401 replies to this topic

[Tiamat of the Sea]

Tier system was useless, tier division points were inherently arbitrary. Every 'mech is different, a sliding scale or entire hierarchy is absolutely required.

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

JagdFlanker, on 11 May 2015 - 03:14 PM, said:

(snipped rant about the CTF-) 4X (more ranting snipped)

seriously?

While I don't necessarily disagree with any of your points, your signature makes your post somewhat ironic ...

JagdFlanker said:

Skills Trumps Mechs

Honestly, I'm not sure why you picked the CTF-4X over the other choices ... the Quad AC/5 CTF-4X is either a monster -- only when ignored until it's too late -- or very close to being the definition of a glass cannon, but it was a one-trick pony before the quirkening.

[OznerpaG]

Kageru Ikazuchi, on 11 May 2015 - 08:55 PM, said:

While I don't necessarily disagree with any of your points, your signature makes your post somewhat ironic ...



Honestly, I'm not sure why you picked the CTF-4X over the other choices ... the Quad AC/5 CTF-4X is either a monster -- only when ignored until it's too late -- or very close to being the definition of a glass cannon, but it was a one-trick pony before the quirkening.

Cataphract pack in the MWO store - had no choice, because trust me i saw what was coming before i clicked 'purchase' lol

and trust me - no amount of skill can save you piloting this thing. it's (technically) slower than the stalker and the hardpoints are as low as the stalker's is high. 4 games played, then it was auto-GXP level and strip mech for storage


but that's not the point - the 4X is a mech that NEEDS quirks more than any single other mech i'v piloted (i have a ton of mechs) and it was given jack-squat for quirks. mechs need to be given quirks based on their practical usage - thunderbolts and stalkers don't really need quirks because their hardpoints are so high you can use cover and survive. just because nobody was piloting them much before doesn't mean they needed help, they were fine. but mechs like the 4X and others that have low mounted weapons have to expose themselves almost fully to be effective so they die much quicker - THEY need quirks

[The pessimistic optimist]

All orions need more side torso armor.

[Surn]

almost every post in this topic is self serving. Clans want quirk reductions and IS want their favorite mech buffed

[FlipOver]

I dislike VTR's quirks.
Come to think of it, also dislike the CTF-3D quirks.

Edit - But to be honest I really dislike any and all quirks on any and all mechs.
Just my 2 C-Bills.

Edited by FlipOver, 12 May 2015 - 04:29 AM.

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

JagdFlanker, on 12 May 2015 - 03:25 AM, said:

the 4X is a mech that NEEDS quirks more than any single other mech i'v piloted (i have a ton of mechs)

Mastered and sold the CTF-4X about a year and a half ago (probably the first time the Ilya was on sale for less than full price), and yeah, you're probably right ... back when CTFs were the heaviest heavy on the field, and CTF-3D poptarts were the meta, CTF-4X's still sucked, but in the right hands, with the right team, it made a decent "mini assault" ... it can dish out the DPS, at a pretty good range, as long as it doesn't get attacked.

One of the biggest problem (or not, depending on your perspective) with the initial rounds of quirks is that they were based as much on 'mech popularity as they were 'mech utility. The WVR and TDR weren't "terrible" 'mechs before quirks, they were just worse than any other 65 or 55 tonner, but now, because they can use certain weapon combinations better than any other 'mech, they're the meta.

It will balance out, it just takes time to apply the balance correctly.

[Moebius Pi]

SRM spread quirks; they don't make enough of a noticeable impact to even deserve inclusion. Really, any quirks that have no real noticeable impact due to tiny percentages.

Any quirk that pushes something easily to 50% (or higher with a module) also is overkill; it may sell the mech and make what was once garbage to viable, but just as often more generalized (though still meaty) quirks rather than hyper specialist would be better served in place. It's fine and well my Dragon 1N is a beast with Ac/5s, but I'd take a lower percentage, more generalized ballistic buff instead just so there was more reason to use other weapons on its arm mounts.

Also, quirks that veer so crazily from the stock build/lore that they start to resemble something else entirely.

Standard PPC quirks; until the PPC becomes something worth using over the ER-PPC, or vs a laser more consistently in the game vs some other energy weapon, not a fan of them. They never seem to get the std PPC used even when included, even if dovetailed with ppc velocity buffs. The weapon needs some tinkering, not a bunch of mechs trying (and failing) to make them more consistently popular via quirks.

And of course, any quirks used to make a fairly ****** weapon more viable on a mech, instead of, you know, fixing the weapon so it is in of itself more worth using. Lots of those out there. It's a patch job otherwise that creates too many hyper specialists; there are some mechs that really are that without any real alternative loadouts, and it's fine in those select cases, but here's hoping to more generalized ones.

Lastly: balance quirks. If a mech is so OP it can't really have more quirks without just getting ridiculous, you should be looking at balancing the mech (Hello Timberwolf), instead of buffing every other mech around it with quirks to compensate. Quirks should streamline and highlight a mech's strengths while in use (I doubt they'll ever be removed from the game so I'm content with their addition) that is on par with its contemporaries rather than lagging badly behind due to design translation issues to a FPS, not turn it into a hyper specialized build behemoth that is just picked over alternatives due to overquirked dominance.

[Surn]

Quirks are fine as long as they specialize a chassis for a specific roles. Clan pilots shouldn't complain because their mechs are good at all roles.

[catspider]

Weapon Velocity quirks are the worst since they change aiming lead time based on mech not weapon.

[Moldur]

The quirks for weapons that are useless are.. useless. I'd rather see a blanket quirk increase to the weapon type, and then a -10, 20%. etc. for any weapon you guys don't want to include in the quirking, that way we don't have mechs with 50% bonus rof A/C 20s, but they still have options for the other ballistics besides say, their A/C 5.


I don't support quirks to begin with though.

Edited by Moldur, 12 May 2015 - 05:20 PM.

[Khobai]

1) atlas quirks should buff the side torsos with +armor instead of arms with +structure

2) firestarters quirks. makes all other lights pretty much obsolete.

3) energy range/projectile velocity quirks in general. its my belief that lasers are too dominant right now and the IS quirks need a nerf as well as the base stats on clan lasers.

Quote

Quirks should favor a mech's stock loadouts, not seemingly random systems.

This. Quirks should encourage stock loadouts not meta/boating builds.

[Navid A1]

I just give you one example of a completely zero effect quirk:

look at IFR-D

it has 2% less pulse laser duration in each of its arms.
To have the worst case scenario, consider a clan large pulse laser with a burn of 1.1s. this quirk makes its burn time 0.044 shorter (%4).
The server ticks at 1/20s which is longer than this change... meaning that depending on when the trigger is pulled there are moments that this quirk does not do anything.

i'd love to see a dev explanation on this quirk... (are these random?)

i get it, you dont want clan mechs to become OP or repeat the patch of thundebolt 9S... but this is ridiculous. you can give the ice ferret 50%+ quirks and it will still under-perform.
So,instead of filling the quirk list with lots of green text (to misguide the user), consider adjusting the quirks to actually have an effect you can observe so that you can make future adjustments (as you promised).

you do remember your statements...don't you?

Edited by Navid A1, 12 May 2015 - 05:30 PM.

[Sereglach]

After taking more time to ponder on it, there is one other mech that I think needs a some tweaking of quirks/hardpoints on some of its variants, the Locust.

The 1V is NOT a LL toting mech. Quirks have made it that way, but honestly that more of a role for something like the Flea, which was a slower 20t mech that carried firepower far above its weight class and compensated for its slow speed with MASC. The original Flea 4 variant actually did, in fact, tote a Large Laser. Put it in the game and make it the LL zapper. We're putting MASC in the game, so we can add the Flea, give it solid durability quirks, and a lower engine cap, so MASC on it won't exceed the 170 (or whatever the new limit will be) speed limit.

The 1V should have something like 6B, split between the arms, and 1E, in the CT. Then, remove the LL quirks, give it a 25% ROF quirk for the machine guns, put 25% buff on ballistic range, and when available put 25% more machine gun ammo per ton. Leave energy alone, no quirks. This puts it into a very unique place, as an actual ballistic ambushing/striking light mech.

On the other hand, the 3V would be differentiated with 4B, split between the arms, and 2E, in the CT. Now, leave the 25% buff for ballistic range, but put on a reasonably significant energy cooldown quirk. This puts it as a somewhat hybrid among the variants.

The Pirate's Bane isn't that bad where it's at, the quirks are modest and not obscene. I'd only suggest changing the specific small laser quirks to small laser family.

Since the 1E and 3M are so similar in hardpoints/style, give one a modestly strong Heat Generation quirk and one modest Beam Duration and Energy Range quirks. Thereby one focuses on heat generation for extended fights while the other focuses on pinpoint damage for quick bursts and harassment.

On the missile front, we've got something similar to the 1V and 3V with the 1M and 3S. While the 3S is more dependent on missiles with its 4 missile hardpoints, give it a 25-50% increase to missile ammunition per ton (it severely needs it, not unlike the Commandos), while giving it modest missile range, cooldown, heat, and spread quirks; while leaving energy alone. On the other hand, the 1M is much less missile dependent with its two energy hardpoints and half the missile hardpoints. Give that one the missile ammo and range, but replace the other quirks with a modest energy heat generation and beam duration quirks for the medium laser family to allow it to separate itself and act as a hybrid.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

However, in all reality, all quirks for weapons should be secondary to the mobility and armor/structure quirks when it comes to making underperforming mechs viable. Weapon quirks should only be used in one of two situations . . .

1. Use a single modest quirk to differentiate very similar variants among a chassis. Make each one play and feel differently by separating your heat generation, range, cooldown, etc. among the variants. It helps give each one a play-style, despite being extremely similar in role/concept/hardpoints. The Jenner, Firestarter, Wolfhound, Grasshopper, Black Knight, Crab, King Crab, Vindicator, Victor, and so many more would all benefit from this treatment and add more variety to the game.
OR
2. Use several modest family linked (like LL family, or pulse family) quirks to make a severely under-gunned/underperforming variant more viable. We shouldn't have something like the machine-gunning PPC Awesome or LL Locust . . . let alone some of the other "super-quirked" mechs. The Dragon, Awesome, Commando, Locust, Summoner, and many others (again) would all benefit from this practices.

Also, for the love of all that's holy, make the quirks more related to stock loadouts or lore-based roles of the mechs, even if you use the "medium laser family" (standard medium, er medium, medium pulse) for a medium laser boat . . . it helps fuel lore while still allowing reasonable variety. On top of it, change the 50/50 split between generic/specific to a 75/25 or 66/33 split, whichever works out better with the math.

We do not need and should not have quirks on EVERY variant and EVERY omnipod and EVERY chassis . . . which is what we seem to be heading towards, especially with some of the weapon "super quirks" on some mechs. If we keep this up power creep will set in, and half the mechs in the game will be super-quirked and the TTK will get so low that matches won't even last 2 minutes after first contact in a "good" fight. We're already seeing beam durations getting so low on some mechs that they might as well be pinpoint damage weapons, and cooldowns so low that we've got SRM4's shooting almost 50% faster than unquirked SRM2's and AC5/s firing faster than unquirked 2's. I agree with some other sentiment in this thread . . . weapons shouldn't be so quirked that they're outperforming other related weapons systems unless it's the most extreme and dire of situations, and even then the generic quirk should far outclass the specific/family quirk.

The over-quirking is the thing I hate MOST about weapon quirks in general. Reign them in! The concept of quirking an underperformer is great, but don't overdo it. Also, don't be afraid to review some mechs and adjust hardpoints and/or engine caps as necessary. Remember when y'all did that for the Raven, Hunchback, and Centurion? We can still do it. If builds change then people will just have to adapt.

[Odanan]

My least favorite quirks are the ones that change the loadout of the mech too much from the stock configuration. If the stock main weapon is, lets say, AC/10, the mech should not receive AC/5 quirks.

Also, I don't like quirks too brutal (like +40% rate of fire) as these can bring some balance issues.

EDIT: forget about it: my least favorite quirk is the speed quirk. I know it is supposed to help mechs like the Summoner and the Highlander, but it feels... wrong. Like weapon damage quirks would feel.

Edited by Odanan, 14 May 2015 - 10:44 AM.

[Ancih]

1- All weapons velocity quirks: ppc, missiles and balistics, bad for gameplay because it makes you need reajusting aim depending on chassis and always feels wrong. All weapons should have a fixed speed. Quirks can affect a weapon's heat, range, cooldown, & duration but travel speed? not a fan.

2- Any quirks that is too small to really be felt (anything less than 5%) or too big (more than 30%). Tiny quirks just feels like a joke, and make the quirks list longer without any relevance. Huge quirks make it feel like there is something very wrong with the base chassis or weapon in the first place and feels like a bandaid fix.

3- Structure quirks, should be armor instead

[Triordinant]

Replace structure-boosting quirks with armor-boosting ones. Don't need that arm or torso if all the weapons and equipment in it are wrecked.

[Telmasa]

Armor boosting is like giving it fake invisible free tonnage though....

[Mawai]

Homeless Bill, on 20 April 2015 - 12:16 PM, said:

Every velocity change quirk, but especially the minor ones are bad news in my opinion. If the PPC needs to fly 25% faster to be used, then it just needs to be 25% faster. Making the same weapon travel at different speeds on different 'mechs is incredibly disorienting, and often it does more harm than good. Shell speed should be a constant the player can rely on. But at least velocity quirks 25% or more are big enough to be immediately noticable and something you can adjust to. Velocity quirks 10% and thereabouts are nothing but a detriment. It doesn't feel like my shell is traveling 10% faster - it just feels like I'm missing every shot by 10%.

The reason PPC and AC velocities were changed is to reduce the prevalence of highly coordinated pinpoint front loaded damage alpha builds. The PPC velocity is slow and it reduces its use in combination with ACs. Increasing PPC velocity will make them more usable by themselves but also in combinations ... so to avoid that they need to adjust the velocities of all AC/PPC.

In addition, they need to quantify how different the velocities need to be in order to decouple their damage at various ranges against targets moving at different speeds. Presumably, the current PPC velocities were determined through such an analysis though it is quite possible that someone just picked the numbers out of the air ... we have no insight into the design process.

By using quirks to make PPCs useful, PGI avoids the issue of PPC+AC by choosing which mechs get the quirks so that this does not become an issue ... though another way to do this would be to increase the PPC speed and nerf the PPC velocity on mechs with both energy and ballistic hard points where this would be a problem.

Edited by Mawai, 15 May 2015 - 03:25 PM.

[ChapeL]

My least favorite quirks: Weapon quirks... all of them. I'd much prefer seeing quirks to mech agility, torso twisting, acceleration/deceleration and most of all structure and armor quirks for the mechs with disadvantageous geometry/size ( I'm looking at you catapult and Nova especially )