43 replies to this topic

[lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol]

I was just curious to understand this in a better light from the informed and enlightened people of the MW:O community.

What is the standard that is used in order to "balance" mechs that we play?

Is there some sort of baseline performance that is expected out of each mech depending on weight, class, hardpoints, customization?

Are the mechs compared against each other in a Community Warfare setting?

Are they compared against stats in group/solo queue?

Are the mechs compared against each other with consideration of how lower/higher ELO players perform in them?

Are stock mech configurations considered against best build meta configurations?

Are mechs mainly being balanced against IS vs. Clan?

FotM popularity nerf/buffing?

Other?

I ask only because I've seen many variants of above suggested in the forums that this is how the balancing is done and could never quite glean together a clear answer.

Edited by 00ohDstruct, 17 May 2015 - 06:26 PM.

[Mcgral18]

There isn't a standard, which is part of the problem.


One suggestion...is when PGI suggests Iterative quirking...they don't go ahead and slap multiple 20+% quirks on something.

[Xetelian]

Well the TBR had a Gold mech sell out, I mean they literally ran out of them and it might just be the best mech in the game so it really comes down to how hard we can nerf it and buff others until we have some balance.
-15% speed and 10% accel decel increase would do the trick.

[Soul Tribunal]

00ohDstruct, on 17 May 2015 - 02:31 PM, said:

I was just curious to understand this in a better light from the informed and enlightened people of the MW:O community.

What is the standard that is used in order to "balance" mechs that we play?

Is there some sort of baseline performance that is expected out of each mech depending on weight, class, hardpoints, customization?

Are the mechs compared against each other in a Community Warfare setting?

Are they compared against stats in group/solo queue?

Are the mechs compared against each other with consideration of how lower/higher ELO players perform in them?

Are stock mech configurations considered against best build meta configurations?

Are mechs mainly being balanced against IS vs. Clan?

FotM popularity nerf/buffing?

Other?

I ask only because I've seen many variants of above suggested in the forums that this is how the balancing is done and could never quite glean together a clear answer.

Statistical Analysis is what they use. They know how many matches are played in them, and what weapons are most used on them more than likely (or in general across all the Clan Mechs).
That's probably how they do their Balancing, much like every other game out there of this genre. (i.e. Wargamming etc).

-ST

[Av4tar]

the standard is the low play-quality but paying whiners. because they are the loudest when they cant play.

[Insects]

Russ has said multiple times that TW and SC are the top bar everything is measured against and the performance target for quirking things up.

The Nerf intention is to bring that bar down lower.

[Alistair Winter]

We don't really know anything about what standard PGI is operating with. It seems like a mix of everything, except the bit about stock builds. Looking at some of the changes they've made, I truly don't understand how they operate, no matter if I look at it through the eyes of a conspiracy thinker, a white knight or whatever else.

We do know a lot about how the players think, and we know there's no sort of consensus. Some people think the game should be balanced like StarCraft or similar games with a rich competitive scene, where the metagame at the highest level determines how the game is balanced, because the competitive scene is regarded as very important. Others think that the game should be balanced around the average player, because competitive players will always find the cheese builds and exploit the system no matter what.

Some people think the game should be based heavily on lore, and that the best mechs in lore should be the best mechs in the game. Others think that PGI should pay more attention to what mechs are naturally superior in a FPS due to hardpoint location, hitboxes and other factors, and just use those factors as a reference point from which to balance the game.

And then there are some players who think that all attempts to balance the game are pointless, because ultimately it all comes down to the pilot's skills and that every mech is good enough if the pilot is good enough. In their view, anyone who complains about balance should just shut up and learn to play.

The crux of the problem, I think, is that PGI has chosen a very unique franchise with limited appeal to a wider audience. They're trying to please many different groups in order to attract a large enough audience to support a very costly game. Ultimately, this results in a game that lacks a clear vision. It's not a hardcore e-sport FPS, it's not an immersive FPS RPG, it's not a casual arcade FPS, it's trying to be a mix between all those things, and more. Because if PGI did pursue a clear artistic vision, without compromise, this game would be a lot smaller in scope. And arguably less profitable.

Which isn't to say that PGI is making the best of a difficult situation, by the way. I do think the game could have been handled differently, handled better. But the answer is ultimately that I don't think PGI has an answer, they're just trying to please the different groups who seem to be united only by their love of mechs. And I do recognise that it's harder to do than most people may think, which is probably why we went so long without another Mechwarrior game.

EDIT: Jesus, that post turned out longer than I intended.

Edited by Alistair Winter, 17 May 2015 - 03:12 PM.

[Xetelian]

Having already made a sarcastic post in this thread hoping it would die, now its got an Alistair essay and it'll live for days...

[Matthew Ace]

Alistair Winter, on 17 May 2015 - 03:11 PM, said:

Spoiler

We don't really know anything about what standard PGI is operating with. It seems like a mix of everything, except the bit about stock builds. Looking at some of the changes they've made, I truly don't understand how they operate, no matter if I look at it through the eyes of a conspiracy thinker, a white knight or whatever else.

We do know a lot about how the players think, and we know there's no sort of consensus. Some people think the game should be balanced like StarCraft or similar games with a rich competitive scene, where the metagame at the highest level determines how the game is balanced, because the competitive scene is regarded as very important. Others think that the game should be balanced around the average player, because competitive players will always find the cheese builds and exploit the system no matter what.

Some people think the game should be based heavily on lore, and that the best mechs in lore should be the best mechs in the game. Others think that PGI should pay more attention to what mechs are naturally superior in a FPS due to hardpoint location, hitboxes and other factors, and just use those factors as a reference point from which to balance the game.

And then there are some players who think that all attempts to balance the game are pointless, because ultimately it all comes down to the pilot's skills and that every mech is good enough if the pilot is good enough. In their view, anyone who complains about balance should just shut up and learn to play.

The crux of the problem, I think, is that PGI has chosen a very unique franchise with limited appeal to a wider audience. They're trying to please many different groups in order to attract a large enough audience to support a very costly game. Ultimately, this results in a game that lacks a clear vision. It's not a hardcore e-sport FPS, it's not an immersive FPS RPG, it's not a casual arcade FPS, it's trying to be a mix between all those things, and more. Because if PGI did pursue a clear artistic vision, without compromise, this game would be a lot smaller in scope. And arguably less profitable.

Which isn't to say that PGI is making the best of a difficult situation, by the way. I do think the game could have been handled differently, handled better. But the answer is ultimately that I don't think PGI has an answer, they're just trying to please the different groups who seem to be united only by their love of mechs. And I do recognise that it's harder to do than most people may think, which is probably why we went so long without another Mechwarrior game.

EDIT: Jesus, that post turned out longer than I intended.

It is a good post that isn't lengthy for the sake of just because though.

[Elizander]

The disparity of IS and Clan technology on a base level is so huge that getting things even on a numbers standpoint is going to be pretty glaring.

• Endo + Ferro difference = 50% critical slots less for clans (or 7/14 slots saved)
  
• DHS = 33% critical slots less for clans (1 slot saved per DHS)
  
• Weapon Range = CERML vs ML is 50% more range, 40% more damage, 32% more DPS (for positives) and 50% more heat, 27% longer burn time.for negatives. The other weapons are a little less extreme in comparison but the differences are still there.
  
• Engines = The bigger the mech, the better it is due to having more space with XL engines. There aren't a lot of IS heavy/assault mechs willing to use XL engines since it can greatly shorten their lifespan (this is hard to quantify though)

Now you put all that together and you try to compensate for quirks. What are you compensating for? Just look at the CERML vs ISML stat differences. We're counting on 5%-20% quirks to balance out the 32-50% differences on various stats. For the sake of simplicity let's say the range cancels out heat and the dps cancels out burn time, that's still leaving a 40% difference (which is a very rough way of estimating things but that's just an example).

Now this is just for one staple weapon. We're not even comparing speed, weight and critical savings and other factors. Trying to brute force quirks to match IS to clans ton for ton is definitely going to reach the 40-50% ranges just to close the gap a little.

Now the problem is that it is comparing to TBR/SCR which have Endo Ferro and a lot of other clams don't have it so when IS are quirked to match TBR/SCR all the other clams fall behind quickly. They are now being quirked to chase the IS mechs which were quirked to chase the huge gap in the tech that the top tier clan mechs have. What we get is a silly cat and mouse game of quirk numbers.

• TBR/SCR in the lead.
  
• Quirk IS mechs to match TBR/SCR
  
• Quirk other clam mechs to match quirked IS Mechs
  
• And so on

There comes a point in time when it gets silly. We'd like to think it is asymmetrical pvp yet it all boils down to one side having higher numbers overall than the other side as a baseline and the other side is just propped up by percentage boosts to match said baseline numbers of the superior side.


If it simply boiled down to IS are 1) slower 2) have shorter range 3) fire more often 4) run cooler versus Clans being 1) faster 2) have longer range 3) Fire less often 4) Overheat faster then it devolves into brawler vs sniper games all day.

The point is there are too many things to factor in and unless chassis are shoehorned into specific dedicated roles or ALL roles of each variant is defined clearly then it's always going to be one big mess.

Edited by Elizander, 17 May 2015 - 04:32 PM.

[Khobai]

Quote

Russ has said multiple times that TW and SC are the top bar everything is measured against and the performance target for quirking things up.

The Nerf intention is to bring that bar down lower.

Which makes no sense.

Rather than nerfing mechs endlessly they need to understand WHY the mechs are overpowered and fix the offending game mechanics... They keep nerfing mechs in circles over and over for the same reasons like a dog chasing its own tail... with no purpose or end in sight.

If they just fixed the core issues of the game then it would be impossible for ANY mech to be overpowered.

Edited by Khobai, 17 May 2015 - 04:08 PM.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Soul Tribunal, on 17 May 2015 - 02:41 PM, said:

Statistical Analysis is what they use. They know how many matches are played in them, and what weapons are most used on them more than likely (or in general across all the Clan Mechs).
That's probably how they do their Balancing, much like every other game out there of this genre. (i.e. Wargamming etc).

-ST

Which really just leads to never ending nerfing this and buffing that, but no real balance measurement.

Cuz one minute a weapon is performing well and another poorly, so they nerf the good gun and buff the bad one, so now roles reverse and a month or so later they go ahead and nerf this and buff that again.

THye need to start with a standard, min and a max cap they aim not to go beyond or below. A vision on how they want the game to be and aim to make it that way. Not buffing this build cuz its popular in hopes that it makes another build more popular...that is not balance.

JJ/GR/PPC build was popular so they nerf JJ to uselessness so JJ builds are no longer.
So GR/PPC builds became a thing, now PPC are useless and GR are tricky to use....
So now we have laser vomit.....whats next? THey going to blanket nerf the hell out of lasers in hopes that we use ballistic builds up until the point people start spamming teh same cannon builds on every mech then nerf t hat to?

THen when the cycle is out of builds to nerf, they begin again....

But dont look at the game playstyle, map sizes and design, core game mechanics or any of that as to why ceertain builds are spammed....just endlessly nerf the guns people like to use until they use another...then nerf it.

[Deathlike]

There is no standard.

That's why there is no logic to the balance changes.

Hard to compare things if there's nothing to reference from.

[Neput Z34]

I think the "standard" depends:
♦ On the day of the week.
♦ Which side of the bed they got out.
♦ What they ate before work.
♦ Did they have a mind numbing meeting with marketing. etc.

The better question is, why?
Is it "Let's try something different and see if it works" or is it [ insert your own tin foil hat conspiracy here ] ?
Sadly only they know what goes on inside the "Puzzle Palace" and I am not wreaking my mind to figure out that enigma.

[AkoolPopTart]

[STEF_]

AkoolPopTart, on 17 May 2015 - 08:41 PM, said:

(endless and useless searching for balance with the "ultimate" quirk system)
(also know as "dog chasing its tail" system)
(also know as "PGI")

[Mystere]

This is the golden standard:

Edited by Mystere, 17 May 2015 - 09:08 PM.

[El Bandito]

It is not simple in a game like MWO but here are some Inner Sphere baseline I personally thought of. Assume the popular variants per example I set.

Light mechs: Does the mech perform roughly in the same level as that of quirkless Jenner? If yes, balanced. If no, tweak it until it does.

Medium mechs: Does the mech perform roughly in the same level as that of quirkless Shadowhawk? If yes, balanced. If no, tweak it until it does.

Heavy mechs: Does the mech perform roughly in the same level as that of quirkless Jagermech? If yes, balanced. If no, tweak it until it does.

Assault mechs: Does the mech perform roughly in the same level as that of quirkless Banshee? If yes, balanced. If no, tweak it until it does.


Buffing Certain weapons such as LBX, MG, Flamer, AC2, and AC10 can also help with mech balance.

Edited by El Bandito, 18 May 2015 - 02:14 AM.

[lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol]

El Bandito, on 18 May 2015 - 12:48 AM, said:

It is not simple in a game like MWO but here are some Inner Sphere baseline I personally thought of. Assume the popular variants per example I set.

Light mechs: Does the mech perform roughly in the same level as that of quirkless Jenner? If yes, balanced. If no, tweak it until it does.

Medium mechs: Does the mech perform roughly in the same level as that of quirkless Shadowhawk? If yes, balanced. If no, tweak it until it does.

Heavy mechs: Does the mech perform roughly in the same level as that of quirkless Jagermech? If yes, balanced. If no, tweak it until it does.

Assault mechs: Does the mech perform roughly in the same level as that of quirkless Banshee? If yes, balanced. If no, tweak it until it does.


Buffing Certain weapons such as LBX, MG, Flamer, AC2, and AC10 can also help with mech balance.

While I can see PGI using that sort of logic, I don't see the same being applied currently to Clan mechs as the "Holy Trinity" are the most popular, yet complained about by IS, clan omnimechs. PGI has deemed those "too good" that they feel the need to negative quirk their functionality/popularity. But again, what is the baseline they are trying to achieve or compare against when they are quirking?

You mentioned bringing light mechs into line with say, the Jenner, but with all due respect, a non quirked Firestarter or Ember will perform much better... so wouldn't logic dictate that those mechs need negative quirks (to make them less viable and goto mechs) as to make the Jenner a better choice? I believe I recall when they gave Victor mechs negative quirks because they were deemed "too good," or am I imagining things? Now I don't see a negative quirk for those at all... why is that? Currently PGI's happy to give negative quirks to some of the clan mechs... which is the reason why I asking what they're comparing against... because honestly I don't think that they're comparing apples to apples (IS to IS) when making their decisions.

Personally, I feel if they are trying to balance IS vs. Clan, it's never going to work in the current state, and it's all because of Omnipods and how Clan mechs are limited in squeezing out extra tonnage (for their ballistics and missiles) to compensate for how PGI's battletech works. If Clan had static hardpoints (I'm not suggesting as a solution, but hear me out) then PERHAPS they could attempt to nerf balance better. Instead I feel like they are punishing balancing specific optimum builds as a knee jerk reaction to stomp out Flavor of the Month builds, and without having a baseline golden standard or realistic expectations for an endpoint of how things should be, it's much like the picture Mystere posted, except in this case it's more like throwing darts at a wall without a dartboard to throw at.

I do wonder, though, if IS was balanced to IS mechs, and Clan to Clan first... that it would be a better process from there to cross balance the two factions. However, as it stands now, I don't believe the two factions mechs are balanced within their own ranks, and why it feels like there's no plan, or order, to what seems like chaotic knee jerk tweaking.

Edited by 00ohDstruct, 18 May 2015 - 09:49 AM.

[Apnu]

Alistair Winter, on 17 May 2015 - 03:11 PM, said:

EDIT: Jesus, that post turned out longer than I intended.

Yes but well said. Thanks.