716 replies to this topic

[KraftySOT]

You also lost 2 MP.

Which turned a Direwolf into a 1/2 (~24kph Max speed)

For 10 seconds or so its massively worse than the TTs penalty, then it just goes away.

Not really in the spirit of the TT either.

I thought the heat penalty it had was good, and just needed the movement penalty, and we can all walk away happy. The heat penalty was what 50%?

Throw on a 50% movement penalty and id call it a day. Thats roughly the equivalent (more heat hurt, but less move hurt) of the TT penalty. Until we get a real crit system, that would do.

Basically it looks like PGI wants clam mechs that lose their ST, to die shortly there after, whereas IS just dies. Which seems fine. The whole 10 second period of recalibration after a massive penalty just seems. Silly, and un BTech.

[Kristov Kerensky]

Gyrok, on 17 March 2015 - 08:45 AM, said:

Absolutely certain that you lose both ST and you die. In fact, you are guaranteed to die as soon as you lose any second torso.

As for the last part, no, it was for being able to play clan mechs assuming all things would be roughly equal.

I must have hit a bug then, why am I not surprised...oh, yeah, PGI...

As for you assuming all things would be roughly equal...what? Even PGI said that the Clan toys would be better than the IS toys long before they were put in, and you expect anyone here to believe you thought that having the better toys would make things equal? If you mean, better toys would compensate for lack of ability, eh..not so much in my experience, but it is an often used excuse. If you mean better toys would compensate for the enemy having lesser toys and THAT would be roughly equal, you keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.

[Agent 0 Fortune]

So the assumption here is that by giving the IS mechs LFE tech 8 years early, that the clans will get larger quirks?
This isn't the way things work, more likely the IS mech quirks will be lowered to bring them in line with their presumed greater survivability (at least those that could benefit from LFE engines, mechs like the Dragon would gain little benefit since they are primarily destroyed by CT damage).

[Cyborne Elemental]

I think 20% speed loss is a little steep, and I mostly play IS mechs..

10% is the bonus given by speed tweak, I would start there and tweak it after its had some time to settle in.

That or do it differently for different mechs, the so called "problem mechs" Timberwolf, Stormcrow, Direwolf.
Do it on a Tier based system just like quirks were applied strongly to lower tier mechs first, and lesser quirks to higher tier mechs.
Start at a base 5% to un-elite the speed tweak bonus, and toss on an extra 3-5% speed loss or whatever for each Tier higher on those problem mechs.

Do it smart, not just lump it onto all mechs equally, because a global change like we saw with the laser nerfs, only hurt the mechs like Summoner, Nova, Kitfox, Adder, and other lower tier Clan mechs that didn't really need those nerfs.

[Mirumoto Izanami]

Mister D, on 17 March 2015 - 10:16 AM, said:

I think 20% speed loss is a little steep, and I mostly play IS mechs..

10% is the bonus given by speed tweak, I would start there and tweak it after its had some time to settle in.

I agree with this. I also think the 10 second "engine recalibratrion" bullshitte is just that...bull shitte.


On the flip side, still a better penalty than what happens in TT...

[Kenyon Burguess]

Gyrok you need a poll on this subject asap. everyone knows a poll on a forum is the best way to gather hard scientific player base data that is sure to convince the development team the error of their ways.

[kapusta11]

Mister D, on 17 March 2015 - 10:16 AM, said:

I think 20% speed loss is a little steep, and I mostly play IS mechs..

10% is the bonus given by speed tweak, I would start there and tweak it after its had some time to settle in.

That or do it differently for different mechs, the so called "problem mechs" Timberwolf, Stormcrow, Direwolf.
Do it on a Tier based system just like quirks were applied strongly to lower tier mechs first, and lesser quirks to higher tier mechs.
Start at a base 5% to un-elite the speed tweak bonus, and toss on an extra 3-5% speed loss or whatever for each Tier higher on those problem mechs.

Do it smart, not just lump it onto all mechs equally, because a global change like we saw with the laser nerfs, only hurt the mechs like Summoner, Nova, Kitfox, Adder, and other lower tier Clan mechs that didn't really need those nerfs.

I'd start with 1%, who needs meaningful penalties, right? IS mechs with XL engine DIE when they lose ST, clans should be happy with ANYTHING that is not equal to what IS experience.

Edited by kapusta11, 17 March 2015 - 10:46 AM.

[Jonathan Paine]

Gyrok has finally sold me on PGI and its approach to dealing with Clan and IS:
We need Clan nerfs and IS buffs for tonnage for tonnage complete parity. There is simply no way to negotiate with people who cant play without a clear meta advantage.Arguing that an engine with 25% tonnage reduction == an engine with 50% tonnage reduction is just pathetic.

We simply do not deserve to have nicer things.

[Almond Brown]

KraftySOT, on 17 March 2015 - 10:12 AM, said:

You also lost 2 MP.
stuff

The whole 10 second period of recalibration after a massive penalty just seems. Silly, and un BTech.

That 10s thing was the Posters idea, not Russ's ffs. This **** is how 'everyone" ends up on an Island. Don't attribute **** to the Dev that they did not say.

Besides. When one reads that a CD "reduction bonus" is considered just another "PGI slap in the face" NERF. it just shows how totally and utterly F*%^$D this place really is.

Quote

and a COOL DOWN buff...so it can run HOTTER than it ALREADY does...?? Because it needed to generate more heat faster...right?

WTF?!

Edited by Almond Brown, 17 March 2015 - 11:13 AM.

[KraftySOT]

Aries 127, on 17 March 2015 - 11:13 AM, said:

I like this idea and think that PGI is smart enough

Let me stop you right thar...

[Aries 127]

Gyrok, on 17 March 2015 - 05:39 AM, said:

Instead of nerfing clans into oblivion (shades of the victor nerf back in the day) and offering single digit quirks as a consolation prize...I have a suggestion, please hear me out.

I think that rather than piss off a large number of the people playing clans, why not bring in the LFEs (http://www.sarna.net..._Engine_-_Light) for the IS?

This would basically stop all the crying about engines, it would also have to come with some drawbacks as well. Quirks on the IS side would need to be adjusted, heavily, without doubt. However, this offers an option that allows mechs to be on roughly equal footing. As the timeline advances, this tech would come about in the primary wave of IS Omnimechs anyway, so why not offer it as an available option now?

I think the way this should work would be that if you equip a LFE into your battlemech, you should have the endo/ferro slots locked. For the sake of grins and giggles, you can turn those off/on, but you cannot dictate where the slots are taken up. That way, you get a pseudo-omnimech that would allow IS to have similar functionality choice versus the Clans (which would still be unable to change engines, at all...).

Thoughts?

I like this idea and think that PGI is smart enough to find ways to make the 3 different types of engines have their own unique value, besides the destruction & weight variables that come with each engine type. With locked-in endo/ferro slots for LFE this would effect loadouts and change the ability of each mech per chosen engine type (Std, LFE, XL). There are many possibilities that come with this option. I would be interested to see an investigation of this option, pro's/con's, by PGI, just to see what they think about this idea!!!

[Kin3ticX]

Thanks for the suggestion Gyrok to normalize the game by closing part of the tech gap.

However, I don't think PGI is planning to shoot the timeline ahead this fast so there has to be another way besides LFE. Also, the LFE would allow a side torso destruction but it only has some of the weight savings.

[Gyrok]

Kin3ticX, on 17 March 2015 - 11:29 AM, said:

Thanks for the suggestion Gyrok to normalize the game by closing part of the tech gap.

However, I don't think PGI is planning to shoot the timeline ahead this fast so there has to be another way besides LFE. Also, the LFE would allow a side torso destruction but it only has some of the weight savings.

My thought was, by allowing LFE and endo, you would basically make up the difference for most clan mechs since the majority do not have endo steel. The few that do would be minor outliers by comparison and IS mechs could run a lesser LFE, like a 300 instead of 340 or something similar then use endo and get comparable weapons tonnage.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

1 - cXLs are vastly superior to LFEs. They cut weight by a significant margin beyond what the LFE offers, leaving the Clan still with more armor, more speed, and more payload.

2 - cXLs and LFEs both have canon penalties when they take engine shielding hits (for example, by losing a side torso). PGI's plan to increase the current penalties is actually in line with canon in this regard, as the current loss of performance is token, at best.

3 - QQ is lame, especially when it's about something that you haven't actually seen in-game yet, and so can speak about neither rationally nor effectively.

[Gyrok]

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 17 March 2015 - 11:51 AM, said:

1 - cXLs are vastly superior to LFEs. They cut weight by a significant margin beyond what the LFE offers, leaving the Clan still with more armor, more speed, and more payload.

2 - cXLs and LFEs both have canon penalties when they take engine shielding hits (for example, by losing a side torso). PGI's plan to increase the current penalties is actually in line with canon in this regard, as the current loss of performance is token, at best.

3 - QQ is lame, especially when it's about something that you Ravenna actually seen in-game yet, and so can speak about neither rationally nor effectively.

Should we talk about all the ways IS ignores TT rules before I write up why this is a case that is not well to carry over for a FPS game, or are you going to take the hint?

[KraftySOT]

Gyrok, on 17 March 2015 - 11:56 AM, said:

Should we talk about all the ways IS ignores TT rules before I write up why this is a case that is not well to carry over for a FPS game, or are you going to take the hint?

Why wouldnt it carry over well to an FPS game? Are there no FPS games out there where damage has effects. Like say, an arm being hit making you less accurate?

Because thats all the mechanic is.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Gyrok, on 17 March 2015 - 11:56 AM, said:

Should we talk about all the ways IS ignores TT rules before I write up why this is a case that is not well to carry over for a FPS game, or are you going to take the hint?

Reflexive anti-TT ranting is not useful.

Note also I referenced lore [canon], not TT.

As for the IS ignoring TT specifically, it really doesn't anywhere near as much as the Clans do. There are mechanics in the TT for modifying Battlemechs, including engine swaps and internal structure upgrades (though almost impossible in the lore due to practical constraints, it is supported for those with access to advanced orbital manufactories, and TT makes it as easy as simply doing the tonnage calculations and assigning the ES crits). As for the lore more broadly, there are numerous precedents for wildly modified builds personalized for their pilots, in ways that we cannot replicate in MWO at all (excepting certain of the Hero variants, which are often based on said modified builds).

Ultimately, the fact that you neither addressed my objections directly nor bothered to do anything but make a couple vague statements and then attack me personally leads me to view this thread as an exercise in selfish egotism, so I'm writing it off as just that. Have fun shouting in your echo chamber, attempting to drive off anyone with constructive disagreements or counterpoints.

Edited by Levi Porphyrogenitus, 17 March 2015 - 12:07 PM.

[CyclonerM]

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 17 March 2015 - 12:07 PM, said:

, not TT. As for the IS ignoring TT specifically, it really doesn't anywhere near as much as the Clans do.

Now that i have shown my expression right now, let me argue..

As you said, and i think Joseph Mallan could confirm and give a better insight about, Inner Sphere BattleMechs are pretty complicated when it comes to customization. In a BattleMech, all the equipment is hardwired. Just to switch an AC20 for a Gauss rifle, you would have to basically remove the hardwired weapon, redesign the weapon mount or something like that, mount in the new weapon, fix the 'Mech's targeting computer to adapt to the new weapon. And add to that the risk of something breaking, plus the cost of more or less expert technicians. Plus, it would take weeks and for all this time your 'Mech has to sit in a mech bay and cannot be used in battle. Not to mention installing an endo-steel structure.. Just to produce it you need an orbital facility. I am not sure about the costs, but from what i read, even if you could actually do it, you might just buy a new 'Mech instead, as that would take at least a month i believe.

It is definitely expensive, so usually field refits are reserved for elite units and custom variants are reserved for special cases (i.e. being a friend of Victor Steiner-Davion or a Khan..).

Let us have a look at MWO now..

You can customize everything ( aside from gyro and cockpit, of course, but just because there are no compact gyro etc. yet) , weapons, armor type and allocation, items, JJs, structure, in a couple of seconds (really, how much does it take to drag + save?), paying just the price of the item you are mounting, without any risk of failing the modification, without the need of hiring expert techs to do the most complicated modifications, and all of this even if you are the lowliest Periphery pirate scum!

OmniMechs now.

Basically, in an Omni, the structure type , the armor type and allocation, the engine, armor/structure crits, engine and some other items are hardwired; the rest is pod-mounted, meaning that pretty much everything could be put there. And much more easily than IS stuff. To switch an ER large laser with a Gauss rifle (aff you should be able to do that, no hardpoints in TT) for example, you only need a couple of hours and a few less experienced techs. It is less expensive and can be done to reconfigure an Omni for the needs of an upcoming battles during a planetary campaign, for example. Sure, there are standard configurations that are usually used, it is not like any and every Clan warrior gets a customized Omni config, but potentially it would be much easier to be done. Anyway, flexibility is the word for OmniMechs in general. Even if the base chassis is hardwired, technically you should be able to mount JJs, ECM, AMS etc. on any 'Mech, provided you have free tonnage (BT players correct me if i am wrong).

In MWO?

We are allowed to change the armor points (but not type), and i am glad for it. Sure, i could accept stock armor values if IS players did the same, and i am not sure if you would want it

However, most of the other restrictions from the tabletop have been translated in MWO: fixed engine, fixed items, fixed crits. And they, in some cases, hurt some 'Mechs (Nova, Gargoyle).

Instead of 100% free pod customization, we have switchable hardpoints. Which is not that bad, but still a considerable reduction of freedom, considering in the lore Phelan Kell uses a customized Nova with LRMs and a LBX, a config that we will never be able to make in MWO.

Lack of Endo/Ferro + locked crits really reduce the firepower of some 'Mechs.

And since there is no time mechanic, no R&R or anything like that, we get few of the advantages of OmniMechs and most of their limitations.

However, a good number of the limitations are actually BT rules. So i would say Clan Omnies follow the rules quite more closely than IS BattleMechs..

This is why i cannot avoid laughing when someone advocates using the BT rules to further nerf Clan 'Mechs.. Everyone is so partial, everyone so ready to shout "corerule ignore!1!" but ready to agree when someone proposes to use BT rules as a means or a justification for more Clan nerfs..

[Mawai]

Just a question for you ...

IF clans are being nerfed ... do you think that maybe there is a REASON?

PGI has terabytes of data showing the effectiveness of each and every mech over the entire range of piloting ability. They know which get the most kills, most assists, most damage, which weapons are the most effective and which are the least.

I am hoping that PGI is not applying these quirks/nerfs/buffs by throwing darts or going by "feel" ... or even consulting the "competitive" players. They should KNOW how out of balance the mechs and weapons are. So ... when folks complain that this or that mech is unfairly getting nerfed ... I have to ask if the people have a vested interest in that mech or perhaps simply don't like change.

At the present time, I am still operating under the assumption that PGI is not entirely clueless ... that they have the numbers and are USING them to aid in balancing clan and IS mechs.

Unfortunately, PGI can take an extremely LONG time to adjust to situations in which they have gone too far ... the TDR-9S was one of their faster reaction times. So, from the sounds of it, they will be adding clan mech quirks in small steps.

[CyclonerM]

Too bad numbers can be influenced by sooo many factors, like new players dropping in trial or not optimized IS 'Mechs?

I am not a strictly competitive player (i would rather do a stock only battle than a competitive match) but , going by feel, i can honestly say Clan vs IS are pretty balanced. Only a couple of 'Mechs on each side tend to create balance issues, but that is where individual nerfs and quirks should come in play instead of global nerfs that hit mostly the already less effective/used/popular 'Mechs. Quiaff?