407 replies to this topic

[Dawnstealer]

Quintus Verus, on 11 May 2015 - 02:39 PM, said:

I think its more CW exhaustion after that intense week of Tukayyid. Also Kurita is not the whipping boy it was at start of 1st beta.

And Steiner FINALLY got organized. And Rasalhague learned how to fight.

Trust me, Marik will get bored, Davion will catch up to the rest of us, and the borders will get more mutable.

[Tyras]

Twilight Fenrir, on 13 May 2015 - 05:44 AM, said:

How do you figure that? O.o If anything, as the clans took over the majority of the map, their tonnage would drop, or the IS would increase...

It's about spreading yourself too thin. If you have 1000 mechs, and hold 100 worlds, that's 10 mechs to a world for garrison... You keep conquering, and make it 125 worlds, then you only have 8 mechs for garrison. The available tonnage on any given world drops.

Ultimately, of course, it's just blanketing a balance change with a story, which I like, actually. And it's quite a reasonable one.

Given that the IS and Clan damage done numbers had a rough parity with the IS 250 ton limit according to PGI's stats, how does removing 10 tons help keep things balanced. The current map situation has nothing to do with IS tonnage, and everything to do with active population numbers.

The organizations that are most active in CW have moved to the IS and have continued to play CW where as the loyalist Clan units have either taken a breather after the Tukayyid event or are too few in numbers to mount a proper defense against an active and organized opposition. Had the merc units that were clans during the event remained affiliated with the clans the map would look a lot different.

That PGI made this decision with full knowledge of the statistics from the Prove Your Allegiance and Tukayyid events, surely knowing that the change wouldn't affect the problem with the Clans getting pushed back, and with only a week's worth of battles after the map reset really reflects poorly on them. It hands the IS players a nerf after telling them that the Clans won the majority percentage of their battles, and doesn't fix the issue of the clans losing planets in slack CW periods. It's not very well thought out.

[CrushLibs]

Void Angel, on 12 May 2015 - 09:01 PM, said:

/fail. Click on the weaponlab in the tool you just linked, on the builds you posted. Now notice the times to overheat. Adjust for quirks. Better yet, just look at sustained dps. Smack yourself on the forehead. Repeat as needed.

Both of these 'mechs are fairly balanced against each other for what they're trying to do. The Stalker's time to overheat is about 19 seconds, compared to the Warhawk's 22, but the Warhawk's weapon cycle is longer. Their expected DPS are similar, thought the Warhawk still has more alpha flexibility and speed v. the Stalker's extremely high weapon mounts and better hitboxes from the front. This is not the Clan "meta" being unable to match the Inner Sphere - rather, it looks a lot like the claim you were correcting.

You even go on to note that they're very close in the testing grounds. Since you're comparing Clan weaknesses to Inner Sphere strengths, that's not a very convincing argument anyway, even if I'm no longer clear whether you're arguing that the two factions are or are not balanced. Clans and Inner Sphere are pretty balanced, but their respective metas do not match up very well.

Clan is OP , clan has better weapons , whine whine whine whine.

I am showing from a data driven , neutral standpoint the differences vs people's unfounded opinions. The 4N has very few quirks compared to other IS mechs. Only a 20% heat reduction was able to take an IS mech with more heat generated and less heatsinks and basically even out or surpass the clan mech.

Now look quirks over as a whole -- lots of IS mechs are getting quirks that bump internal hit points by ALOT a 65 ton TDR has more internals on its side torso than a 100 ton DWF or the AWS which adds 40% more CT and 1/3rd more side torso hit points.
Locust gets a 50% armor buff putting it on par with a raven. Dragon 1N machine gun AC-5s , and more over quirked IS mechs with massive 50% cool downs and 30% reduction in duration or super hit points and armor buffs.

Clan is OP ?? I think not. Small quirks make huge changes and PGI went too far on many mechs and the entire quirk system needs to be looked at and revamped and "balanced"

[Thelamon]

Reducing the IS dropdecks is hardly the solution to the strategic (population) problems the clanners currently face.
And it is a big slap in the face of all the IS Players as well.

1. Tukayid and the pre-event CW clearly showed that the 10 ton upgrade for IS decks made for more balanced matches.
And even with ten more IS tons the Clanners won the Event!
The tonnage has nothing to do with the strategic side in CW, it merely makes for a more balanced gameplay on the level of the individual battle/ CW match and it has proven its usefullness.

2. Currently CW has a vey low population across te board and the Clanners (with a lower player base than IS) are getting pushed back due to inactivity.

- One quick way to get the clanners back on track is certainly to offer juicy MERC contracts for significant time periods.

- The other way to get some more "Perma-Clanners" would be to offersome kind of equipment support for newer Players who simply can't afford a decent Clan drop-deck.

Edited by Thelamon, 14 May 2015 - 09:47 AM.

[Túatha Dé Danann]

CrushLibs, on 13 May 2015 - 06:46 AM, said:

Clan is OP , clan has better weapons , whine whine whine whine.

I am showing from a data driven , neutral standpoint the differences vs people's unfounded opinions. The 4N has very few quirks compared to other IS mechs. Only a 20% heat reduction was able to take an IS mech with more heat generated and less heatsinks and basically even out or surpass the clan mech.

Now look quirks over as a whole -- lots of IS mechs are getting quirks that bump internal hit points by ALOT a 65 ton TDR has more internals on its side torso than a 100 ton DWF or the AWS which adds 40% more CT and 1/3rd more side torso hit points.
Locust gets a 50% armor buff putting it on par with a raven. Dragon 1N machine gun AC-5s , and more over quirked IS mechs with massive 50% cool downs and 30% reduction in duration or super hit points and armor buffs.

Clan is OP ?? I think not. Small quirks make huge changes and PGI went too far on many mechs and the entire quirk system needs to be looked at and revamped and "balanced"

Neutral, hmm?

A mechs primary values are:
- Speed
- Armor
- Firpower (DPS, sustained DPS and Alpha)
- Range
- Weapon mounts
- Additional equipment slots (ECM, Jump Jets)

If I may, I would take a Hellbringer over a Stalker 4N any day. It runs 90 kph instead of 62, it has ECM, can mount a shitload of Double heatsinks and with 7 Medium lasers, it has not only a similar range, but also a higher alpha and dps, while having a smaller cross-section.

I would take the Stormcrow over a Thunderbolt, cause it has more range, speed and is similar tanky.

You can take a Madcat over ANY IS chassis, you could even take a Brawl-Nova into the field and watch everything go to hell with 12 Small lasers if your team is capable of such a feat. And even the Kit-Fox got enough punch to wreck an IS hevy if piloted in the right hand.

I'll take Clan mechs any day over IS mechs. So, if you think, everything is nice and fine now, why not opening the Clan chassis for IS, heh? If IS is so OP for you, we would stick with the IS chassis, right?

Yes? No?

What about: Its about teamplay and not about the mechs!
If I see 12 PUGs mounting all LRMs on their machines and getting shot into oblivion, because not a single one has the balls to expose himself to create a frontline, because every single one is a second-line mech, what do you think happens when an organized team shows up? Right, more lube!

Cause and effect.

[Banditman]

CW needs population balancing in place. Without penalties and bonuses that encourage population balance, CW will remain a nightmare.

And no, the contract bonuses were not nearly enough incentive to encourage population balance, and there have never been any penalties in place.

[CrushLibs]

In solo matches I used to take my DWF now I take a Jegger or FS instead.

When I did IS CW I took stalkers since I like stalkers but with all the quirks its makes even more sense to take IS.

[Gagis]

I'd say that population does not even need to be balanced if switching factions is not as advantageous as it is now. The side with the largest army and/or the best and/or most coordinated fighters SHOULD win. Skill, coordination and the number of friends at your side are the kind of advantages that good games tend to encourage rather than discourage.

Biggest problem probably is that there are too many factions for too few players.

[Bulvar Jorgensson]

CW would be better handled more covertly by PGI. By that I mean that battles fought on planets have hidden factors that sway the outcome the way that PGI needs, think of a scripted single person game or a Gamesmaster ran Old school RPG, where PGI are running the event behind the scenes (throwing in the odd Arty strike, BOG-land that slows mechs to a crawl, etc)

The players in their mechs can take part in and get personal glory and possibly extra Kudos (I would suggest unique cockpit items etc, but pgi might not like loosing that revenue stream) for battling on a planet and depending on hidden factors get their name on a planet.

Having the Galactic map set out as it is, seems to discourage players as this whole idea of SET DOWN "Cease-fire times" is nuts. It gives too much power to large groups who ZERG a planet just before a cease fire.

If Pgi expect CW to keep playing correctly they have to acknowledge that MERC players hold too much sway on how the community map progresses for their own good. (I know guys lets get the best of all worlds and FLIP/FLOP when we like)

I can only speak as a constant GB player, I have played in Numerous CW drops, mostly as 4+ all the way to full 12 man teams, un yet I have not received the amount of C-bills or Items a player I know who switches faction/clan as his merc company dictates, nor seen the amount of planets with that Merc units name on it ever become less than my CGBI.

Players are being put off CW as it seems futile and pointless, compared to dropping in a mech for a match or 4.

Getting game scores over a certain amount might solve the problem short term, but a long term solution evades my thought processes for now.

[Arioch1973]

First of all, my appologies if what I am about to write has already been mentioned. This thread is growing way to rapidly and are far to long for me to keep up with it. So I am just adding my 2 cents. I dont care at all about balancing IS vs Clan in these ideas, only about making CW more alive and interesting, and population balanced.

I think logistics could play quite a big role here in balancing things out, with overpopulated groups.

Might not be ideal, but some ideas;
1. Chose Faction, or Merc Faction. Mercs can go where they want to fight. Loyalists can only attack neighbouring areas. Add to this that you can not just switch from a faction to another within a few days or weeks. For example, minimum time should be 1 month. Switching to another faction (if you are not mercs) should zero your loyalty and rank with previous faction, as you are basically commiting treason. All benefits you gained from the ranks in that faction should be remove (mech bays primarily, since C-bills and MC will be hard to remove). Further, any attempt to switch back to that faction if you are a loyalist should be meet with a severe penalty (would you want a traitor back?).

2. COST OF TRANSPORT!!!! Jumping from planet to planet should not be free for Mercs. Loyalists have the support of their faction, so they might have a lot cheaper transports within their own territory, and a slightly reduced one outside it. This will make mercs less able to jump all over the map. Also make it that the more members in the unit, the higher the cost to transport your equipment and personel (makes sense), and you will see groups being more selective about where they will go.
This could also be coupled with or done in such a way that a unit get one free ship to transport X amount of mechs and personel. Then they have to buy more for c.-bills. And there could be an upper limit to how many ships a unit can have.

3.Incentives. Loyalty points, mechbays etc. are not really a good incentive for players to play community warfare. What is lacking is objectives, goals to reach. Something to work towards other than a rank. One way of doing this is putting the whole CW map against a storyline, a story that is played out and which outcome are determined what happens in CW. The map reset is the start of the story, and it needs to have definite goals, ends to the story (that probably means a map reset again).
Some other incentives to play that I can think of is;
> Holding a planet should mean something other than determining where you can attack or defend next. The most basic incentive would be that for each planet that your unit holds, you get a C-bill bonus for each match in CW. For example if your unit holds 5 planets, you might get a 5.000 C-Bill bonus for each match. However, this should not be something that ends up in each players personal winnings, but be an income to the unit to pay for logistics of transporting the unit.
> Not all equipment should be available for everyone. Planets that for example manufacture ER Large Lasers, need to be held before you can buy them. A decent amount of "resource" planets like this, should give everyone a chance to at some point add such equipment to their inventory. The effect would be less meta builds I guess, players valuing the equipment they have fought for a lot more. And also a strong incentive to actually grab a specific planet.
> Capital planets should be capturable once you have taken the rest of the planets held by a faction. At that point, that faction ceases to exist until the next map reset (end of the story line as described above). Members of that faction will now either be given the choice of becoming mercs or joining the conquiring faction.
> Factions (not merc faction) should have an economic system, in which the larger the territory they hold is, the more money i available (per week) to hire mercenary units. And that should be the main income for mercenary units, to be paid by factions. This way, you will see merc units move around a lot more than staying with a single faction.

Well, that is all I have for now, my tired brain needs some sleep.

[Void Angel]

CrushLibs, on 13 May 2015 - 06:46 AM, said:

Clan is OP , clan has better weapons , whine whine whine whine.

I am showing from a data driven , neutral standpoint the differences vs people's unfounded opinions. The 4N has very few quirks compared to other IS mechs. Only a 20% heat reduction was able to take an IS mech with more heat generated and less heatsinks and basically even out or surpass the clan mech.

Now look quirks over as a whole -- lots of IS mechs are getting quirks that bump internal hit points by ALOT a 65 ton TDR has more internals on its side torso than a 100 ton DWF or the AWS which adds 40% more CT and 1/3rd more side torso hit points.
Locust gets a 50% armor buff putting it on par with a raven. Dragon 1N machine gun AC-5s , and more over quirked IS mechs with massive 50% cool downs and 30% reduction in duration or super hit points and armor buffs.

Clan is OP ?? I think not. Small quirks make huge changes and PGI went too far on many mechs and the entire quirk system needs to be looked at and revamped and "balanced"

Why are you quoting me pointing out that "Clans and Inner Sphere are pretty balanced," then accusing me of "whine, whine, whining," before you go debunking the "Clans are OP" position? Why are you trying to say that Clans are underpowered by posting a Stalker (top-tier) meta build against a Warhawk (lower-tier) nonmeta build - particularly when the numbers for their performance are very similar anyway? The Stalker 4N's exceptional 20% heat reduction for Large Lasers is insignificant because of the number of quirks it has? What does that have to do with anything? Highlanders have tons of quirks, and they suck! The Thunderbolt is overpowered because of the structure buffs no one cares about? (The guns are long gone by the time you lose the torso, if it even matters.) The Locust's armor is "on par with a Raven," because of 50% armor buffs to its arms?! Do the things you say make sense to you, or do they just... happen, as a blessed surprise? Forgive me, but I'm trying to figure out which one of you I'm talking to here.

Some Inner Sphere 'mechs are indeed overquirked - but overall performance between the Clans and the Inner Sphere during Tukayyid was pretty even. No amount of paper theorycrafting will ever trump actual performance in-game - particularly when you rant about things that are inconsequential or (in the case of Raven-tough Locusts) do not even exist. Even beta testing won't find all the possible interactions that the full player-base can come up with, which is why bugs and balance tweaks are always a thing in every game. And when you take a "neutral, data-driven" approach, you ignore a lot of things that aren't quantified by Smurfy, but still have a real effect on the game.

Your claim to "neutrality" is a pathetically obvious lie - you've succeeded in embarrassing yourself with your own example, and if this new offering is any indication of your "data-driven" approach, you need to just put away the shovel and stop digging your hole deeper. It's quite apparent that you are not neutral in the least, and are simply skimming numbers to support your own unfounded opinion - an opinion that flies in the face of the data provided by live gameplay.

Edited by Void Angel, 13 May 2015 - 04:09 PM.

[ThatGuy539]

I like CW...no matter what the drop tonnage is, or which side I am playing. And I'll play with the faction that pays the most.


30 minutes can be a bit long, but if I'm short on time there's always the normal queue.

The wait times to get into a match can be a bit annoying though. But 4v4 or something should help with that if it gets implemented. And once more people start playing it, it should also be better.

Unfortunately, no matter how many people are playing, if there are more people on one side than the other, the side with the most will have longer wait times to get into a game. 4v4 should help, but it may not be as fun as 12v12. Meh, we'll see.
Upping the loyalty rewards for factions with low populations should help too. [And as a Privateer...aka licensed Pirate, I will definitely gravitate to whoever is paying the most. P) ]

And once the CW community is a lot larger, it would be nice if team and PUG play could be separated. PUG play is for PUGS, and Team for teams. Should help keep everyone happy. An Elo system would also be nice, but ya, only once there are a lot more people playing it. With the CW population low as it is currently, I'm just happy to get into a game with whomever.

Edited by ThatGuy539, 14 May 2015 - 09:07 AM.

[Stain Pain]

PGI you fkn blew it again. Not only you created a completely stupid system in a completely unbalanced environment. You keep messing with it in all the wrong ways.

I just came back the past few weeks after my previous long break from the game that was due to clan mechs dominating the battlefield. Now I'm gone again and I think it's time to say this will be permanent. I really love Battletech but I don't have to take this **** anymore.

[John Stryker]

This might sound crazy, but if you want to balance CW, how about adjusting the drop tonnage of a faction? As the faction gets bigger, it loses drop tonnage 5 tons at a time. The opposite happens when the faction gets smaller. You could even go as far as dropping mech quirks and nerfs on mechs in CW that way. Eventually there would form a natural balance after a few weeks.

[Clay Pigeon]

John Stryker, on 02 July 2015 - 11:29 AM, said:

This might sound crazy, but if you want to balance CW, how about adjusting the drop tonnage of a faction? As the faction gets bigger, it loses drop tonnage 5 tons at a time. The opposite happens when the faction gets smaller. You could even go as far as dropping mech quirks and nerfs on mechs in CW that way. Eventually there would form a natural balance after a few weeks.

Jade Falcon's drop deck would be pretty darn small right now.

[Dagorlad13]

Tom Sawyer, on 11 May 2015 - 02:32 PM, said:

Rejoice clanners for your whines of IS OP has been heard.

Once again the IS gets screwed over. It was not enough that we got flooded with attacks and could only respond.

How about Tukayyid 2 where the clans have to defend and we can flood attack?

Silence freebirth surat! Show that you no longer need two crutches, but you can now walk with just one.

John Stryker, on 02 July 2015 - 11:29 AM, said:

This might sound crazy, but if you want to balance CW, how about adjusting the drop tonnage of a faction? As the faction gets bigger, it loses drop tonnage 5 tons at a time. The opposite happens when the faction gets smaller. You could even go as far as dropping mech quirks and nerfs on mechs in CW that way. Eventually there would form a natural balance after a few weeks.

Faction loyalty is not rewarded nearly as well as it should be, this would give players even less incentive to remain loyal to a faction.