139 replies to this topic

[KraftySOT]

Karl Streiger, on 22 March 2015 - 11:46 PM, said:

Take TT for example how do you want to simulate a 2/3 Clan Pilot vs a 2/3 IS pilot?

A real pilot tree.

[Sjorpha]

Why are you debating this as if it was politics or a matter of opinion? There is real data on the average impact of each mech in the game, and the goal of balancing is to make that impact (when built optimally) as equal as possible.

The challenge isn't to argue for "your" side, the challenge is to explore the game and push the limits in a way that increases that body of data so PGI can work on the balance.

People ask "when are you done?", often about this or that nerf.

Never, because there is always going to be tweaks needed as the game and it's meta evolves for as long as it exists, but a starting baseline balance could for example be first at least 10 comparable top tier mechs on both factions, as measured by competitive performance, and second no mechs severely underperforming as compared to that.

The quality of discussion here has sunk to the level of ignorance and dishonesty that it feels pointless to take part in, I sincerely hope PGI is not reading these threads as it will only give them bad ideas. Use the data you have and take council with the players knowing their ****, you know who they are.

[KraftySOT]

Sjorpha, on 22 March 2015 - 11:59 PM, said:

There is real data on the average impact of each mech in the game,

No there really isnt.

Sjorpha, on 22 March 2015 - 11:59 PM, said:

The quality of discussion here has sunk to the level of ignorance and dishonesty that it feels pointless to take part in

Yep.

[Karl Streiger]

Sjorpha, on 22 March 2015 - 11:59 PM, said:

The quality of discussion here has sunk to the level of ignorance and dishonesty that it feels pointless to take part in, I sincerely hope PGI is not reading these threads as it will only give them bad ideas. Use the data you have and take council with the players knowing their ****, you know who they are.

But its fun to take part

Although I'm not sure if the data could tell you stuff, can't say i know in which quality those data is represented. But i expect a aggregation of all inputs (Mech Variants, average ELO, weapons used) but is that data accurate enough to show you that a Thor D build with a right sided load out of ERPPC and Gauss piloted by an above average ELO pilot is good because of the Pilot, the Team, the weapon or the Map?

[Lily from animove]

KraftySOT, on 21 March 2015 - 02:08 PM, said:

Well, alot of the posts are right, this is getting ridiculous.

You guys do realize when you put in 50,000 words on a topic on either side, using completely asymmetrical examples, and both sides make fairly convincing if not convoluted points, it means the balance is pretty good right?

Asymmetrical balance is a thing as old as flight sims. One guy has a Spitfire Ia. which can turn and burn, its got great energy retention, a tight turn radius, and low stall speed. Its very stable, it can dive well when it rolls over (it has no fuel injection, negative Gs starve the engine of fuel and oil). The other guy has a 109E4. It has a higher speed, better guns, better climb, better immediate dive (fuel injection).

On paper these two aircraft couldnt be more different, however, as has been shown in 30 years of flight simulators, the actual historical documentation of the real airframes, and massive amount of computations to figure it out, the Spitfire Ia, and 109E4, is the closest match up in history.

Yet that has never stopped a literal cubic ass load of people over the years, saying one or the other is OP. Theyve gone to extreme places and even resorted to real life crime over the debate. Theyve said its because only speed and altitude matter (the 109 is OP!) theyve said its because turn and burn (chasing tails to shoot from dead 6 oclock) is so easy for noobs and the spit is so good at that (The Spitdweeb stick stirred me im an experten Luftwaffle, the Spitfire is OP!!!).

Regardless of the the fact that sims just simply make a flight model that attempts to perfectly simulate the aircraft, and all the flight tests and combat reports show that the two craft are a perfect asymmetrical match for each other, that spawned dozens of more versions of each airframe expanding on the strengths that each side has, each attempting to finally put the nail in the other sides coffin with some stat that outclassed the other, people still debate this TO THIS DAY.

At the end of the day, in 30 years, no one has ever proven one or the other is over powering of the other. Over powering in and of itself means something is so clearly powerful that no one could argue about it. The simple fact that there is a debate at all, is proof that its not over powering.


Now return to your regularly scheduled whine fest.

weren't you one of the IS biggets whiners when it comes to nerfing clanners?

[Karl Streiger]

Lily from animove, on 23 March 2015 - 02:55 AM, said:

weren't you one of the IS biggets whiners when it comes to nerfing clanners?

Question of everybody's point of view - you are subjective in this aspect

and about the asymetric balance he is right:

The builds for new to get some success are Clans
The builds for the best players are Clans - but the middle ground is IS

The newb in a Clan stand no chance vs a average IS player maybe not even the average Clan vs average IS Player - but the good IS Player will have hardly a chance when fighting a good Clan Player

Edited by Karl Streiger, 23 March 2015 - 03:02 AM.

[Lily from animove]

Karl Streiger, on 23 March 2015 - 03:00 AM, said:

Question of everybody's point of view - you are subjective in this aspect

and about the asymetric balance he is right:

The builds for new to get some success are Clans
The builds for the best players are Clans - but the middle ground is IS

The newb in a Clan stand no chance vs a average IS player maybe not even the average Clan vs average IS Player - but the good IS Player will have hardly a chance when fighting a good Clan Player

thats biased, or show me the 30 kills CW clanner if one so far exists.
So all we know is that we have proof of IS able to deal easily with clans, What we lack is IS pilots able to do so.
Now those pilots have to ask themselves why and where they fail to achieve this.
Sure you cna also cry for nerfs, but this will not improve a pilots bad skills, it will only increase them in relation to others. skill can't be gifted, it needs to be trained to improve.

Krafty cosntantly just showed where clans are better in his argumentation, never once has he tried to see it the other way around and look where IS is better, and so if you can't see your strenght you can not work around them.

Edited by Lily from animove, 23 March 2015 - 03:48 AM.

[Karl Streiger]

Lily from animove, on 23 March 2015 - 03:13 AM, said:

Krafty cosntantly just showed where clans are better in his argumentation, never once has he tried to see it the other way around and look where IS is better, and so if you can't see your strenght you can not work around them.

In a direct comparison - ton for ton the Clans are better.

Ok - that was before the lazy quirks screwed stuff - now you have builds that ton for ton are better as clans and a couple of builds that ton for ton still suck.

Again a question of asymmetric balance - i know that one a good day my YLW can kill a TimberWolf or SlaughterCrow in one on one (not of worth in a Team Play like CW)

But on my average days - when i want to grind and shot points i always run ClanMechs.
For example the 30 Streak Crow- or the 30Streak Summoner - easy to use - easy Cbills for no afford

Edited by Karl Streiger, 23 March 2015 - 03:26 AM.

[Lily from animove]

Karl Streiger, on 23 March 2015 - 03:24 AM, said:

In a direct comparison - ton for ton the Clans are better.

Ok - that was before the lazy quirks screwed stuff - now you have builds that ton for ton are better as clans and a couple of builds that ton for ton still suck.

Again a question of asymmetric balance - i know that one a good day my YLW can kill a TimberWolf or SlaughterCrow in one on one (not of worth in a Team Play like CW)

But on my average days - when i want to grind and shot points i always run ClanMechs.
For example the 30 Streak Crow- or the 30Streak Summoner - easy to use - easy Cbills for no afford

see, streaks ar enot even that good, lol, other builds are better, yes lazy clanbuilds like the streak make for lazy people fater money, but the truth is, the moment you ue soemthign non lazy you can be way more efficient, and then IS has a lot builds oing this better nowdays. don't compare the lazy vs lazy builds, because that is not increasing any balance.

[Karl Streiger]

Lily from animove, on 23 March 2015 - 03:50 AM, said:

see, streaks ar enot even that good, lol, other builds are better, yes lazy clanbuilds like the streak make for lazy people fater money, but the truth is, the moment you ue soemthign non lazy you can be way more efficient, and then IS has a lot builds oing this better nowdays. don't compare the lazy vs lazy builds, because that is not increasing any balance.

OK you have shown a perfect example of a Occam's Razor mod - for balance.
When you remove the "imho" not important builds for balance - you can balance stuff right?

Everything is valid - you have to compare the Adder with the Wubbolt as well as the SniperWhale with the Grid Iron.
Everything is important - and the lazy build should just underline my statement:
Its simple to get adequate results in almost any Clan Mech. And i don't mind if that streak build is good or not - it prints C-Bills - because Cbill printing is direct proportional to damage dealt.

So to look for the "best quirked" IS Mechs vs. the best ClanMech needs first a closer look - IS vs IS and Clan vs Clan
everything that influences all ClanMechs or all IS Mechs as a whole is not a nerf to get balance between iS and clan - its simple a correction.
Want to balance Wubbolt vs TimberWolf - well you need to balance the Orion vs the 5SS first as well as the Summoner/Gargoyle vs the TimberWolf

When you have a reason to take the Orion over the Thundebrolt - and the Summoner over the Timberwolf that is not influenced by you personal "opinion" (I hate the TimberWolf - its a characterless build and every noob can get good results in, same for the 5SS with MPLAS only - bs boring build from noobs for noobs)
When you have prove in data, theory and player opinions about reasons to take one for another - you can look for Clan vs IS asysmetrical balance.

At the current state with the really lazy quirk system its really hard to have a objective opinion -but I try

[TB Freelancer]

Sjorpha, on 22 March 2015 - 11:59 PM, said:

The quality of discussion here has sunk to the level of ignorance and dishonesty that it feels pointless to take part in, I sincerely hope PGI is not reading these threads as it will only give them bad ideas. Use the data you have and take council with the players knowing their ****, you know who they are.

Go back on every major discussion whether it was groups being able to face pugs, RnR, etc. and you'll find its been like this from day one. On the bright side, PGI seems to be doing better than most DEVs I've seen at filtering out the bull....

Edited by TB Freelancer, 23 March 2015 - 04:51 AM.

[Lily from animove]

So you wanna tell the streak adder prints money as the FS9? only if you are horribly using the FS9 wrong. otherwise any FS9 pilot with decent skill will disagree with you.

So I can make averagely more scores with my Nova than even in any other clanmehc currently except tbr and SCR. Simply because I have laods of matches in the Nova. Would I spend another 100 matches in a row in a DWF, it would heavily exceed because it's the better mech + I then have the skill compensation. But after not havign touched the Direwolf since maybe 200+ matches, I sometimes fail to even get 300+ damage. But thats not a mech issue its a piloting issue due to the lack of being used to the chassis.

Thats why you can NOT compare this. People call out the zeus to be bad, because they played a few matches without gotten used to the chassis and cry for buffs. Its not even here for a month and poeple already cry.

If Is pilots would cry less and spend a bit more time in their chassis playing them the way they need to be played they would simply reach clanlevel of competition. But they don't they switch loadouts and mechs all the time and stuck being medicore used to their mech, instead of mastering them.

Streakcrow and streack adder are "easy" mechs, meaning they reach their maximum potential quite fast without many "tricks to master" Which is not the case for other mechs. Thats why they feel easier to play, why you achieve things faster. Yet if you play the other emchs correct you would be a lot better. streacks are crap. srms are even better, yet smrs are already "harder" because manual aim. It will take you more effort and time to lern the not so easy srm loadout. But the result once you get there is making the streak look pitiful.

Same is with the IS vs clans. clans have less chassis, so they naturally at this point have more playtime in these chassis, Especially the TBR and SCR as only true top tier CW mechs. And so they are of course way better by experinece in these chassis.
IS players try around a lot. also due to constant quirks changing their mechs, but this makes them have the issue of not havign enough playing experience in these mechs. But then some truly good pilots come, and can pull this off better than the usual playerbase. They show you the true potential and how reliable this is to achieve. (because everyone can pull the 1k damage match in a chassis once in a while). Now the other pilots IS need to follow this. But instead many prefer to cry for nerfs/buffs than trying to ake the effort and skilling up.

So you need to differ between easy and true possibilities of the mech. Yes timber is easy to play and you reach 90% of its potential quite easily. But that does not automatically mean a Wubbolt is inferior. It may be with the same "easy" effort you may only bring the wubbolt to 70% performance. But thats not what should decide balance. It can be a wubbolt with experience can even reach 110% of a Timbers level. Unequally easy does not mean unequally balanced. Think about the overquirked Thunderbolt we had. This build was easy to master and stronger than others. and so it was easier to ientify as OP.

IS has a lot mechs able to match the clanners and even exceed, they are just not as easy to bring there, because you may need 100+ matches in them before you get there. But people are too lazy to go there and want their "easy skill" now and here.

[Karl Streiger]

hey here we have a consensus. Some Mechs can achieve their full potential faster than others.

[Davegt27]

let me put my WCS hat on (weapons control systems)

oh never mind just watch this




I personally never say anything is over powered they are just powered

That means they do what they are designed to do

[Sjorpha]

KraftySOT, on 23 March 2015 - 12:06 AM, said:

No there really isnt.

Yes there is, whether it is easily accessible or not the landscape of possible performance is defined by the game rules, and the statistics of each mech is tracked. PGI could take that data and parse it, or give it to a mathematically proficient community member to work with. We could have graphs showing how each mech performs on average as well as spike performance and performance in relation ELO (skill thresholds for high peaks).

There is data to be mined and there are competitive games to outline the general picture, and there are players who understand that picture better than others. Adiuvo is certainly one of them, and with all due respect you're not, because you say things like "clan lasers are bad" when they are the most efficient weapon category in the game as of the current meta.

[DONTOR]

Adiuvo, on 21 March 2015 - 02:22 PM, said:

If we have a bunch of mechs in a class that are poor, then what's the point in driving that class? What is the point of driving anything but the strongest mechs? If someone doesn't care about how they perform in a match and just wanna have fun, that's fine, but that sort of person wouldn't really care about game balance to begin with.

The point is to drive a lower tier mech and out perform everyone else on your team, with all their tier 1-2 mechs. Its fun and you still perform well if you pilot them efficiently.

[Sjorpha]

TB Freelancer, on 23 March 2015 - 04:50 AM, said:

Go back on every major discussion whether it was groups being able to face pugs, RnR, etc. and you'll find its been like this from day one. On the bright side, PGI seems to be doing better than most DEVs I've seen at filtering out the bull....

They are doing ok at ignoring the silliest ideas, but they are not as good at replacing them with good ones.

They seem unwilling to make the factions tech balanced in itself, and instead has gone for a route of obscuring the imbalances with quirks on the IS side and build restrictions on the clan side.

I think this is a very convoluted and weird way to do balance between two factions is a game, because it is extremely difficult for the average player to judge a mechs potential when numbers don't mean what they say and a weapon is in practice a different weapon on different mechs. Why not just go throught the tech of both factions and balance each piece of equipment ton for ton. Then you could get rid of the restrictions and quirks as faction balance tool, which it is a bad tool for, and use it only for internal faction balance, which it is a good tool for.

Anyways, if they can achieve balance in their roundabout way, I will support that. It is better than imbalance.

Edited by Sjorpha, 23 March 2015 - 07:36 AM.

[KraftySOT]

Lily from animove, on 23 March 2015 - 02:55 AM, said:

weren't you one of the IS biggets whiners when it comes to nerfing clanners?

Nope.

Im the guy who still thinks that the values should all be TT, we should have a Battle Value system, and 10 v 12.

Sjorpha, on 23 March 2015 - 07:22 AM, said:

Yes there is, whether it is easily accessible or not the landscape of possible performance is defined by the game rules, and the statistics of each mech is tracked. PGI could take that data and parse it, or give it to a mathematically proficient community member to work with. We could have graphs showing how each mech performs on average as well as spike performance and performance in relation ELO (skill thresholds for high peaks).

There is data to be mined and there are competitive games to outline the general picture, and there are players who understand that picture better than others. Adiuvo is certainly one of them, and with all due respect you're not, because you say things like "clan lasers are bad" when they are the most efficient weapon category in the game as of the current meta.

Fair point, but its not available for anyone to do that kind of parsing.

[KraftySOT]

Sjorpha, on 23 March 2015 - 07:22 AM, said:

Adiuvo is certainly one of them, and with all due respect you're not, because you say things like "clan lasers are bad" when they are the most efficient weapon category in the game as of the current meta.

And no, he isnt. Clam lasers ARE bad. If you think, or he thinks, theyre the most efficient weapon system in the game, youre brain dead.

The most efficient weapon, is technically, a Guass on a Spider with a 15% rof increase and 45% range increase, making it the highest damage, longest range, PPFLD weapon in the game. However. Its terrible to run that.

Thats one of the problems with data collection. Is that you still have someone come alogn and tell you what the data "means" when its absolutely meaningless.

Its like when scientists say "We found a new particle when we smashed things together" and the press says "Scientists solved all the mysteries of the universe!"

The discovery in and of itself is meaningless and has no greater context, thats the problem here. Even if you parse all that data and get metrics, that might very well be completely wrong simply because of the way youre collecting them and the 'purpose' youre collecting them for. If youre looking for the most efficient weapon, and youre not including quirks, and maps in that data, your data is worthless.

Clam lasers get better on Alpine, or Boreal.

They get real bad on Mordor.

Whereas you still can alpha 6 LL on a 4N on Mordor, with basics.

The most popular meta Hellbringer build cant even do that. And its damage projection at range is worse.

Its complicated, people are biased, the meta doesnt even reflect the exact balance issues either.

Lets go back to my 109 and Spitfire example. The 109 is harder to fly, but probably a better aircraft in the right hands at the right altitude than the Spitfire can ever be. At around 5km altitude, a 109 has ridiculously good performance and can BnZ a Spit 1a all day, all night, until its fuel runs out.

Yet, generally, most people are bad at flight sims. Its nothing personal, just most people fly around in circles chasing tails and pulling the trigger. Thats about as far as they get. They dont know an Immelman from a Scissor.

The Spitfire is really, really good at chasing tails. Its a great noob machine because anyone who gets in one and chases tails, is going to beat any 109 who is also chasing tails. (because the 109 pilot is flying it wrong) so this leads to bad metrics. You have 80% of the players, split between two sides (40% of the player base on each side) who is bad, and chases tails. This leads to the SPITDWEEB META!

Despite the fact that the 109 is actually a better aircraft, the fact that there arent enough hands that are good on them, makes the Spit, meta. When ALL the metrics are factored in, like the realities of computer games and competition in general, the meta doesnt even always reflect the actual reality.

So...the META...doesnt matter.

Edited by KraftySOT, 23 March 2015 - 08:50 AM.

[Ultimax]

Krafty, this is what it looks like when someone who knows what they are doing pilots a Dire Wolf.





This is contrary to all of the nonsense we see with guys running perma-clan faction tags convinced the DWF is "bad".

The reality is those players are bads, not the DWF.

4:10 to 4:15 in particular should be enlightening, with all the talk of "invincible unhittable firestarter" nonsense we see bandied about, or ravens who dance 50m from 4 or 5 timber wolves.

Edited by Ultimatum X, 23 March 2015 - 08:59 AM.