150 replies to this topic

[SkyHammyr]

E Rommel, on 07 April 2015 - 10:38 AM, said:

I find the suggestion that stock mode would be good for new players even more hilarious. Stock mode would teach new players all the wrong lessons, especially IS players.

... And, getting /ROLFStomped in Trial Mechs by Meta Horses is PERFECT for the New Player Experience.

I played the Stock Scene, it was fun. It wasn't unbalanced and it certainly didn't teach me bad habits.
It would've been much more fun if there were rewards attached to it so more people would be encouraged to try it put.

Edited by SkyHammr, 07 April 2015 - 03:56 PM.

[ROSS-128]

Jaeger Gonzo, on 07 April 2015 - 03:14 PM, said:

E Rommel you are still comparing tech 1 with tech 2 and even clans? FFS cant you google it out already in sarna?
When I will have more time maybe I will take a walk on all your examples. But I will tell you already, all those meks are common view in our games and are doing fine.
But I will give you one thing on that Banshee, its not as weak as you think about it, but indeed is handicapped a little, its be cause in MWO we don`t have melee. And that particular Banshee is designed as melee mek. Same as Charger for example. This one would show you laugh I suppose as it is 80t assault with only 5 SL. But I seen those BNC on the field and where doing decent enough I would say, never drive them though. All others meks you mentioned are very good in stock settings and most of them I drive with good to very good results. Damn, some of them like KTO or AWS, sometimes I take accidentally to public drop and still do decent enough. But you can ask Tesuni about it, this crazy sotb is taking stock even to CW and he claim that hes doing good enough.

If you would read the posts, I was comparing basic IS (single heatsinks, standard engines in all cases) to basic IS, and Clans to Clans. So you can take your whining about tech levels and different factions and shove it: they are not even balanced against themselves.

MLX-A vs SCR-PRIME. Both Clans. No contest. Hell, even MLX-A vs ADR-PRIME, still no contest. Both Clans, same weight class, ADR completely trounces the MLX-A because the MLX-A has a garbage stock loadout.

BNC-3E vs AS7-D. Both IS mechs. Both pre-3025. Atlas trounces the Banshee hands down, even with how schizophrenic its loadout is.

Don't believe me? Just look at their BVs. Tech 1 Cicada vs Tech 1 Hunchback, Hunchback wins.

What do you want, a spreadsheet of every single mech every made sorted by tech level and BV? An essay? A powerpoint presentation? A thesis paper? This isn't rocket science, these imbalances are glaringly obvious to anyone who takes a half second to look at it objectively.

You say you never see any balance issues, I say you're either lying, have the thickest rose-colored glasses I've ever seen, or have a severe case of confirmation bias because everyone is dropping in the same mech, so you never see the weak mechs on the field.

And those examples are only scratching the surface, a small peek at the most glaring, undeniably underpowered mechs. What are you going to whine about now, that I should only compare a mech to itself? Well gee whiz, I guess if everyone drops in the exact same mech with the exact same loadout you would have "balance", of a sort.

[Damocles]

thinking in a 1v1 equal basis in a team game.

Good stuff

[ROSS-128]

Damocles, on 07 April 2015 - 05:07 PM, said:

thinking in a 1v1 equal basis in a team game.

Good stuff

A mech that doesn't pull its weight is a burden to the team. But hey, I guess if you think the MLX-A has a good stock build, there's just no helping you.

[Damocles]

E Rommel, on 07 April 2015 - 05:33 PM, said:

A mech that doesn't pull its weight is a burden to the team. But hey, I guess if you think the MLX-A has a good stock build, there's just no helping you.

Cool. miss my point and put words into my mouth.

But totally, role warfare isn't a thing. A Banshee will duel Atlas mid-match straight up zellbrigen style annnnd there is just no helping me (because I need halp?)

Edit: Q: Was it the Pz III v. the Sherman (Tank v tank equal footing) or the PaK 40 usage (asymmetrical footing) that was considered a success by Rommel in N. Afrika?

Edited by Damocles, 07 April 2015 - 06:03 PM.

[Jaeger Gonzo]

Ok lets do with your latest examples.
First most often when we think about stock games we think about 3025 TRO, that mean no clans or other fancy stuff.
But we played clan v IS as well in deep asymmetrical setting and those matches was one of coolest experience in MWO ever.

But getting back to your mechs.
MLX-A is 25 ton mech, SCR is 55 ton mech. And you are compering those two? Are stoned today? But anyway MLX-A job is not actually fighting directly the enemy, so basically any comparison is sense less.

BNC-E vs AS-D. While atlas is clearly one of the strongest mechs that you can find in 3025 TRO and have "ohh **** factor", actually smart Banshee pilot can clearly out play Atlas. Is a lot faster and have higher alpha at range going for ammo critical at torsos, while Atlas on range have only LRM 20 and that is not enough to take out Banshee. But I did talk already about Banshee, did I?

Cicada vs hunch. You are not giving witch variants you want to talk about. Lets take the most common CDA-3C vs HBK-4G.
First hunch is heavier mech, so its supposed to be little stronger.
So while 4G is clearly one of the strongest mech around, any 3C pilot will out play 4G with easy. 4G is slow and has nothing at range, 3C is extremely fast and is carrying PPC long range punching weapon. Opening LT should not be that hard looking for ammo critical.
So all your examples clearly fail.

Of course I agree with you that BVs system would be best, but tons balance is not that bad either, specially in 3025 TRO. At first TT did not have BVs as well.

[IronLichRich]

Okay, the amount of RAEGGGGG in this thread is really high.

So, to the people who were saying that DavidHurricane's DWF was mosy definitely not a DWF, is there a reason for that besides the changed armor values? Everything else should be fine since locked equipment is locked and pod mounted equipment can be swapped.

Stock mech mode for 3025 would be interesting, though some mechs are still pretty bad (i.e. banshees without melee)

For stock modes with level 2 tech or clan tech there is a bunch of disparity. I'm not too fresh on level 2 IS configurations, but as said before, it's not a level playing field.

[ROSS-128]

Damocles, on 07 April 2015 - 05:59 PM, said:

Cool. miss my point and put words into my mouth.

But totally, role warfare isn't a thing. A Banshee will duel Atlas mid-match straight up zellbrigen style annnnd there is just no helping me (because I need halp?)

Edit: Q: Was it the Pz III v. the Sherman (Tank v tank equal footing) or the PaK 40 usage (asymmetrical footing) that was considered a success by Rommel in N. Afrika?

It was a combination of reliable supply lines, military intelligence, communication, and highly mobile shock tactics utilizing rapid concentration of force to isolate and destroy the other side in small pockets. Once the Allies disrupted his ability to gather intelligence, resupply his forces, communicate with his forces, and stay mobile, they were able to push him clear across Africa.

Considering you don't have a constant stream of replacement mechs coming in to resupply you and you're limited to a 12v12 fight on a confined map, your mech better be able to perform its role better than the other team's alternative and contribute to the damage trade on top of that if you want to come out on top. Your MLX with a flamer and two machineguns is dead weight that your team has to carry.

"You can bring three" isn't a very positive trait in a game where you can only bring one anyway. Many of these mechs of course are otherwise good mechs, that are simply held back by pathetic stock loadouts. The ability to customize saves these mechs from the garbage bin and makes them actually playable.

[Jack Corban]

IronLichRich, on 07 April 2015 - 06:25 PM, said:

Okay, the amount of RAEGGGGG in this thread is really high.

So, to the people who were saying that DavidHurricane's DWF was mosy definitely not a DWF, is there a reason for that besides the changed armor values? Everything else should be fine since locked equipment is locked and pod mounted equipment can be swapped.

Stock mech mode for 3025 would be interesting, though some mechs are still pretty bad (i.e. banshees without melee)

For stock modes with level 2 tech or clan tech there is a bunch of disparity. I'm not too fresh on level 2 IS configurations, but as said before, it's not a level playing field.

You can change the pod but never its contents. Such are the rules. Just because there is Customising does not make every mechs with every configuration a Dire Wolf.

That said i'm purly speaking from the Battletech point of view wich we are concentrating on here for Stock 2035 TRO. And Changing somthing on a Predefined sanctioned Mech be it a Clanner or a IS Mech is changing the Design and makes it not that Mech anymore.

If you put a Tactical Spacemarine in a Terminator Armor it is still a Space Marine but it certeinly is not a Tactical Marine anymore.

Same goes for any Mech If i take a HBK-4G and Rip out its AC/20 and replace that with 3 Machine Guns and a Faster engine. It stays a Mech. But it is no HBK-4G anymore.

Edited by Jack Corban, 07 April 2015 - 06:35 PM.

[Jack Corban]

E Rommel, on 07 April 2015 - 06:26 PM, said:

It was a combination of reliable supply lines, military intelligence, communication, and highly mobile shock tactics utilizing rapid concentration of force to isolate and destroy the other side in small pockets. Once the Allies disrupted his ability to gather intelligence, resupply his forces, communicate with his forces, and stay mobile, they were able to push him clear across Africa.

Considering you don't have a constant stream of replacement mechs coming in to resupply you and you're limited to a 12v12 fight on a confined map, your mech better be able to perform its role better than the other team's alternative and contribute to the damage trade on top of that if you want to come out on top. Your MLX with a flamer and two machineguns is dead weight that your team has to carry.

"You can bring three" isn't a very positive trait in a game where you can only bring one anyway. Many of these mechs of course are otherwise good mechs, that are simply held back by pathetic stock loadouts. The ability to customize saves these mechs from the garbage bin and makes them actually playable.

First of there is other uses for a Light then to engage other mechs in direct contact. Scouting and keeping the Group informed about movement of the enemy lances that they might not be able to concentrate on at all given times because they are engaged in Combat. Second a MLX-A in your back while some other dude has your attention is as deadly as any other mech in your back.

Like it or not. You have not one clue how to be a good Mech warrior before you have actually played stock and learned how to pilot a REAL mech. Not this Kindergarten BS you guys concoct up in your fancy smurfies. Wich at no point has anyone ever tried to make and go away. We are tolerant of that, so is our ways. But what we get is nothing but **** form you and others for trying to get heard on somthing that is real FUN to many.

Not everyone is breed to be a Hardcore Mechwarrior Player or Battletech Fan. We get that. But denying us to try to get what we think is fun is pathetic and intolerant. Go play your Mechs that you made in your Mechlab. Noone denies you that. Man i play the same game you do and i think customizing Mechs can be a great fun. Yet i don't do it because even though i like customisation, i like Stock Mechs even more. Wanna know why that is ?

Because thats how i learned to love Battletech and Mechwarrior. And so did many many others here, may they speak up or not. This whole game was financed by people that are diehard Battletech and Mechwarrior fans. People that have sunken hundreds if not thousands of hours into its predecessors and Tabletop and Novels. We know our ****. And We made this game happen. It is time we get what we want for once. And yes not all original Founders/Kickstarters are Diehard BT fans. To say differently would be lying but still the majority of people that made this game happen knew what Mechwarrior was opposed to most if not 80% of the current playerbase that has probably never heared of Battletech/ Mechwarrior before this game. So who are you to come in here and piss all over this without even once trying it. **** numbers.

Fun is not measured in Numbers. But success of games is measured in Fun.

And let me tell you this. Most people that originally backed this game do not have FUN.

Edited by Jack Corban, 07 April 2015 - 06:53 PM.

[Jaeger Gonzo]

Actually hes numbers has fail as I proofed in my post. Hes forgetting about tonnage, speed and range. Taking dps as only chassis parameter. Noob thinking that`s all.

[ROSS-128]

Jaeger Gonzo, on 07 April 2015 - 07:00 PM, said:

Actually hes numbers has fail as I proofed in my post. Hes forgetting about tonnage, speed and range. Taking dps as only chassis parameter. Noob thinking that`s all.

You didn't prove jack squat, all you did was toss spitballs about "well if the person in the worse chassis is a vastly better pilot..."

That's not balance. If you have to be a better pilot to get the same results, the loadout is underpowered. The Hunchback's BV is nearly double the Cicada's BV for a reason. And your Banshee example? The Banshee only carries 150 damage worth of AC ammo. Hope you like running a 95 ton assault mech with a single PPC, because that AC ammo is going to go fast.

So that Banshee does 150 damage, and then turns into a 95 ton paperweight with less firepower than a 40 ton mech. It just so happens there's also a reason the Atlas' BV is so much higher than the Banshee's.

But since you're going to keep moving the goalposts, let's go ahead and compare a mech TO ITSELF.

MLX-A vs MLX-B vs MLX-C. Would you rather have two machine guns with a half ton of ammo, or two CERMLs, and two SRM-6s with two tons of ammo? How about an ECM, CERLL, and CERML? The Mist Lynx isn't even balanced against the Mist Lynx!

The Banshee isn't balanced against itself either: the 3M and 3S are both superior to the stock 3E (though ironically, when customized to take advantage of their hardpoints that relationship is reversed. Mechlab saves the day!). The 3M is the best of the three as far as I'm concerned, since the S does swing too far in the opposite direction with that STD 285 (in my experience, ~300-325 is the sweet spot for engines on that chassis). The S still beats out the E though because at least it brings a second ton of ammo for its ACs, and enough backup weapons that it's not a paperweight when it runs out.

If the mechs aren't even balanced against their own varaints, how can we expect them to be balanced against other mechs? The claim that stock loadouts are remotely balanced with each other is laughable on its face. The BV system exists in the first place because they're not!

[Hoffenstein]

I'd love to see a base stock mode, especially for the first 20 or so matches.

[Agent 0 Fortune]

E Rommel, on 07 April 2015 - 07:27 PM, said:

<says all mechs are not created equal in 3025>

I am not sure why you are so hung up on everything being exactly equal to everything else. It isn't that way currently with customization, but the difference is scale. If you make a bad franken-mech and take it against a meta-build, what is the disparity? You take a "bad" stock mech against a "good" stock mech and the imbalance is far less. To the point where every mech is viable in a stock mech 3025 tech match.

This stock mech queue is small potatoes, If I had my druthers CW should be a long-term campaign (6m - 1y), and each mech would start as stock, with pilots earning customization time allowing them to slowly improve their rides. I also believe PGI should use asymmetrical balancing for CW. Get rid of 12 IS vs 12 Clan, in favor of a more balanced match up 8(IS) vs 5(C) or 12(IS) vs 7/8(C).

[ROSS-128]

Agent 0 Fortune, on 07 April 2015 - 07:49 PM, said:

I am not sure why you are so hung up on everything being exactly equal to everything else. It isn't that way currently with customization, but the difference is scale. If you make a bad franken-mech and take it against a meta-build, what is the disparity? You take a "bad" stock mech against a "good" stock mech and the imbalance is far less. To the point where every mech is viable in a stock mech 3025 tech match.

This stock mech queue is small potatoes, If I had my druthers CW should be a long-term campaign (6m - 1y), and each mech would start as stock, with pilots earning customization time allowing them to slowly improve their rides. I also believe PGI should use asymmetrical balancing for CW. Get rid of 12 IS vs 12 Clan, in favor of a more balanced match up 8(IS) vs 5(C) or 12(IS) vs 7/8(C).

Have you seen some of these stock mechs? Bad doesn't even begin to describe it. You might want to check the prescription on your nostalgia glasses.

Plus, you can fix a Frankenmech by opening the Mechlab. Turns out, building good mechs is a skill that you can learn. One that I suppose a lot of the people calling for stock mode must lack, since they apparently consider it cheating. If your Frankenmech does bad, that's a problem with your skill as a mech designer. If a stock mech does bad, that's a problem with the stock mech.

[Jack Corban]

E Rommel, on 07 April 2015 - 08:04 PM, said:

Have you seen some of these stock mechs? Bad doesn't even begin to describe it. You might want to check the prescription on your nostalgia glasses.

Plus, you can fix a Frankenmech by opening the Mechlab. Turns out, building good mechs is a skill that you can learn. One that I suppose a lot of the people calling for stock mode must lack, since they apparently consider it cheating. If your Frankenmech does bad, that's a problem with your skill as a mech designer. If a stock mech does bad, that's a problem with the stock mech.

Dude. Seriously ? We call customizing cheating ? Say What now. running out of arguments are we ? LMAO

Edited by Jack Corban, 07 April 2015 - 08:10 PM.

[ROSS-128]

Jack Corban, on 07 April 2015 - 08:10 PM, said:

Dude. Seriously ? We call customizing cheating ? Say What now. running out of arguments are we ? LMAO

Well you obviously ran out of arguments a long time ago. Going to pretend your rants about how custom mechs aren't "real Mechwarrior" didn't happen? Or that you haven't repeatedly tried to argue that losing the ability to improve the mechs we get would somehow be "more balanced" because Mechlab OP?

If you're bitter that other people built better mechs than you, how about building better mechs?

[Bishop Steiner]

FupDup, on 07 April 2015 - 06:17 AM, said:

Tech 1 mechs aren't equal to each other.

Tech 2 mechs aren't equal to each other either.

and even with quirks, modified mechs aren't equal, either. Don't see the point?

[Jack Corban]

E Rommel, on 07 April 2015 - 08:24 PM, said:

Well you obviously ran out of arguments a long time ago. Going to pretend your rants about how custom mechs aren't "real Mechwarrior" didn't happen? Or that you haven't repeatedly tried to argue that losing the ability to improve the mechs we get would somehow be "more balanced" because Mechlab OP?

If you're bitter that other people built better mechs than you, how about building better mechs?

You crack me up little buddy!

[FupDup]

Bishop Steiner, on 07 April 2015 - 08:27 PM, said:

and even with quirks, modified mechs aren't equal, either. Don't see the point?

I'm trying to convince people that stock mechs aren't the utopia to end all utopias, where cancer and all other ailments known to mankind are cured and humanity lives in peace forever. There are still issues lurking about.

I'm not saying no to the mode itself, I'm saying that it still has some of the issues like "min max" that normal custom mode already has (but instead of min-maxing builds you could only min-max which variant you chose). It's when people make claims like "all mechs can contribute, none are disadvantaged, etc." that I feel the need to step in and correct such statements.

Edited by FupDup, 07 April 2015 - 08:42 PM.