193 replies to this topic

[Widowmaker1981]

Sandersson Jankins, on 10 April 2015 - 02:58 AM, said:

You're mostly right about needing to play both sides to have a good opinion. However, I think that if you take long-term experience into account, even a pure IS player knows what the general balance is. As long as that person is thinking properly and is reasonable, I suppose.

I think that IS mechs are just slightly better than clan mechs on average right now- I don't know what to do to change it. Mostly because I don't know much about clan mechs! Clans have just never appealed to me in lore- too rigid. I'd prefer to be a rowdy, hard-drinking, natural-born freebirth in my Mediocre Battletech Simulator ™, thank you!

The trouble is the 'that which kills me is OP' mentality.

Clans currently have 6 'decent' mechs for solo/group queue (DWF, WHK, TBR, HBR, MDD, SCR) and this drops to 4 for CW really, due to DWF and WHK forcing you to take a mech outside of those 6 to fit the tonnage. That means people get killed by Timbers and Stormcrows constantly, because those are largely the only mechs used on clan side - that means people assume they are OP due to getting killed by them. This will be solved only when the 2 lighter mechs from wave 3 are released, because then clans will have a decent 30 and 45 tonner, allowing a great deal more variety - those 4 mechs will more than double to 9 or 10 chassis that are frequently used (ACH, SHC, SCR, MDD, HBR, EBJ, TBR, WHK, DWF and maybe EXE)

Personally i think balance between the best of clans and the best of IS is pretty damn close to ideal right now.

I simply dont identify at all with the factions 'background' because im not here to roleplay. It is only and entirely about the stompy robot action for me (literally the only reason i play CW is that i like the game mode format, i couldnt give two flying f**ks about the map really)

[Paigan]

Widowmaker1981, on 10 April 2015 - 03:11 AM, said:

The trouble is the 'that which kills me is OP' mentality.

Clans currently have 6 'decent' mechs for solo/group queue (DWF, WHK, TBR, HBR, MDD, SCR) and this drops to 4 for CW really, due to DWF and WHK forcing you to take a mech outside of those 6 to fit the tonnage. That means people get killed by Timbers and Stormcrows constantly, because those are largely the only mechs used on clan side - that means people assume they are OP due to getting killed by them. This will be solved only when the 2 lighter mechs from wave 3 are released, because then clans will have a decent 30 and 45 tonner, allowing a great deal more variety - those 4 mechs will more than double to 9 or 10 chassis that are frequently used (ACH, SHC, SCR, MDD, HBR, EBJ, TBR, WHK, DWF and maybe EXE)

Hear hear, support!

however:

Widowmaker1981, on 10 April 2015 - 03:11 AM, said:

I simply dont identify at all with the factions 'background' because im not here to roleplay. It is only and entirely about the stompy robot action for me (literally the only reason i play CW is that i like the game mode format, i couldnt give two flying f**ks about the map really)

Not everyone who cares about background must automatically be a roleplaying guy.
In Starcraft, you can be an enthusiastic Zerg or Protoss player but never heard or thought about Roleplay at all (are there even SC RPGs?).

Personally, I like the idea of unequal sides being balanced by complementary imbalances (e.g. clans have better tech, IS have greater number).

So despite being no roleplayer (hate them TBH), I still think it sucks that IS mechs simply get turboquirked to all of a sudden out-tech the high-tech side. Ruins the story and makes the game boring.

[xengk]

You made Stalker sad

[Joseph Mallan]

I agree with Paigan here Widow. Choosing a faction cause you like their style isn't RP. That would be me in game pretending I was born on Furillo, and graduated from Sanglamore in the class of '49. Instead of being a 49 year old Married Autoworker from Michigan.

[Widowmaker1981]

Paigan, on 10 April 2015 - 03:23 AM, said:

however:

Not everyone who cares about background must automatically be a roleplaying guy.
In Starcraft, you can be an enthusiastic Zerg or Protoss player but never heard or thought about Roleplay at all (are there even SC RPGs?).

Personally, I like the idea of unequal sides being balanced by complementary imbalances (e.g. clans have better tech, IS have greater number).

So despite being no roleplayer (hate them TBH), I still think it sucks that IS mechs simply get turboquirked to all of a sudden out-tech the high-tech side. Ruins the story and makes the game boring.

But there must be 1 to 1 balance parity, because balance based on numbers doesnt work in a game where each player only controls one unit - because that player is more powerful if he joins the more powerful but lower numbers faction, people want to be more powerful so they join that faction, and then the side that should have less numbers has more, and vice versa. The quirks are a better way to achieve that than blanket nerfing clan equipment as they give IS mechs their quirky, oddball flavour and clan TECH gets to stay better.

[Joseph Mallan]

Widowmaker1981, on 10 April 2015 - 03:30 AM, said:

But there must be 1 to 1 balance parity, because balance based on numbers doesnt work in a game where each player only controls one unit - because that player is more powerful if he joins the more powerful but lower numbers faction, SOME people want to be more powerful so they join that faction, and then the side that should have less numbers has more, and vice versa. The quirks are a better way to achieve that than blanket nerfing clan equipment as they give IS mechs their quirky, oddball flavour and clan TECH gets to stay better.

I fixed that for you Widow. It was a small faulty generalization. Not all players do what you are saying. I chose to be a Lyran to see if I could help change the canon history.

I am no fan of how weak the Clans have been made, and the quirk system... I use mostly the weapons that are meant to be on a Mech, while improving Sinks and armor. Unless I am trying to make a specific Make Due (Like my Grasshammer).

[Paigan]

Widowmaker1981, on 10 April 2015 - 03:30 AM, said:

But there must be 1 to 1 balance parity, because balance based on numbers doesnt work in a game where each player only controls one unit - because that player is more powerful if he joins the more powerful but lower numbers faction, people want to be more powerful so they join that faction, and then the side that should have less numbers has more, and vice versa. The quirks are a better way to achieve that than blanket nerfing clan equipment as they give IS mechs their quirky, oddball flavour and clan TECH gets to stay better.

There are a lot of possibilities to balance it more elegantly than straight forward 1on1 parity.
For example:
- Significantly more drop tonnage for IS (like 240 vs. 300 or so)
- Consumables only for IS and none or only limited for clan mechs (e.g. airstrikes only for IS, maybe ammo packs, etc.)
- Special tactical equipment for IS like specilized ammo, mines or that C3 command computer thingy, etc.

One could easily imagine a completely unquirked stalker to win against a superior-stats-WHK by using special ammo, cooling shots and 2 airstrikes or whatever.

Storywise, the balancing aspect is that clanners are high-tech, high-skill but tactically rigid, dull, etc. while IS are creative, play dirty, lay traps, etc (*cough* tukayyid *cough*). Of course most of that does not translate to MWO, but much of it could very easily, e.g. by shifting consumables and their tactical potential to the IS side.

Edited by Paigan, 10 April 2015 - 03:40 AM.

[Alienized]

also, boating single weapon systems needs to be reduced massively.

[Paigan]

Alienized, on 10 April 2015 - 03:41 AM, said:

also, boating single weapon systems needs to be reduced massively.

Really, why?
Almost EVERY weapon platform from stone ages to fighter jets concentrate on one weapon system with maybe a minor secondary weapon as backup.

Because it makes sense:
It reduces complexity, synchronizes range, effect, etc. and therefore maximizes the unit's fighting power.

Ideas like "1 ERLL for long rang and 2 LRM-10 for indirect fire and 1 SRM for close combat and 2 MGs because there was still space for them" are absurd, naive.
Even with 12-13 years, I found those descriptions in the tech readout to be pretty cheesy and stupid.
That is not how battles work. Neither in TT nor MechCommander nor in MWO.

Most of the time, >50% of your weapons will be dead weight and would be better invested in more or the usable kind.
Different situation? Deploy a different mech suitable for the task.

Mechs are no lone wolf survivable vehicles like the Voyager lost in the Delta quadrant.
They're tactical tanks with legs and get equipped accordingly.

If mixed weapons fit your play style or even the situation, fine.
But pure-builds are naturally the best strategical choice.

Don't scream for nerfing something just because it does not fit some naive romantic idea of a versatile mech.

Edited by Paigan, 10 April 2015 - 03:53 AM.

[Widowmaker1981]

Paigan, on 10 April 2015 - 03:51 AM, said:

Really, why?
Almost EVERY weapon platform from stone ages to fighter jets concentrate on one weapon system with maybe a minor secondary weapon as backup.

Because it makes sense:
It reduces complexity, synchronizes range, effect, etc. and therefore maximizes the unit's fighting power.

Ideas like "1 ERLL for long rang and 2 LRM-10 for indirect fire and 1 SRM for close combat and 2 MGs because there was still space for them" are absurd, naive.
Even with 12-13 years, I found those descriptions in the tech readout to be pretty cheesy and stupid.
That is not how battles work. Neither in TT nor MechCommander nor in MWO.

Most of the time, >50% of your weapons will be dead weight and would be better invested in more or the usable kind.
Different situation? Deploy a different mech suitable for the task.

Mechs are no lone wolf survivable vehicles like the Voyager lost in the Delta quadrant.
They're tactical tanks with legs and get equipped accordingly.

If mixed weapons fit your play style or even the situation, fine.
But pure-builds are naturally the best strategical choice.

Don't scream for nerfing something just because it does not fit some naive romantic idea of a versatile mech.

Exactly. No one with a brain makes a combat vehicle that is mediocre in all situations, because it will always lose out to a specialist in every situation. You make a specialist vehicle, and then use tactics to put it in the right place to use its specialization. I will never understand why people dont get that.

[Molossian Dog]

Widowmaker1981, on 10 April 2015 - 01:54 AM, said:

Yeah, not all people with clan tags are 'clanners'

Everyone needs to just fricking STOP IT with this Us vs Them mentality when it comes to balance arguments. You SHOULD want both sides to be balanced, objectively, not for 'your' side to be stronger. And in order to have a valid opinion on it you also REALLY need to extensively play BOTH sides.

You are 100% right in admonishing me because I certainly was not paroding the style and baseless forum agenda of the OP but presenting a balanced and elaborate argument.

[Tahribator]

This thread is

[Lily from animove]

Sandersson Jankins, on 10 April 2015 - 02:58 AM, said:

You're mostly right about needing to play both sides to have a good opinion. However, I think that if you take long-term experience into account, even a pure IS player knows what the general balance is. As long as that person is thinking properly and is reasonable, I suppose.

I think that IS mechs are just slightly better than clan mechs on average right now- I don't know what to do to change it. Mostly because I don't know much about clan mechs! Clans have just never appealed to me in lore- too rigid. I'd prefer to be a rowdy, hard-drinking, natural-born freebirth in my Mediocre Battletech Simulator ™, thank you!

because more chicken legs, more laz0rs.

At the time of MW 2 and 3 I hardly new about the lore, especially the difference between IS and Clanners. All that were jst robots to run around with and shooting with.

I liked the Supernova most, prefered the DWF over the annhilator. and always liked the addder and also the Nova. I prefer mechs with chicken legs and real arms. (not jeager, SCR or catapult like "arms"). Sure those low slung arms are not suited in shooters, but clanners had more chassis by design that I liked.

The stalker, wow yeah great mehc for a shooter game, especially with the hitboxes it got. But lacks arms
Stalker are annoying opponents, high cockpit, hig hp, high weapon points. He will see you before you cna see him, he has a line of fire before you will have. They are tricky to approach at specific maps, especially in CW.

Edited by Lily from animove, 10 April 2015 - 04:25 AM.

[Alienized]

Widowmaker1981, on 10 April 2015 - 04:00 AM, said:

Exactly. No one with a brain makes a combat vehicle that is mediocre in all situations, because it will always lose out to a specialist in every situation. You make a specialist vehicle, and then use tactics to put it in the right place to use its specialization. I will never understand why people dont get that.

i dont get why everyone uses specializations oin environments where it hurts your team. especially in PUG battles you have to be flexible to adapt your tactic. that can happen everytime even in CW that you have to switch from ranged fighting to brawl because it will get you the advantage over your enemy.

but i guess that requires too much skill for most to even understand, not even to mention the skill it needs to put it to the battlefield.

you just prove that people are unwilling to learn anything because *its a game*. its all about stupid point and click, everything else is already too complex.

[Mindwipe]

Widowmaker1981, on 10 April 2015 - 04:00 AM, said:

Exactly. No one with a brain makes a combat vehicle that is mediocre in all situations, because it will always lose out to a specialist in every situation. You make a specialist vehicle, and then use tactics to put it in the right place to use its specialization. I will never understand why people dont get that.

Well to be fair, going by the original fluff units used what was available most of the time. And that often meant using Uncle Joe's Warhammer, Ben's ancient Dervish which was missing the lower left arm, Karl's fresh off the line Wolverine he got as payment from his last merc contract, and his sister's salvaged Commando. Production didn't really catch up to demand until well into the Clan invasion. Although why that production was suddenly possible can only be attributed to BattleTech economics, which tend to make the MWO economy look sane.

On the Stalker line though, unless I'm completely forgetting things, the original Stalker had a highly advanced combat computer that managed it's weaponry and enabled far better heat control than the later Succession War era versions. Perhaps the 4N has become the repository for all those combat computers? Does sound awfully quirk-like doesn't it?

But yeah, I love my Stalkers when I'm pugging, but since my unit has stayed Clan for CW so far it's very frustration trying to deal with them. Their hardpoint layout and ability to hull down is amazing and I've not had a favorable exchange with one yet that is dug in. Rushing them isn't always an option either. Overall though I'm content to wait until the next Clan pack. If they're mostly mounting high mounted hardpoints like the art indicates we will get a much better picture of balance between them. Overall, I think the balance is pretty good right now. Just too limited in what options that balance gives you.

[Bobzilla]

The only reason specialist vehicals exsist in the military is beacuse it isn't a single person going off to fight, and most can be changed based on a spacific mission vs a known enemy, and most platforms aren't large enough to handle multipule systems (if they were there's a transportation problem) and the cost of lossing one wouldn't be worth it. This world has the tech to fit every need on one plaform efficently that doesn't affect cost much more.

This game doesn't realliy adress any of those areas. Be nice if it did. Scouting missions to know enemy loadouts in the next match, r&r, supply logistics, transportation logistics....

[Joseph Mallan]

Alienized, on 10 April 2015 - 03:41 AM, said:

also, boating single weapon systems needs to be reduced massively.

Been happening in the video game since the 80s far as I understand it. How are you going to stop folks from loading up ONE weapon unless you stop any and all ability to modify?

[Novawrecker]

El Bandito, on 09 April 2015 - 06:24 PM, said:

Gonna wait for a long time for IS SSRM6s.

Meanwhile, IS still has access to just as (if not more) effective weapons like Pulse Lasers (call me crazy).

Keez, on 09 April 2015 - 06:30 PM, said:

With the thunderbolt its fair because the hit boxes are average. The stalker takes ct damage and throws it to the sides mean while he is doing 60 point alphas and not heating up a bit. It has no equal at the moment.

Above Translation: "Yappy yapity yap, while I focus everyone's attention away from the already ridiculous Timber Wolves".



Btw ... 54 pt Alpha @ 75% heat. Take your rhetoric somewhere else.

Edited by Novawrecker, 10 April 2015 - 06:11 AM.

[R Razor]

Keez, on 09 April 2015 - 06:16 PM, said:

12 mans that run all (Direwhales, Timberwolves, Stormcrows, Hellbringers) in cw fyi your not good you mechs are.

Fixed that for you.

[Alienized]

Joseph Mallan, on 10 April 2015 - 04:54 AM, said:

Been happening in the video game since the 80s far as I understand it. How are you going to stop folks from loading up ONE weapon unless you stop any and all ability to modify?

i said it quite often, boating close range weapons its not that much of a problem since getting in range is already a hard thing.
boating alot of long range energy weapons is something only a very limited number of mechs were able to.

so split up enegry slots into high and low energy hardpoints while high energy are all the weapons that require 2 slots and more.
everything with 1 slot can be fitted there too. dedicated boats like the awesome should use 3 of those high energy hardpoints but stalkers?
no. they can load a wide variety that can be used very well on these maps that we currently have.

you can do that for IS mechs as well as for hellbringers with their 4 large laser loadouts. it doesnt remove any customization just boating ability of some weapons.