407 replies to this topic

[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.