76 replies to this topic

[Tombstoner]

Changing the band-aid on your gun shot wound is not the solution. Don't shoot yourself in the foot to begin with.
Balance issues are all easily quantified before you start coding. Issues with IGP, the game engine and hit detection are not as foreseeable as what happens to mech choice or balance when the clans arrive..... Ghost heat and quirks are completely avoidable and unnecessary if you build the game correctly. Asking for faster garbage is not the solution.

[Tombstoner]

Mirkk Defwode, on 22 June 2015 - 01:28 PM, said:

I'm still working on a mega balance sheet, but the approach I'm taking is going back to the roots for tabletop and thus will take significant time that I don't really have to invest at the moment.

Make sure you include and explain how the port to skill based targeting alters the 2d6 To hit heat effects on chance to hit and more importantly damage allocation system; also a 2d6 RNG. Its important because max armor allocation is based on the 2D6 probability. speed effect on chance to hit along with heat where part of TT. basically MWO has hit rates much higher then TT. Thats ok but the ability to place shots is not quantified across all mechs. thats why the atlas is a walking kill where as a light at 150 kph is much harder to kill.

[DaZur]

cSand, on 22 June 2015 - 11:50 AM, said:

Well I see you a lot in matches so there ya go

Golden Rule # 172 - "When you point one finger, there are three fingers pointing back to you."

Edited by DaZur, 22 June 2015 - 02:02 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

CocoaJin, on 22 June 2015 - 01:22 PM, said:

That still gives the premier chassisies the same advantage they already hold. If a chassis is a constant(no changes in hardpoints and specs), then any blanket changes in a weapon's specs is more or less equally applied to all other chassisies too.

Did you not read the rest of the post? That was already addressed. You need to use global solutions for global problems (i.e. ML being woefully out-ranged and out-gunned by C-ERML) and you need specific solutions for specific problems (i.e. buffing the hunch structure on an HBK-4G because that one part of the 'Mech is a super weak link holding it back). Giving one 'Mech a better standard Medium Laser than the other to overcome deficiencies in durability in a game all about customization is just backwards as hell.

Also, chassis is plural for chassis.

DarthRevis, on 22 June 2015 - 01:24 PM, said:

Yup, which result in NO CHANGE actually, just puts all the mechs that use that weapons on a lower relative platform then other mechs that do not But did NOTHING to stop the issue. But they are still in the same place relative to each other and only change is to things that are not affected by this or mechs that dont use Clan weapons, they get a buff because they did not get nerfed.

A Jenner was not ever better than the Locust because it had longer-reaching lasers. Even after the Locust gets some incredible improvements to its lasers, it's still not ultimately better than a Jenner.

I'll give you a hint as to where the problem lies: one of these 'Mechs is not 35 tons.

Ergo, longer reaching lasers is not the solution to the Locust's deficiencies.

[XX Sulla XX]

DarthRevis, on 22 June 2015 - 01:10 PM, said:

But in the same turn you increased face time on mechs that need help like the Mist lynx, Kit fox....etc.

So this is actually a NERF to them because they need help but the fix is there, a CERMED nerf would results in a structure buff for the mechs that it will actually hurt. Then we have a happy medium...but again. This gets away from SMALL CHANGES and could result in being problematic

Also I sure DO understand and I am in the camp of NEVER HAVING QUIRKS TO BEING WITH. They have created more problems then they were worth IMO. The fact that you claim i dont understand something after 3 comments to each other is rather comical....How do we have any idea what each other understand at this point?

They tried what you are purposing already...when mechs come out they get GENERAL BUFFS and they ALWAYS prove to not be enough or to much and they must go back and touch the mechs again. So i dont see how affecting the WEAPON would help when some variants do better or worse with the same loadouts.
It comes down to what you said earlier, hitboxes, geometry, hardpoint location. Those are the things we cannot change so Mech specific quirks come down.

If it was me, all IS mechs would have gotten Beam decrease and Heat gen decrease once clans hit....everyone. Then we would move onto make each mech viable with those quriks as the baseline. Then from there (another week later or so which would make guys like Sulla pissed at my snail speed) you try structure and mobility to get it in its final place. The wild swings we have now are kinda silly (30% one week 15% the next and then 3 months later after a change to some other global mechnic you put it back where it was when you started) and really just turn me off from the mechs all together...i just go play some other mech that wont be altered and need to be rebuilt each time i log in.





So basically you are just stomping your foot throwing a fit because they are not doing it fast enough? How entitled you sound...

We already have what you are purposing just not fast enough for you...or on one a month because of things (CW, New maps, old maps being redone, new mechs, and quirks on OLD MECHS like you are pruposing) and i am fine with that. There really are not THAT many more mech that need help. Quickdraws, some IS lights, Shadowhawks could use some love...but outside that. I dont see the issue in needing them NOW PGI is a small company and like i said in a previous thread i am pretty sure my buddy has more kids then Russ has employees.

BTW......Are you on a time limit? Computer only lasts 4 more months?

And yes I am on drugs but what does that have to do with anything? You would have much harder time with me when I am NOT on drugs sir.
.

But now that i got to the bottom of that wall of text just to say...

I want my stuff faster!

Well notice the title of the thread is " Need for faster balance changes" so yes they should be doing them faster. No stomping involved but it would be better for the game to fix mechs that need it in a more timely fashion.

CocoaJin, on 22 June 2015 - 01:22 PM, said:

That still gives the premier chassisies the same advantage they already hold. If a chassis is a constant(no changes in hardpoints and specs), then any blanket changes in a weapon's specs is more or less equally applied to all other chassisies too.

True some quirks will always have to be made to balance mechs like the TW.

Tombstoner, on 22 June 2015 - 01:40 PM, said:

Changing the band-aid on your gun shot wound is not the solution. Don't shoot yourself in the foot to begin with.
Balance issues are all easily quantified before you start coding. Issues with IGP, the game engine and hit detection are not as foreseeable as what happens to mech choice or balance when the clans arrive..... Ghost heat and quirks are completely avoidable and unnecessary if you build the game correctly. Asking for faster garbage is not the solution.

I pipe dream of a complete redo of how the game is setup is not a solution either. Its a fine dream but it is a dream.

[Armorine]

So basically make everything vanilla and the same so nothing sucks..... Nope. There will always be garbage mechs

[XX Sulla XX]

Armorine, on 22 June 2015 - 04:04 PM, said:

So basically make everything vanilla and the same so nothing sucks..... Nope. There will always be garbage mechs

No you just have less of a difference between the best and worse not zero difference.

[cSand]

Armorine, on 22 June 2015 - 04:04 PM, said:

So basically make everything vanilla and the same so nothing sucks..... Nope. There will always be garbage mechs

Well, TBH, I actually prefer having underdog mechs. I like having mechs that are more (or less) forgiving. It allows a wide range of playstyles and also some challenge for those who like playing the underdog anyways.

Overall, I would say that smart piloting is a bigger decider of viability rather than what tier the mech is.

That said, some chassis really need a little boost I think becuase some game mechanics have changed over time yet the chassis has not changed. For example the Highlander and Victor, who got their mobility d**ked hard by the JJ changes, when realistically the big selling point of those mechs should be their mobility!

Lack of hardpoints or funky hardpoints I think are OK, as long as the mech makes up for it elsewhere such as mobility. Which is why I don't find the Summoner to be as bad as people say it is, because that thing at least has some legs on it, and if you play to that strength rather than trying to face brawl everyone it works a hell of a lot better

[Armorine]

And there's the problem I draw from this. Some of the worst mechs will require hellacious quirks to make them good. This absolutely guarantees they'd become meta in some way. By the very nature of BT there are garbage mechs. There has to be. As the time line progresses more powerful mechs enter the battlefield. Lord help us if we get stuff like the devastation....or the brune(dark age)

[XX Sulla XX]

Armorine, on 22 June 2015 - 04:43 PM, said:

And there's the problem I draw from this. Some of the worst mechs will require hellacious quirks to make them good. This absolutely guarantees they'd become meta in some way. By the very nature of BT there are garbage mechs. There has to be. As the time line progresses more powerful mechs enter the battlefield. Lord help us if we get stuff like the devastation....or the brune(dark age)

Many mechs already have very big quirks and are not meta.

[Burktross]

TheCharlatan, on 22 June 2015 - 09:23 AM, said:

There is a problem here: you say that


Which means that "your opinion dosen't count."
But you say that we have to follow Gman's opinion on what is good and what is not.
Why his opinion and not someone else's?

This is the main problem with balance from the player side: it's based on opinions.

The only guys with the stats are the ones at PGI. They look at the numbers and, hopefully, know what to do to change them in the way they think is good to the game.

If we were to go in "quirk overload" as you ask, we would have meta-shifts way too fast, and people would get pretty angry with the constant "buy the FOTM mech".

Well... there are objective things to go off of.
Like, well, the Quickdraw and Awesome's relatively huge size.
Victor's hardpoint inadequacy.
Hard mounted JJs
etc

[XX Sulla XX]

Looks like we are going to see some more balance changes.

AndrewPappas ‏@AndiNagasia 18h18 hours ago
@russ_bullock @Paul_Inouye i know you both at bussy but many of us would like to see some form of MWO Tweaking every patch,...
0 retweets 0 favorites

• 
  
• 
  
  
  
  AndrewPappas ‏@AndiNagasia 18h18 hours ago
  @russ_bullock @Paul_Inouye ... Example AC2 Cooldown tweaked, Quirk tweaks for 2-4 mechs per Patch Cycle, so we can see changes in balance,
  0 retweets 0 favorites
  
• 
  
• 
  
  
  
  Russ Bullock ‏@russ_bullock 18h18 hours ago North Vancouver, British Columbia
  @AndiNagasia @Paul_Inouye well your going to get a fair bit if that in this next patch
  
  
  
  
  
  • 

8:11 PM - 22 Jun 2015 · Details

Edited by XX Sulla XX, 23 June 2015 - 12:53 PM.

[Koniks]

ITT: expected personality conflicts.

OP: I get the feeling the devs, even if they do spend some time playing the game or observing players, don't spend enough time looking at granular performance data. And they definitely don't do enough tests like the Clan vs IS ones.

I'd like the quirk process to be less arbitrary than it appears. Schedule regular evaluations of gameplay. Make balance changes more frequent, less drastic, and more targeted.

[Deathlike]

I expect little to no headway, given the current track record.

Things that did get help didn't get any refinements (it's as if the changes require 6 months to take, instead of 2 to 4 weeks).

The Maddog needs quirks, and so does the Mist Lynx and Nova...

Whatever, I expect less all the time.

[XX Sulla XX]

Deathlike, on 23 June 2015 - 05:20 PM, said:

I expect little to no headway, given the current track record.

Things that did get help didn't get any refinements (it's as if the changes require 6 months to take, instead of 2 to 4 weeks).

The Maddog needs quirks, and so does the Mist Lynx and Nova...

Whatever, I expect less all the time.

Good then they can probably meet your expectations now.

[Deathlike]

XX Sulla XX, on 23 June 2015 - 05:33 PM, said:

Good then they can probably meet your expectations now.

What are you talking about? They are getting lowered all the time.

[TheCharlatan]

Sjorpha, on 22 June 2015 - 09:39 AM, said:

Gmans tier lists are not just his opinions though, it is his way of reporting the metagame trends from the competitive scene and high elo play. He puts a lot of work into getting this as unbiased as he can and should be respected for that work IMO, as I see it there is a huge difference between what he does and some random dude posting screenshots of his favourite mech performing.

I'd like some more frequent, and smaller, balance tweaks as well, so I agree with the OP.

Sorry, my comment came out wrong: i highly respect gman's work and keep a constant eye on his blog, if only to know what builds i will be facing the most.
I just think that catering to a single voice, even one as good as Gman's, is not the way to go.

To the OP: after reading more of this discussion, i think that we can agree: PGI needs to up the speed at which lower tier mechs (and we can all agree on at least some of them) get new quirks, at least to close the gap a bit.

Let's just hope they don't get carried away and create a new 9S, when it had machine gun ER-PPCs.

[XX Sulla XX]

TheCharlatan, on 23 June 2015 - 11:14 PM, said:

Sorry, my comment came out wrong: i highly respect gman's work and keep a constant eye on his blog, if only to know what builds i will be facing the most.
I just think that catering to a single voice, even one as good as Gman's, is not the way to go.

To the OP: after reading more of this discussion, i think that we can agree: PGI needs to up the speed at which lower tier mechs (and we can all agree on at least some of them) get new quirks, at least to close the gap a bit.

Let's just hope they don't get carried away and create a new 9S, when it had machine gun ER-PPCs.

Exactly that is all I am asking for. They do not have to be huge changes but they do need to work on it a little every patch. If nothing else people will be trying out the mechs to see if they are any good in between patches.

[Joseph Mallan]

El Bandito, on 22 June 2015 - 09:16 AM, said:

PGI can test out some weapon balance change immediately, such as increasing LBX pellet damage or removing Machine Gun CoF. Takes only few minutes to make the change in the XML sheet--and they can just test it in their PTR if they are afraid of live servers abusing the newly balanced weapons. Yet they don't. They make me sad.

Still, PGI is at least doing balancing more frequently than Blizzard. Been waiting for ages for them to do the next balance patch on Hearthstone.

Why remove a MGs cone of fire? Machine guns are not pin point accurate weapons they are spray and prey. Even the GAU-9 sprays a stream of shells into the dirt for like a quarter mile leading to the target and splashing all around the target once lined up. AND its an light Auto Cannon!

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 24 June 2015 - 02:02 AM.

[bad arcade kitty]

imo they should fix hit reg before any serious balance changes