to use Battlemasters by their terrible quirks. If you think losing 2 quirks is not important when doing your build you basically don't care about quirks. Just say so then and be done with it.

Edited by Torgun, 20 February 2015 - 05:39 PM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Tennex, on 19 February 2015 - 02:09 PM, said:

don't give them ideas

an evolving meta keeps the game interesting. But we don't want it too turbulent. Changes are good but over a very gradual time. Plus if there are drastic changes it will become a barrier for older players coming back to having to learn a completely different game

Theyre FINALLY learning that changes dont need to be knee jerk to the other side of the pendulum. Dont let that go backwards lol

[oldradagast]

It wouldn't surprise me.

Keep in mind they had a 45% off sale on weapon modules about a week before massive changes to the quirks... thus encouraging people to buy piles of weapon modules, and then rendering them useless when the quirks were changed and people had to update their mechs.

[InspectorG]

Brody319, on 19 February 2015 - 04:00 PM, said:

because I'm sure Russ and the rest of PGI made a whole bunch of money by Nerfing the Thunderbolt (who has no mastery pack or hero anyway), and changing the Wubverine, who has no champion, mastery pack, or hero!

First they give them a ton of quirks, put them on sale in the faction sales for cheaper c-bills, then nerfed them!

Its the most foolproof way to make money ever! offer a free product, change the product a bit, then make money!

Too complicted and contrived.

Quirks were implemented to sell mechbays. I have satellite photos as proof.

Why are mechbays $3 ? Most chassis have 3 variants? 3 types of weapon hardpoints?

3 sides to a triangle.

I know who runs PGI...

[Void Angel]

Torgun, on 20 February 2015 - 05:38 PM, said:

After reading this tirade of senseless wordcrapping you claim I'm the one that need meds? I don't know if you're high or just drunk and frankly at this point I don't care. If anyone sounds unbalanced it's most certainly you. PGI are definitely pushing medium lasers on everyone that want to use Battlemasters by their terrible quirks. If you think losing 2 quirks is not important when doing your build you basically don't care about quirks. Just say so then and be done with it.

You're not even trying any more; just "No, you! You're drunk or high!" You still haven't justified or corrected your earlier errors, and you're substituting conclusions for facts and just making things up - just being able to phrase an accusation as a syllogism doesn't make your reasoning valid. If you look at the quirks and understand them (you're still ignoring the many requirks that have only general quirks,) you can easily see that not making use of a single -10% Medium Laser Duration quirk is hardly going to break any build - it's hardly required that one "not care about quirks" to recognize that. What you are doing has several nasty philosophical names, but given your past performance you'll simply dismiss the terms as "wordcrapping," so I'll be blunt - it's also called lying, and you should stop.

Barring an undiagnosed or untreated mental disorder, there's really no other way to describe your willful disregard of contrary evidence and insistence on making things up to score what you fondly believe to be a "logical kill." Give it up, take your meds, drink your milk, and go home. I'll even give you some aspirin for the headache.

[Osric Lancaster]

occusoj, on 20 February 2015 - 04:41 PM, said:

Honest questions:
How many people do you think will play this single UAC5 Dragon?
Why should they choose it over the -1N or a Phract?

Well they could want the two arm energy points, but you're right. That's a case of lopsided quirk application. The 1N has a broad ballistic bonus that is, by itself, better than the 5N's weapon specific bonus. Add to that the 1N's specialty bonus and the number of relevant weapon system each variant can fit respectively and the 1N is the clear winner. (partly because the weapons it specializes in don't jam and lets it put out 10 points of damage at once.)

That said, if you took away the 5N's chance to jam, I'd take it over a 1N simply because the uAC would be doing not quite the same dps as two AC5s on a 1N for roughly 1/2 the weight.

* The Cataphract's not a 'Mech I'd use simply because it's arms are so low slung. I actually had one and sold it for a Jagger.

Edited by Osric Lancaster, 20 February 2015 - 06:51 PM.

[Kristov Kerensky]

occusoj, on 20 February 2015 - 04:41 PM, said:

Honest questions:
How many people do you think will play this single UAC5 Dragon?
Why should they choose it over the -1N or a Phract?

No idea, does it matter? People who like the Dragons will play the Dragons. I happen to like Battlemasters, so I play them. I played them before they had quirks, I didn't change a single config on my Battlemasters once they added quirks, and I haven't changed a single config after they changed the quirks.

Want to know why?

Because I like the Battlemaster, I don't care what quirks it has or doesn't have, I like the MECH. I have a good time in it, I do well in it, did well before the quirks, do well still.

Certain players will always look for the Flavor of the Moment build, whatever chassis that may be, they don't care about anything but the highest possible DPS, it's the nature of their gaming. Some of them will be the so called Top Tier gamers, others will be the plebes who can't hit the broadside of an Awesome with a Arrow IV, they hit a wiki, see the 'top build' and grab it. Have you read the threads full of the screaming about the Quirkening? This thread has it, people who literally spent hundreds of real world dollars SINCE the quirks were first introduced to buy the top Mechs based soley on the quirks. Mechs these people, some of whom have played for the 3 years I have, have never even LOOKED at before the quirks were put in.

Why did they do that? There's not a single tourney going on that has a payout in real cash, not even one with decent prizes for pity's sake, so what exactly was the reason these people blew hundreds of dollars suddenly? Well?

[occusoj]

Kristov Kerensky, on 20 February 2015 - 06:51 PM, said:

No idea, does it matter?

If making as many mechs/variants at least somewhat viable is no objective at all, then it doesnt matter.
But if mechs need to be as close to their stock version without keeping their value in battle in mind, why, for example, isnt Urbie kept at its normal engine cap? Might be for the $$$$$.

Kristov Kerensky, on 20 February 2015 - 06:51 PM, said:

I happen to like Battlemasters, so I play them

Thats been the reason for the AC10 DRG-1N on the enemy team today. He could easily have done twice or tripple the damage by going for the quirked AC5s. But hey, he wanted fun in his cool AC10 mech and didnt mind going for a powerful build. So he screwed his team for about 400-600 damage, Im sure they appreciated it.
I drop in things like 6PPC BNC on rare occasions, just because I can. Usually only once, its not fun once the game starts. I know its depriving my team of a chance to win and from there on it sucks for me. Cant enjoy running weak builds.

If people just play it for watching moving colors on a screen and hearing some pew pew, so be it. Just dont balance the game after them. Doesnt work. Neither does balancing for the comp crowd.

Kristov Kerensky, on 20 February 2015 - 06:51 PM, said:

This thread has it, people who literally spent hundreds of real world dollars SINCE the quirks were first introduced to buy the top Mechs based soley on the quirks.

Well, their fault. Everyone should already know by now that PGI has no consistency in anything they do. Except breaking the game.
Spending hundreds of dollars on MWO is something I cant understand, especially when its for chasing some NGNG/PGI/.... defined "meta" or whatever they call the abominations of balance they come up with.
Each to his own but I wouldnt ever do it.

[Kristov Kerensky]

occusoj, the UrbanMech doesn't have an engine cap, it simply comes with a 60 stock, that can be swapped out, same as most people swap the engines in the Mechs we have already, pretty sure I don't actually run any stock engines except in my Clan Mechs, those I can't change or I would

PGI is attempting to make as many Mechs viable as possible, but viable isn't always what WE think it is compared to what PGI thinks it is. I personally find the Raven to be a horrible Mech, can't do jack in one, while I love my Spiders. My CO in SRM hates the Spiders, loves the Ravens. I consider the Raven to not be viable, he considers the Spider to not be viable, until we see the other driving them and realize..oh..it's ME that's not viable in that thing! I know people who consider anything under 90 tons non-viable, and others who think anything over 45 tons is non-viable, pick a tonnage, pick a Mech, we can find people on these very forums who'll say they are both viable and non-viable and prove it to us.

Quirks make the Mech a little better at it's INTENDED job, which is determined by it's stock loadout, not by what people WANT to toss on it. Build it without using the stock weapons, it's still viable, it's not taking a hit anywhere, it's just not getting a boost. If there's no penalty, then there's no wrong way to build the Mech.