109 replies to this topic

[Davers]

Gyrok, on 05 March 2015 - 11:13 PM, said:

You are taking things a bit far...

This is why things would not change much for the IS as it is now:

1.) Per the last test, clans already had an average superior elo delta of ~250 in group queue.

2.) All incoming players that are F2P are IS players anyway, because in the current implementation, if you do not drop real money, for mechs, bays, and/or premium time, or some combination of those previously mentioned...you will not be a clans player any time soon.

3.) Lots of the diehard IS only guys will be staying in IS units and playing the game as IS because that is what they want to do. Units like SRoT are not suddenly going to stop being Steiner because Clans. If that was the case, no one would have been left in the inner sphere after wave 1 dropped and was out for 2-3 months. That did not happen.

4.) Clans generally have less PUGs to begin with, and the units, while often smaller, are also more tightly integrated and organized.

So, really, you are making something out of nothing, because as it stands right now. We have exactly what you are advocating against, except it is balanced slightly differently. New players come in and either pay to clan, or grind in IS mechs. How does that change at all in my proposal?

Because what we have right now is a problem- and you want to codify it into 'How things should be' instead of actually fixing it because 'lore'.

[Revis Volek]

Davers, on 06 March 2015 - 09:52 AM, said:

Increased speed with less sacrifices/Clan XLs give superior survivability
Do not have to make as many sacrifices to get 'medium ranged' weapons ie ERML vs LL
Half weight missiles

That is not BETTER by definition, different yes but you have no gave examples of how they are better. we have to make sacrifices to get these things...locked engines, Locked upgrades (endo, FF) longer burn times on these better medium range lasers (that for some reason you compared to LL) we also have crap ballistics, mechs that run much, much hotter and no quirks to speak of. Our half weight missiles also STREAM FIRE so one AMS can make my 6x LRM 5 MDD a total waste if i dont group fire them. Even still a lot get taken out by AMS before hitting the target.

Also, what SACRIFICE are you make to put on 1 ton lasers? Seems rather silly to me...they weigh the same as Clan ERmeds so that point is not valid at all.

IS LL can now do damage the same ranges clans ERLL's can and half the heat, often less. So that is no longer even a valid argument either. We both have range....


Saying we have increased speed is also not really true....we dont have ANY light mechs that go anywhere near the speed of IS light or do they have the survivability. Clan XL's may not kill you when you lose a ST but we also dont have the option of using STD engines and increasing our survivability even more so like IS mechs do. So that is different but not necessarily better. What the clans have going for them is all their mechs are around the same speed 89+ for the most part outside 2 mechs.


Again....none of those are hands down saying CLAMS ARE BETTER. They are just different....

"ah, Nuprin. Little, yellow....Different...."

Edited by DarthRevis, 06 March 2015 - 10:26 AM.

[Apnu]

Necromantion, on 06 March 2015 - 09:46 AM, said:

So in the same hand you want to move towards lore and then away from it? I mean I am alllllll for the pinpoint AC's that IS has on clan mechs xD and rebuffing clans to their previous actual OP state if that means 10v12 by all means.

But at the same time PGI has already said they are going to be implementing 4v4 and 8v8 game modes. So i am confident we are always going to see multiples of 4 for each faction.

Well the lore disagrees on what ACs actually are. In some descriptions the basic auto cannon fires a projectile relative to its damage and this is how the TT treats it. But some descriptions say the auto cannon is a stream of shells relative to its damage. But still the TT says an AC10 will do 10 points of damage to one location, how the player imagines it is inconsequential.

What PGI did to clan ACs is to make them burst like some of the books say auto cannons do, while keeping the IS ACs the more "traditional" pin point damage to one location.

I'm not talking about ultra ACs, those should fire two "rounds" of damage to the rating of the gun. Hitting different locations as aiming and movement dictate.

There are no trickle LRMs that I know of in the lore.

I pilot IS exclusively. No alt-accounts, no clan tech. I find that clan LRMs are trivial to avoid or mitigate. I can count on one hand the number of times I've died from clan LRMs. As for the ACs, they're something of a nuisance most of the time, spreading the damage is pretty easy.
PGI's original stated goal was to give the clans a unique flavor, that turned out to mean a different HUD, and bursting ACs, long burn lasers and trickle missiles. But the combat doctrine remains the same as the IS. Culturally, there is no difference between the clans and the IS if you ignore mech selection.

If we really want the clans to "feel different" from the IS, then giving them a totally different battle doctrine would go very far in that direction. 10v12 is a huge step in that direction.

But also understand, that my idea also means giving c-bill and GXP buffs to clans who intentionally drop underweight. So not only 10v12, but also less assaults and heavies than the IS. If a clan team chooses to front load with DWFs and TBRs, then they should get a c-bill nerf for that. Then let the players work it out from there.

But PGI won't do this. This is a pipe dream on my part. I know.
There's a Command Chair post here about why they decided to keep 12v12 for Clans vs IS. The TL:DR version is this: Math is hard and the MM doesn't like hard math. Which I totally disagree with. Much of it is because they think of the player experience as an individual experience and have built the MM with that in mind. A group of players independently looking for games and the MM is trying to make a game based off 3/3/3/3 rules and Elo from that available pool of individuals. (Talking about public queue here of course as was the command chair post at the time)

Well if they had game lobbies for players to find and collect in, then you can remove all that math from the MM. Impose number and class limits on the lobby, then send that lobby off to the MM for a game, trying to match Elo. Very simple actually.

Anyway, PGI disagrees with me and has been quite consistent about that. So that's why we're going to get 4v4 and 8v8 in CW and they're going to continue to make the Clans and IS balanced on the tech level while ignoring any interesting and cultural differences that exist between the two "races" The only thing that really separates the clans from the IS is the changes to the weapons (long burn lasers) and the HUD. Which is superficial as far as I'm concerned.

So now we have 12v12 in CW because its a left over artifact of the public queue which was originally meant to only exist as a test bed until CW was finished. But along the way PGI changed its mind and decided to keep that part of the game and everything they did there has been dragged into CW, awkward warts and all. We will continue to have 12v12 until PGI decides to bite the bullet and do some really creative thinking about CW.

[Davers]

DarthRevis, on 06 March 2015 - 10:26 AM, said:

That is not BETTER by definition, different yes but you have no gave examples of how they are better. we have to make sacrifices to get these things...locked engines, Locked upgrades (endo, FF) longer burn times on these better medium range lasers (that for some reason you compared to LL) we also have crap ballistics, mechs that run much, much hotter and no quirks to speak of. Our half weight missiles also STREAM FIRE so one AMS can make my 6x LRM 5 MDD a total waste if i dont group fire them. Even still a lot get taken out by AMS before hitting the target.

Also, what SACRIFICE are you make to put on 1 ton lasers? Seems rather silly to me...they weigh the same as Clan ERmeds so that point is not valid at all.

IS LL can now do damage the same ranges clans ERLL's can and half the heat, often less. So that is no longer even a valid argument either. We both have range....


Saying we have increased speed is also not really true....we dont have ANY light mechs that go anywhere near the speed of IS light or do they have the survivability. Clan XL's may not kill you when you lose a ST but we also dont have the option of using STD engines and increasing our survivability even more so like IS mechs do. So that is different but not necessarily better. What the clans have going for them is all their mechs are around the same speed 89+ for the most part outside 2 mechs.


Again....none of those are hands down saying CLAMS ARE BETTER. They are just different....

"ah, Nuprin. Little, yellow....Different...."

1. SRMs don't stream fire. They work exactly as IS SRMs, only half weight. BETTER.
2. Are you saying LLs weigh the same as ERML? I never compared ERLL to anything. The ML vs the ERML is no comparison, if that is what you are talking about. Greater range, as well as more damage per second of burn time. BETTER
3. You will soon have a light mech that performs like an IS light with JJs and ECM. And the Clan XL engine is FAR SUPERIOR to IS Standard engines or XL engines. If the IS could use them you would never see a mech equiped without one, ever. If you really cannot see the Clan XL engine is the best type of engine in the game, then there is no hope of talking to you about balance. It is just plainly BETTER.

[Necromantion]

Clams are OP because they look cooler. /Thread

[Necromantion]

Davers, on 06 March 2015 - 10:45 AM, said:

1. SRMs don't stream fire. They work exactly as IS SRMs, only half weight. BETTER.
2. Are you saying LLs weigh the same as ERML? I never compared ERLL to anything. The ML vs the ERML is no comparison, if that is what you are talking about. Greater range, as well as more damage per second of burn time. BETTER
3. You will soon have a light mech that performs like an IS light with JJs and ECM. And the Clan XL engine is FAR SUPERIOR to IS Standard engines or XL engines. If the IS could use them you would never see a mech equiped without one, ever. If you really cannot see the Clan XL engine is the best type of engine in the game, then there is no hope of talking to you about balance. It is just plainly BETTER.

1) They could stream fire if youre foolish enough to put them in a slot with less tubes than needed but yeah thats moot point so....

Yes without artemis LRMs and SRMS for clans are half the weight of IS but also create more heat.

LRMS are moot in a way as most decent 12mans do not run them as Clans or even IS though if you want to talk about them CLRMs are more suceptible to AMS fire due to being fired as streams.

ISSRMs have a higher damage per heat as they have slightly higher damage with the same cooldown and heat as CSRMS which would make them better at brawling due to better heat efficiency per damage point, no?

2) You said do not have to make as many sacrifices to get medium ranged weapons. Do you forget that every Clan weapon has higher heat and burn time when it comes to beam weapons? Which makes you have to stay exposed longer, makes you have to move/adjust to transfer damage to a specific component for a longer period of time. Sure range is superior in some cases if youre comparing to un quirked mechs with no range quirks but the other things such as reduced heat/reduced burn time result in better dps and potential for better dps transfer to only one component.

3) Yet this mech will still have hotter and longer duration burn time beam weapons than its IS counterparts. To be honest the ergonomics of a lot of Clan mechs make them have some very blatant weaknesses despite the XL engines. Stormcrow CT is extremely vulnerable when popping up to look over things due to cockpit location, timberwolf shoulders do the same thing and the CT is huge like the stalkers used to be, Nova arms house all weapons and are easy to blow off. Most MLX weps are in the right arm. The boxy direwolf/warhawk/ice ferret can barely shield their side toros with arms... etc.

[Revis Volek]

Davers, on 06 March 2015 - 10:45 AM, said:

1. SRMs don't stream fire. They work exactly as IS SRMs, only half weight. BETTER.
2. Are you saying LLs weigh the same as ERML? I never compared ERLL to anything. The ML vs the ERML is no comparison, if that is what you are talking about. Greater range, as well as more damage per second of burn time. BETTER
3. You will soon have a light mech that performs like an IS light with JJs and ECM. And the Clan XL engine is FAR SUPERIOR to IS Standard engines or XL engines. If the IS could use them you would never see a mech equiped without one, ever. If you really cannot see the Clan XL engine is the best type of engine in the game, then there is no hope of talking to you about balance. It is just plainly BETTER.

They are not superior....i dont get how you can even say that. XL's use more slots then STD...so you can bring less weapons, less heatsinks, less equipment, less ammo. How is that BETTER? Maybe on some builds and some mechs but to say its just better is flat our wrong.

Also, you did in fact compare ERMEDs to LL....here it is.

Davers, on 06 March 2015 - 09:52 AM, said:

Increased speed with less sacrifices/Clan XLs give superior survivability
Do not have to make as many sacrifices to get 'medium ranged' weapons ie ERML vs LL
Half weight missiles

See that there at the bottom...where you try to compare our ERML with your IS LL? So its seems sentence structure and debate have escaped you. I think we see via your argument how much you know.

Again...different but not flat our better. Both have better things and worse things about the mechs....hence DIFFERENT!

Edited by DarthRevis, 06 March 2015 - 11:32 AM.

[CyclonerM]

Davers, on 05 March 2015 - 02:08 PM, said:

PGI is not interested in making huge maps. Too many people complained about 'MechWalker Online'. We should focus our efforts on having PGI make small maps interesting.

What PGI's maps are lacking is 'the jungle'- which is where all the interesting strategy comes from and secondary objectives are located. What we have now is just 3 lanes.

Davers, on 05 March 2015 - 03:23 PM, said:

But this has been PGI's map philosophy all along. It's in almost every map except Alpine (which has a different problem), Tourmaline, and possibly Canyon (still 3 lanes, but it also has that multilevel thing going on). Instead of asking for maps PGI has no interest in making, why not focus on getting PGI to do more with the maps they are going to make?

So i cannot express my opinion on what would be interesting for me in map design and feedback to PGI because i know many would complain?

How can we have tactical depth and variety of approaches in a small map? True, Forest Colony has three different approaches: water, groundside and tunnel, but we are still talking about funneling all the 'Mechs in a lane, as you say, bumping each other just to get a shot.

I never heard any MW:LL player complain about their maps being so big. And they are VERY big compared to MWO maps.

Saxie, on 05 March 2015 - 05:27 PM, said:

I don't know how you can balance a mechanic where you can take 12 guys shoot at one other mech and kill it. Team work would make 10/12 hell for anyone dropping for clans. It doesn't have to be 'tested' per say you could make a thought experiment to realize that this would not work.

See, people? Some say the Clans would get stomped, some say the IS would get stomped. Instead of thinking narrowly about the perception of "weaker 'Mechs" why do not we ask for a test , both with pugs without comms and several units, so we can find the compromise, the sweet spot?

[MischiefSC]

IS SSRMs are a joke. SSRM2s are not enough firepower to put down a single light from the time he gets from the gate to the ogen. a SSRM6-boat however absolutely can. You can run a Clan SSRM6 boat with a couple ERMLs and actually effectively kill mechs in any weight.

Clan SRMs are flat out hugely superior. Better range, less tonnage.

Clan ERMLs are so stupidly superior to IS MLs that trying to compare them is reason to laugh at people. The only place that mechs start to get to parity is with long range or when the IS runs a dakka-boat.

The Clans have a shorter list of overall mechs but a pretty comparable list of GOOD mechs. To play against Clans I need to run a Dragon-1N "Pwnface Special", a wubber-bolt, and either a ECM light and an ERLL assault or if someone else on my team is handling ECM run a 2nd 1N and 2nd Wubberbolt. That's what I get to fight the Clans and do it really well. Saying 'well, Clanners have to run Scrows, Hellbringers and Twolves' isn't an argument.

The Clan XL is a stupidly huge advantage. Stupidly huge. It compounds the advantages of lighter weapons by giving them either way more weapon tonnage or way more speed. Makes them vastly more tanky. We all know this. PPFLD is only a big benefit for comp team players. All the scrubs on my IS team can not leverage PPFLD to offset that, because even a scrub tier clanner can take advantage of better speed, maneuverability and STD engine survivability but XL weight savings.

There are still a lot of balance issues on both sides. I'm of the opinion that a lot of clan and IS mechs need buffed up. Said it many times before and will say it again -

the Timber Wolf needs to be the benchmark, not the peak for heavies. The Stormcrow needs to be the benchmark, not the peak for mediums. IS needs a Timber Wolf or two and a Stormcrow or two. The new fast ECM light coming to the Clans, unless the hitboxes are terribad, is going to be the new best peak light. By a huge stretch. More firepower than a Firestarter, same speed, ECM.

Then you have cost. Bluntly the best solution IMO is to price clan XLs like STD engines. That is the Clan STD engine, isn't it? Refund the cbill value difference to people who bought them, give some premium time or unlocked colors or whatever to people who bought them cash to offset the value change but pull that bandaid off and move forward. The current system of cost doesn't work. It is what creates the skill disparity between Clanners and IS.

Solution IMO is quirks, for IS mechs and bad Clan mechs to get things up there. Reduce cost of Clan mechs to be comparable to the same weight of IS mech. That would equalize the skill disparity.

[CyclonerM]

MischiefSC, on 06 March 2015 - 11:37 AM, said:

Solution IMO is quirks, for IS mechs and bad Clan mechs to get things up there. Reduce cost of Clan mechs to be comparable to the same weight of IS mech. That would equalize the skill disparity.

I remember back then, when PGI was talking about Clan vs IS balance, they said that the balancing philosophy behind the Clan 'Mechs would have been "better stats, but more skill needed to use them" which you can see with lasers with longer beam duration and stream-firing ACs.

[Davers]

DarthRevis, on 06 March 2015 - 11:26 AM, said:

They are not superior....i dont get how you can even say that. XL's use more slots then STD...so you can bring less weapons, less heatsinks, less equipment, less ammo. How is that BETTER? Maybe on some builds and some mechs but to say its just better is flat our wrong.

Also, you did in fact compare ERMEDs to LL....here it is.




See that there at the bottom...where you try to compare our ERML with your IS LL? So its seems sentence structure and debate have escaped you. I think we see via your argument how much you know.

Again...different but not flat our better. Both have better things and worse things about the mechs....hence DIFFERENT!

You are the one comparing ERML to ML, not me.

I said "Do not have to make as many sacrifices to get 'medium ranged' weapons ie ERML vs LL."


Then you said

DarthRevis, on 06 March 2015 - 10:26 AM, said:

Also, what SACRIFICE are you make to put on 1 ton lasers? Seems rather silly to me...they weigh the same as Clan ERmeds so that point is not valid at all.

IS LL can now do damage the same ranges clans ERLL's can and half the heat, often less. So that is no longer even a valid argument either. We both have range....

Which has nothing to do with my original post. I never mentioned ML or ERLLs.

Not sure how you see a huge increase in engine weight for mechs with close to zero zombie potential as a good thing. I just love how you view Clan XLs as a weakness instead of the huge advantage it gives, especially for Clan Medium mechs.

CyclonerM, on 06 March 2015 - 11:27 AM, said:

So i cannot express my opinion on what would be interesting for me in map design and feedback to PGI because i know many would complain?

How can we have tactical depth and variety of approaches in a small map? True, Forest Colony has three different approaches: water, groundside and tunnel, but we are still talking about funneling all the 'Mechs in a lane, as you say, bumping each other just to get a shot.

I never heard any MW:LL player complain about their maps being so big. And they are VERY big compared to MWO maps.

You can theory craft all you want. Just like they guys who want to make SHS more viable, the guy who wanted to remove DHS, all the heat cap guys, the 100+ ideas to change PPFLD, and this very thread.

But the Devs have stated (I believe in the first Dev Log "Rebooting Mechwarrior" or some such, and in a web interview piece) that their map design philosophy is to create channels so players can get to fighting faster. They never planned on huge maps that had to be explored. They are not recreating the MW4 leagues, or MWLL.

CyclonerM, on 06 March 2015 - 11:40 AM, said:

I remember back then, when PGI was talking about Clan vs IS balance, they said that the balancing philosophy behind the Clan 'Mechs would have been "better stats, but more skill needed to use them" which you can see with lasers with longer beam duration and stream-firing ACs.

I guess they failed that as well since not a single Clan platter will admit to the Clans having any advantages.

[Necromantion]

I find it hysterical that you ignored the points i made in my post

[Davers]

Necromantion, on 06 March 2015 - 11:08 AM, said:

1) They could stream fire if youre foolish enough to put them in a slot with less tubes than needed but yeah thats moot point so....

Yes without artemis LRMs and SRMS for clans are half the weight of IS but also create more heat.

LRMS are moot in a way as most decent 12mans do not run them as Clans or even IS though if you want to talk about them CLRMs are more suceptible to AMS fire due to being fired as streams.

ISSRMs have a higher damage per heat as they have slightly higher damage with the same cooldown and heat as CSRMS which would make them better at brawling due to better heat efficiency per damage point, no?

2) You said do not have to make as many sacrifices to get medium ranged weapons. Do you forget that every Clan weapon has higher heat and burn time when it comes to beam weapons? Which makes you have to stay exposed longer, makes you have to move/adjust to transfer damage to a specific component for a longer period of time. Sure range is superior in some cases if youre comparing to un quirked mechs with no range quirks but the other things such as reduced heat/reduced burn time result in better dps and potential for better dps transfer to only one component.

3) Yet this mech will still have hotter and longer duration burn time beam weapons than its IS counterparts. To be honest the ergonomics of a lot of Clan mechs make them have some very blatant weaknesses despite the XL engines. Stormcrow CT is extremely vulnerable when popping up to look over things due to cockpit location, timberwolf shoulders do the same thing and the CT is huge like the stalkers used to be, Nova arms house all weapons and are easy to blow off. Most MLX weps are in the right arm. The boxy direwolf/warhawk/ice ferret can barely shield their side toros with arms... etc.

1. Why are you bringing up LRMs? I am talking about real weapons. You don't see me complaining about your half weight flamers.

2. Yes, the ERML has a longer burn time than a LL. It is also cooler, and weighs 4 tons less. But even with a longer burn time, it deals more damage than an IS ML in the same time period. Is it hotter? Yes. But the ML equivalent is much more the ERSL than the ERML. You want to talk about DPS, but the standard Clan practice seems to be more about large long range alpha strikes followed by cooling, than some kind of sustained exchange.

3. Lots of IS mechs have their weaponry located in one arm/location. That is not a Clan weakness. The Orion is as weak as the Timberwolf at hill peeking, (other than the Timberwolf having JJs of course) so what?

Necromantion, on 06 March 2015 - 12:06 PM, said:

I find it hysterical that you ignored the points i made in my post

Don't get hysterical. Patience is a virtue. I was getting to you in my own time.

"The ox is slow, but the earth is patient."

[Necromantion]

Davers, on 06 March 2015 - 12:27 PM, said:

1. Why are you bringing up LRMs? I am talking about real weapons. You don't see me complaining about your half weight flamers.

2. Yes, the ERML has a longer burn time than a LL. It is also cooler, and weighs 4 tons less. But even with a longer burn time, it deals more damage than an IS ML in the same time period. Is it hotter? Yes. But the ML equivalent is much more the ERSL than the ERML. You want to talk about DPS, but the standard Clan practice seems to be more about large long range alpha strikes followed by cooling, than some kind of sustained exchange.

3. Lots of IS mechs have their weaponry located in one arm/location. That is not a Clan weakness. The Orion is as weak as the Timberwolf at hill peeking, (other than the Timberwolf having JJs of course) so what?
Don't get hysterical. Patience is a virtue. I was getting to you in my own time.

"The ox is slow, but the earth is patient."

1) Welllllll what about the srm points i made?!

2) The same can be said about IS alphas especially after ghost heat was removed from 3 large lasers of any type and new LLas quirks for all variants were added though. And sure ok the erml does more damage than the IS ml but its still hotter and requires more burn time thus more time exposed to deal damage

3) You were talking about the XL being so amazing but the majority of Clan mechs have blaitantly obvious weaknesses (yes i know the wolverine and the dragon for example are dependant on their right weapon arms for example) but nearly every Clan chassis has something like this due to either Boxy designs, extremely veulnerable CT or ST's or loaded weapon arms. *Shrug* I have no issues killing clans as IS at all.

Im forumimpatient

[Gyrok]

MischiefSC, on 06 March 2015 - 11:37 AM, said:

the Timber Wolf needs to be the benchmark, not the peak for heavies. The Stormcrow needs to be the benchmark, not the peak for mediums. IS needs a Timber Wolf or two and a Stormcrow or two. The new fast ECM light coming to the Clans, unless the hitboxes are terribad, is going to be the new best peak light. By a huge stretch. More firepower than a Firestarter, same speed, ECM.

Then you have cost. Bluntly the best solution IMO is to price clan XLs like STD engines. That is the Clan STD engine, isn't it? Refund the cbill value difference to people who bought them, give some premium time or unlocked colors or whatever to people who bought them cash to offset the value change but pull that bandaid off and move forward. The current system of cost doesn't work. It is what creates the skill disparity between Clanners and IS.

Solution IMO is quirks, for IS mechs and bad Clan mechs to get things up there. Reduce cost of Clan mechs to be comparable to the same weight of IS mech. That would equalize the skill disparity.

If you learn to aim SRMs, they are equally effective against lights, in fact, I prefer them because ECM does not counter your ability to fire them.

As for the parts above. The A firestarter will equal any clan SPL build for firepower, range will be ever so marginally different, but not by much after quirks, and the FS9 runs cooler.

Clans actually do have STD engines...look at the Kingfisher.

Necromantion, on 06 March 2015 - 12:54 PM, said:

1) Welllllll what about the srm points i made?!

2) The same can be said about IS alphas especially after ghost heat was removed from 3 large lasers of any type and new LLas quirks for all variants were added though. And sure ok the erml does more damage than the IS ml but its still hotter and requires more burn time thus more time exposed to deal damage

3) You were talking about the XL being so amazing but the majority of Clan mechs have blaitantly obvious weaknesses (yes i know the wolverine and the dragon for example are dependant on their right weapon arms for example) but nearly every Clan chassis has something like this due to either Boxy designs, extremely veulnerable CT or ST's or loaded weapon arms. *Shrug* I have no issues killing clans as IS at all.

Im forumimpatient

I would also like to point out that a 6LL stalker can alpha all 6 LLs for 60% heat on crimson, meanwhile the TW laser vomit build does so for 64% heat on the same map. The stalker does the same damage at greater range with a STD engine...that is balanced right?

LOL...some people do not get it...you are feeding the trolls...they never listen.

Edited by Gyrok, 06 March 2015 - 01:07 PM.

[Necromantion]

Gyrok, on 06 March 2015 - 01:05 PM, said:

LOL...some people do not get it...you are feeding the trolls...they never listen.

I think its more just being incapable of stepping back and looking at all the factors as well as not having experience with both contexts they are arguing for/against.

I frankly am unbiased, I play where ever my unit goes and dont prefer IS to Clans or vice versa other than the fact that I think clan mechs always looked cooler because they have a larger amount of non humanoid mechs.

[Davers]

Necromantion, on 06 March 2015 - 12:54 PM, said:

1) Welllllll what about the srm points i made?!

2) The same can be said about IS alphas especially after ghost heat was removed from 3 large lasers of any type and new LLas quirks for all variants were added though. And sure ok the erml does more damage than the IS ml but its still hotter and requires more burn time thus more time exposed to deal damage

3) You were talking about the XL being so amazing but the majority of Clan mechs have blaitantly obvious weaknesses (yes i know the wolverine and the dragon for example are dependant on their right weapon arms for example) but nearly every Clan chassis has something like this due to either Boxy designs, extremely veulnerable CT or ST's or loaded weapon arms. *Shrug* I have no issues killing clans as IS at all.

Im forumimpatient

1. ASRM6 vs CASRM6. Difference of .9 damage, compared to 1.5 tons in savings. Is .15 damage per missile an advantage compared to being able to carry an additional heat sink and .5 ton of ammo per launcher (or armour, or an AMS, or whatever)?

2. ERML does more damage in .9 seconds than the IS ML does in it's .9 total burn time. Isn't the extra range and damage (making it almost the equivalent of a LL) worth one point of heat?

3. Clan XLs are an ACTUAL upgrade, compared to IS XL engines, which can actually make a chassis WORSE. Would't every Atlas pilot love a Clan XL? Get to keep that AC/20 with all the weight saving benefits.

All mechs have weaknesses, the Dragons you mentioned also get stuck with death due to ST damage, as well as having all weapons in one arm, unless they use STD engines, in which case they probably cannot carry enough ammo for those AC/5 builds to be very worrisome.

When Clan mechs were first implemented Clan players said they were balanced, before any quirks. After quirks they then said they were balanced. Then PGI upped the cap on LL GH, and Clanners said they were balanced. At no point in the development has any Clanner ever said, "Hey, these mechs are pretty powerful".

[bar10jim]

Summon3r, on 05 March 2015 - 08:34 AM, said:

go big or go home, 4 IS lances (16mechs) vs 3 clan stars (15mechs) keep the 10ton boost or push it to 20tons since we are adding another lance/star

Simply no. The performance hit in FPS when the game went from 16 to 24 mechs was bad enough. Going to 31 would only exacerbate the situation, pushing people who have marginal performance out of the game.

[Richter Kerensky]

Gyrok, on 06 March 2015 - 01:05 PM, said:

I would also like to point out that a 6LL stalker can alpha all 6 LLs for 60% heat on crimson, meanwhile the TW laser vomit build does so for 64% heat on the same map. The stalker does the same damage at greater range with a STD engine...that is balanced right?

LOL...some people do not get it...you are feeding the trolls...they never listen.

Lots of problems with this post -
1. Timberwolves are 30kph faster than Stalkers and can mount jumpjets
2. The Clan XL engine has no significant disadvantage over the STD engine (just slots), so bringing this up makes no sense
3. Stalkers are 85 tons and require you to take a light in your drop deck if you're running one, Timberwolves have no such weakness

And somehow all of that is a problem because your lasers' range isn't quite as long as it can be in a heavier weight class, and it runs only marginally hotter? What?

[MischiefSC]

Gyrok, on 06 March 2015 - 01:05 PM, said:

If you learn to aim SRMs, they are equally effective against lights, in fact, I prefer them because ECM does not counter your ability to fire them.

As for the parts above. The A firestarter will equal any clan SPL build for firepower, range will be ever so marginally different, but not by much after quirks, and the FS9 runs cooler.

Clans actually do have STD engines...look at the Kingfisher.



I would also like to point out that a 6LL stalker can alpha all 6 LLs for 60% heat on crimson, meanwhile the TW laser vomit build does so for 64% heat on the same map. The stalker does the same damage at greater range with a STD engine...that is balanced right?

LOL...some people do not get it...you are feeding the trolls...they never listen.

So how fast is the Stalker? How much does it weigh? What's the sustained DPS on it again, what with LLs having a longer cooldown than most the weapons the laservomit TW has. Oh, plus JJs. Have you looked at mobility differences? How is that ability to move your arms side to side thing working out?

Are you seriously saying that the TW and the Stalker are equal mechs to compare? The TW is all around superior to the Stalker, for 10 tons less. That's the point. Comparable firepower, comparable heat, just about comparable armor (given that you don't relaly need back armor on a TW) plus JJs and 50%% faster, plus more agile twisting and maneuverability, for 10 less tons.