437 replies to this topic

[Walluh]

It's apparently not ignored, since you have to enter every thread and whine about it without fail.

[Johnny Z]

Walluh, on 16 March 2015 - 05:22 PM, said:

It's apparently not ignored, since you have to enter every thread and whine about it without fail.

I get a good laugh about this subject. So no, not ignored at all, just that its tough to take many replies from Omni pilots or their Inner Sphere alts seriously.

[Apnu]

aniviron, on 16 March 2015 - 04:32 PM, said:

It's a bit disingenuous to imply that clan weapons are all upsides. I won't comment on LRMs, they're bad for both factions, but saying that clan autocannons are better is a statement that very few people will back you up on- including PGI, since apparently they agree that clan autocannons need a buff. Clan lasers are better, but they also come with much longer burn times and more heat. More importantly, they come with virtually no quirks as well, meaning that an optimized IS chassis has the same range with less heat and a shorter burn time at the expense of weight. The Stalker 4N is a perfect example- it outclasses the Timberwolf, but it needs more tonnage to do it.

My point is that while nerfing the Timberwolf is a reasonable proposition, I don't think you're going to find a single decent player who will say that any clan lights or mediums besides the Stormcrow can hold a candle to what the IS bring- and these are the mechs that are going to be most affected by the heat and speed changes.

Sadly I never suggested that "clan weapons are all upsides" I noted their limit to show balance. That for every complaint about them, there is a benefit. Many players around these forums ignore this. As to weather or not the weapons are balanced, that's the topic of another thread -- I didn't get into it.

There are many players here, and around other place on the internet who complain how badly clan players have it. Which is pretty silly if you look at the CW map and see how badly the clans are doing against the IS.

Players don't take the clan ACs much for one reason: spread damage. They hate that clan tech has many spread damage weapons. PGI probably won't change that, so any buffs they make will be met with derision and whining from clan players. Clan players want the Inner Sphere's pinpoint alphas while enjoying the ammo, weight and crit. slot benefits of clan tech.

[Burktross]

CutterWolf, on 16 March 2015 - 05:08 PM, said:

Oh no you IS fan boys call anything that has the word Clan in it OP. I'm going to start a thread called, "PGI please make all Clan mech start out legged."

[WazOfOz]

Zeece .Cheers for posting some of Russ's ideas on fixing the (perceived OPness of clan mechs) on these forums... I never go to Twitter & would have had no idea what his ideas were/are. this should have been posted by devs in announcements, along side the wave 3 clan collection announcement. to allow people like myself (never visit twitter) to make a more informed decision on weather to purchase the pack or not.

[Zoid]

I don't see what the big deal is. Basically what would happen is if you lose the ST, you lose the benefit of the XL engine. Meaning that the 20% reduction in speed is roughly what you'd have if you had a standard engine of the same weight. Much better than being dead like IS XL engines.

[ThrashInc]

Apnu, on 16 March 2015 - 05:34 PM, said:

Sadly I never suggested that "clan weapons are all upsides" I noted their limit to show balance. That for every complaint about them, there is a benefit. Many players around these forums ignore this. As to weather or not the weapons are balanced, that's the topic of another thread -- I didn't get into it.

There are many players here, and around other place on the internet who complain how badly clan players have it. Which is pretty silly if you look at the CW map and see how badly the clans are doing against the IS.

Players don't take the clan ACs much for one reason: spread damage. They hate that clan tech has many spread damage weapons. PGI probably won't change that, so any buffs they make will be met with derision and whining from clan players. Clan players want the Inner Sphere's pinpoint alphas while enjoying the ammo, weight and crit. slot benefits of clan tech.

1. Range is not a benefit unless the maps/objectives are spread far enough to warrant a constant re-positioning to take advantage of this benefit.

2. Critical slots/tonnage is a benefit, though this is somewhat negated by limited space due to large engines and on the less-good mechs, fixed slots for items that aren't really worth taking.

3. Longer burn time, higher heat, more damage - doesn't always translate into an upside, but again, if the maps could allow you to constantly re-position and maintain range, it would be.

4. The CW map is not indicative of anything. There are a lot of other factors at play than just "clans take territory, nerf pls".

5. You are correct about Clan AC's, they will never be worth taking. The best clan brawling weapon is a C-Gauss Rifle. Anything short of making Clan AC's single shot like IS will not make them worth taking. There are huge hitreg issues with clan AC's on top of it being spread damage. I don't think that will or should happen, even if other changes are made to make them less garbage, they'll still be garbage.


To make my point, without the ability to maintain range (clans do have the maneuverability) and without the ability to effectively "brawl" due to much higher DPS on IS mechs, the clans don't have a real advantage. You have to hope that you can win on maneuverability, pinpoint alphas, and tactics. As soon as a competent IS group gets within 300m, your OP clan mechs are done. Not to mention that in CW, that means you are done because the drop zones are being camped.

If there was something that is completely unbalanced IS vs. Clan, it would be the Streak SRM 6 but then again, there aren't many other effective ways to stop a light rush.

I don't think clan mechs suck, but I don't think they are OP either. There are plenty of awful IS mechs, but there are also plenty of really, really good ones.

[Lynx7725]

Even as an IS pilot, I'm not so sure about the appropriateness of this. I think it'll tilt the balance of the Clan-IS technology advantage sufficiently that the Clans don't enjoy that substantial amount of advantage any more.

[Goose of Prey]

This type of "balance" is why I got a refund of my clan pack and just bought a few mechs I really wanted. The xl issue was really the only thing that gave the clans an op adv. Now with poor hit reg. (by design, I believe they could fix it tomorrow if they wanted) along with serious weapon nerfs I'm finding the clan mechs less and less of a threat.

While user agreements allow game designers to change what they want when they want, this type of piss poor game design is what will do PGI in. Regular radical changes to your already sold product is a sign of poor quality control, under led middle management, and a weak out of touch upper management. PGI leadership has more of a feel for spreadsheet realities than an understanding of what their customers want in a product.

The reason given for the increased price of clan mechs and equipment was it's superiority to IS gear. If the goal is a 50/50 win lose balance then why the price gouge?

I can drive either IS or clan, it makes no difference to me now. PGI's lack of respect is another issue.

[Satan n stuff]

Burktross, on 16 March 2015 - 03:46 PM, said:

You could also say, "useless MGs make for such good gameplay, right?"

So to buff one weapon you'd have mechs randomly die as soon as their armor is breached?
Do you not realize how incredibly frustrating the game would be for everyone if you could drop dead completely at random whenever your torso internals get hit? Why do you think PGI didn't implement that in the first place?

[Anarcho]

really tired of this "nerf the clans" BS...

If you want make Clans=IS make engines, armor and structure swapable... make the weapons the same, and just be happy for piloting a diferent skin of mech.

Balance the game with 10vs12, battle value based matvh maker or something like that, but I guess it is too late for a change like that.

Otherwise, if the nerfs keep coming, I would like a refund for wave 3, since the mechs are "equal" should cost the same. And no, your argument that it vomes with XL engines and armor/structure isnt valid anymore because it doesnt matter, since the nerfs are here to "equalize" the gameplay. So, equalize the price too...

[Johnny Z]

Anarcho, on 17 March 2015 - 12:40 AM, said:

really tired of this "nerf the clans" BS...

If you want make Clans=IS make engines, armor and structure swapable... make the weapons the same, and just be happy for piloting a diferent skin of mech.

Balance the game with 10vs12, battle value based matvh maker or something like that, but I guess it is too late for a change like that.

Otherwise, if the nerfs keep coming, I would like a refund for wave 3, since the mechs are "equal" should cost the same. And no, your argument that it vomes with XL engines and armor/structure isnt valid anymore because it doesnt matter, since the nerfs are here to "equalize" the gameplay. So, equalize the price too...

Pay to win quote of the month.

Players can find this quote in the next issue of "Man Babies monthly"

Edited by Johnny Z, 17 March 2015 - 01:03 AM.

[Widowmaker1981]

Considering literally vendoring my Dires if this comes through lol.. i barely play them anyway due to the absurd slowness (which im not really complaining about since they have obscene firepower.. its just too frustrating to spend 90% of every game holding W hoping to get a shot in before the game ends lol)

Meh. I play IS Assault 95% of the time in the group queue now anyway... BNC/BLR for life.

[Nightshade24]

Prosperity Park, on 16 March 2015 - 10:32 AM, said:

I, for one, do think it's a good idea to further penalize Clan Mechs for a side-torso loss.

Losing a side torso with a Clan XL means your engine just lost 2/3 of its health points. Receiving 66% engine damage should have hefty consequences.

lore wise that side torsos was just a 'buffer' with least important parts...
It should mean "nothing happens" to it besides the fact your ST is gone.

You also forget the fact most of our XL mechs have no ES or sometimes FF either.. so our XL engine isn't an advantage. it's like a fragile standard engine because your standard mechs can have ES (ie stalker... thunderbolt... cataphract... etc) while our ones (nova, summoner... mad dog... etc) do not.

Also hard wiring...would you take a 100 kph light or a 150 to 170 kph light?

[Nightshade24]

Rhent, on 16 March 2015 - 10:50 AM, said:

ROFLMO on the complaints for Clan Light mechs.

Lets put this in perspective:
-IS Light mechs almost exclusively run XL's and when they lose a torso they explode.
-Clan Light mechs that lose a torso lose 20% of heat sinks & speed.

Gee, I wonder what faction would rather trade XL engine losses?

they also run 150 to 170 kph with higher DPS as well.

What do you see people crying on CW for...

"OMG over powered adder rush ..."

or "OMG over powered firestarter rush ..."

you also have the fact that due to this speed it's harder to hit those mechs =l there is hit detection problems for mechs over 140 kph. All IS mechs can do that besides panther.
No clan light can do that in game.

[Soy]

Johnny Z, on 17 March 2015 - 01:00 AM, said:

Pay to win quote of the month.

Players can find this quote in the next issue of "Man Babies monthly"

Look man I gotta say this, just... guy you're quoting didn't say anything about pay to win. He said he doesn't like the way PGI is working on clan mechs. His comment about 10v12 in retrospect is relevant.

Just stop, you come across like a total autist.

[Nightshade24]

Heffay, on 16 March 2015 - 11:46 AM, said:

Clan lights will be getting quirks tomorrow. The net change between quirks and Clan XL engine changes might still be a buff for them.

4% machine gun range. 2% ER PPC fire rate.

Very buff. much jesus mech.

Jman5, on 16 March 2015 - 12:00 PM, said:

Why on earth would anyone want to opt out of a Clan XL engine? They are essentially low-ton Standard engines as they are now.

Gee, I wounder why you want to have the ability to not put your big guns in a more protected area.

Or to go more then 100 kph in a light that is already doing less DPS then the 60 kph faster IS lights...

Or able to not die so easy.

[Nightshade24]

Zoid, on 16 March 2015 - 05:58 PM, said:

I don't see what the big deal is. Basically what would happen is if you lose the ST, you lose the benefit of the XL engine. Meaning that the 20% reduction in speed is roughly what you'd have if you had a standard engine of the same weight. Much better than being dead like IS XL engines.

The "Big Deal" is the fact only 2 clan mechs in game is considered not Under powered to ****es and only with a SPECIFIC load out.

All the other mechs are UP for the following reasons...

1) Has FF instead of ES
2) Has neither FF or ES
3) Has hardwired limitations that cripple it (JJ, heatsinks in X location, FF/ ES slots, Engine, etc)
4) engine is to big / small (lights going 90 t0 100 kph... heavies wasting tonnage on over sized engine, etc)
5) Lack of quirks nad clan tech nerf results into very weak builds (ie 4 er med lasers instead of 2 er ppc.s)


This nerf basicly marks the tombstone for all clan mechs. as the remaining 'competetive clan mechs' which is already very few are now closing there eyes on there death bed.

There is already flooding of emails for refunds for wave III as well as strikes going on due to the fact that T5 clan mechs get 1% to 4% weapon quriks while IS mechs comparable to there Tier and role have 40% and 50% quirks.


Mathematically speaking, T4 will have no quirks, T3 will have negative 5%'s, T2 will have negative 10%'s, T1 have negative 20%'s.

on average and approximately...

Make clan tech have normal values and double heatsinks mean 2.0 eff. then these changes won't be a problem.

[Bleary]

Clan XLs need tradeoffs. Not just to help balance IS vs Clan; they need it so Clan omnis with XLs aren't strictly superior to equivalent omnis without them. At the moment the Clan standard engine serves as much purpose as single heat sinks.

And if Clan XLs are balanced, then Stormcrows and Timberwolves will be more balanced. And then perhaps they can make Clan ACs worthwhile (and maybe even ease the heat on CER-PPCs) and suddenly the Clan meta won't bore me to ******* death.

Because the problem isn't really Clan vs IS balance. That only ever matters in CW anyway, and CW has its own very specific (and likely transient) meta built around the fact that we only have a tiny handful of maps to test the beta CW client on. The problem is intra-Clan balance. 2.5 chassis are miles better than the others. 2 weapons are miles better than the others. It's impossible to balance the rest of the chassis or guns against them.

Edited by Bleary, 17 March 2015 - 02:23 AM.

[Widowmaker1981]

Bleary, on 17 March 2015 - 02:06 AM, said:

Clan XLs need tradeoffs. Not just to help balance IS vs Clan; they need it so Clan omnis with XLs aren't strictly superior to equivalent omnis without them. At the moment the Clan standard engine serves as much purpose as single heat sinks.

And if Clan XLs are balanced, then Stormcrows and Timberwolves will be more balanced. And then perhaps they can make Clan ACs worthwhile (and maybe even ease the heat on CER-PPCs) and suddenly the Clan meta won't bore me to ******* death.

Would you be amenable to allowing clans to swap to standard engines (and install ES if they don't have it) if the penalties get too steep? you wouldn't use an IS XL in a stalker, and you SURE AS HELL wouldn't use one in a Mad Dog.