129 replies to this topic

[Sir Wulfrick]

1) Give IS mechs the ability to use all clan weapons.

2) Give clan mechs the ability to use all IS weapons.

3) Remove all quirks.

4) Balance largely complete.

[Water Bear]

Sir Wulfrick, on 02 July 2015 - 12:27 PM, said:

1) Give IS mechs the ability to use all clan weapons.

2) Give clan mechs the ability to use all IS weapons.

3) Remove all quirks.

4) Balance largely complete.

Do you want to know why no clan player will get behind this? Because it might actually work. They've got something to protect here.

It's like the suggestion for making IS XL's behave like Clan ones. Number one, it would work. Number two, there is no number two. Half the mechs in the game already have this advantage, no clear reason not to spread the joy if it is in fact balanced.

[InspectorG]

Aresye Kerensky, on 02 July 2015 - 11:36 AM, said:

I say they should temporarily balance everything perfectly 50:50. All IS and Clan weapons have the exact same stats. Quirks get taken away, both IS and Clan XLs have the same durability, etc.

Keep everything like that until all the heavy complainers from both sides realize they actually just suck.

NOPE. Wont work.

A. they will then complain about how the difference between IS/Clan is only cosmetic and breaks Lore.
B. Admit they suck???? HAHAHAHA.

I think the overall direction is fine.

Clans get moar alpha at cost of heat and duration.
IS dets DPS at cost of range and tonnage.

LET THE MAPS AND OBJECTIVES give emphasis to range or brawl.

[Appogee]

I'd still like to see how 2 Clan stars of 5 go against 3 IS lances of 4.

Maybe even try to recreate the Zellbriggen mechanic that led to 'fairer' fights between the IS's inferior tech and the Clans' superior Clan Mechs and weaponry. For example, a Clan Mech might experience a significant delay switching targets if it hasn't finished off its prior target ... because Clanners are supposed to battle one on one. For example, Clan ECM might not render Clan Mechs totally invisible, because 'we are too proud to hide' etc.

Trying to make Clan and IS weapons equivalent is the antithesis of what an IS v Clan fight should be about in BT.

Edited by Appogee, 02 July 2015 - 12:48 PM.

[Kristov Kerensky]

Appogee, on 02 July 2015 - 12:46 PM, said:

I'd still like to see how 2 Clan stars of 5 go against 3 IS lances of 4.

Maybe even try to recreate the Zellbriggen mechanic that led to 'fairer' fights between the IS's inferior tech and the Clans' superior Clan Mechs and weaponry. For example, a Clan Mech might experience a significant delay switching targets if it hasn't finished off its prior target ... because Clanners are supposed to battle one on one. For example, Clan ECM might not render Clan Mechs totally invisible, because 'we are too proud to hide' etc.

Trying to make Clan and IS weapons equivalent is the antithesis of what an IS v Clan fight should be about in BT.

Since we have parity, 10 Clan Mechs vs 12 IS Mechs is pretty much a win for the IS, if you can't see that right now, well...

And Zellbrigen doesn't work like everyone thinks, I really wish people would get off that and realize it will NOT happen, PGI can't ENFORCE RP, especially when something like Zellbrigen in the subject, as it was NOT always used by Clan Warriors when facing IS Warriors in the first place and it was not used by them after a very short time fighting the IS. It is not some rigidly enforced code that all Trueborn followed, it varies from Clan to Clan and the IS was seen by MOST Clans as not being worthy of Zellbrigen to begin with, the IS quickly showed the rest of the Clans that they were indeed NOT worthy of it at all.

[Aim64C]

Kristov Kerensky, on 02 July 2015 - 12:59 PM, said:

Since we have parity, 10 Clan Mechs vs 12 IS Mechs is pretty much a win for the IS, if you can't see that right now, well...

"Parity" is a very generalized subject to be throwing around.

Many, such as myself, would argue that the game was horribly imbalanced with just the Inner Sphere involved and that the Clans simply made worrying about balance rather futile in the long run.

Quote

And Zellbrigen doesn't work like everyone thinks, I really wish people would get off that and realize it will NOT happen, PGI can't ENFORCE RP,

I agree, here. Trying to force role play is like trying to force 'mech designs and weapon strategies (ghost heat and removing LRMs from the game).

I would contend, however, that there is no avenue for RP as a community within the game, and not really much in the way of ... well ... war. There's Solaris, but that's not what battlefields look like.

Quote

especially when something like Zellbrigen in the subject, as it was NOT always used by Clan Warriors when facing IS Warriors in the first place and it was not used by them after a very short time fighting the IS. It is not some rigidly enforced code that all Trueborn followed, it varies from Clan to Clan and the IS was seen by MOST Clans as not being worthy of Zellbrigen to begin with, the IS quickly showed the rest of the Clans that they were indeed NOT worthy of it at all.

It did still influence Clan concepts of warfare, politics, and battlefield promotion - to a detriment, I would add.

Clans often favored head-on battle strategies and, particularly mechwarriors, were rather touchy on the concept of teamwork within the notion of a single opponent. Honor was found in defeating strong opponents on one's own and assisting could be taken as an insult to one's abilities or just seen as depriving one of honor (though in the case of fighting the Inner Sphere - generally seen as an insult).

The Clans are capable of being pressured outside of this mentality - but so long as they hold the upper hand, they tend to stick to rather rigid ideologies until the demand for survival kicks them into using whatever tactics will depose the threat to their survival.

After all, the survivors decide what is and is not honorable... and if the honorable ways cause extinction, then evolution has spoken.

Ironically - it was the concept of Zellbrigen as applied to strategy that led to the annihilation of Smoke Jaguar. Zellbrigen influences many things within the culture of the Clans - including many of their philosophical outlooks on life. Smoke Jaguar was weak and was allowed to be annihilated by the Inner Sphere.

The Clans are very interesting from a sociological and political standpoint. They're both human and alien at the same time.

[Sjorpha]

Johnny Z, on 02 July 2015 - 05:01 AM, said:

The second alternative is bad for the following reasons that cannot be argued with.

- OP Omni mechs would mean seperate queues for the solo queue or any Solaris game modes that may come out. Read slowly let that sink in and do the math.

- OP Omni mechs would mean the marketable mechs for Mechwarrior Online would be HUGELY reduced. Again read slowly let that sink in and do the math.

Of course they can be argued with.

There is no reason to split solo and group queues, the MM would make 12 man teams with the IS players and 10 man teams with the clan players, then drop them against each other. Depending on the player counts on IS and Clan games could be IS vs Clan, IS vs IS or Clan vs Clan as needed to create matches. You could also do 8 vs 5 matches to easy up the MMs work when there are few players.

Solaris would need some kind of special ruleset though, maybe a tiered system based on the mechs BV as per PGIs upcoming formula or something. In any case solaris is a big development project in any case, PGI is going to have to deal with creating a ruleset for it in any case.

If IS 12 man teams are on parity with Clan 10 man teams, then IS mechs would be competitive within the IS meta. Just like lights can be competitive now despite assaults being much more powerful, because of weight class and tonnage restrictions they get a competitive niche. The same would be true for IS mechs in general with a 12 vs 10 setup.

Edited by Sjorpha, 02 July 2015 - 01:56 PM.

[Kristov Kerensky]

Aim, if you are in an IS Mech and see an equal tonnage Clan Mech, do you automatically assume you've lost and just give up? Or do you think, 'I wonder if that pilot is any good?' and lay into them, confident that YOU are the better pilot and will win?

Right now, Clan vs IS, equal tonnage, it's not a given that the Clan Mech will be the victor, it's not an autowin. And in some tonnage ranges, the IS has a definite advantage, looking at you Lights... And I'll take my King Crab over my Dire Wolf any day of the week and twice on Sunday, it's just the better Mech, despite the Dire being able to carry more weapons and hit harder.

Parity has been achieved, we see it in the solo/group que outside of CW and we see it in CW drops where we actually get Clan vs IS match ups constantly. Clan PUG vs IS PUG, toss up who'll win every single time, teamwork and individual skill are the determining factors, NOT the Tech being used. Organized units, well, that'll be down to who's the better team, exactly as it should be. I've seen IS units take down Clan units and vice versa, the better players are winning regardless of the Tech being used by either side, solo or group, rambo or organized, and that says it all.

There are some outliers, but we have those on BOTH sides of the equation, Clan and IS both have them. And that's to be expected and it's actually a good thing, since PGI can look at those and see what they did right and wrong. Of course, it's PGI, so they tend to get those 2 backwards

Role Play..ah..that's a subject I love myself, I played as Steiner in TT and then as a Clan Trueborn in MW2, even earned my Bloodname via Trial as it should be done online playing MW2. Spent 2 years being the Clan Trueborn online, no contractions, no vulgarity, all that stuff, loved it! I still do it to some extent in MWO ingame and on the forums on occasion. Enforcing it, not possible, but WE can do it ourselves and some do, most don't, see that same thing in any MMO out there, RPers are usually a very minor part of the playerbase. We have units in MWO where RP is expected and enforced within the group, others don't care, both IS and Clan. It is what it is, a minority playerbase thing, so those of us who enjoy it do it, those who don't make fun of us

And while Zellbrigen does influence the Clans in so many ways, it's use against the IS, and lack thereof, is a documented part of the lore, the Crusaders were really not into Zellbrigen with the IS, after all, they are barely better than talking animals! while other Crusaders did offer it, and that varied inside each Clan, some offered, some didn't. The Wardens GENERALLY offered it, but again, it varied inside each Clan, personal feelings always played a part in it, Warden or Crusader. And lets not forget, each Clan had their OWN version of Zellbrigen, and it often had variations inside the Clan as different cliques would have their own ideals when it came to Zellbrigen. It's overall influence on the Clans, definitely visible across so many different aspects of their culture, politics, everything. Like you said, the Clans are really an amazing social construct, both human and alien at the same time, and yet, at the core, totally human through and through.

[Mystere]

Sir Wulfrick, on 02 July 2015 - 12:27 PM, said:

1) Give IS mechs the ability to use all clan weapons.

2) Give clan mechs the ability to use all IS weapons.

3) Remove all quirks.

4) Balance largely complete.

Water Bear, on 02 July 2015 - 12:35 PM, said:

Do you want to know why no clan player will get behind this? Because it might actually work. They've got something to protect here.

It's like the suggestion for making IS XL's behave like Clan ones. Number one, it would work. Number two, there is no number two. Half the mechs in the game already have this advantage, no clear reason not to spread the joy if it is in fact balanced.

[Water Bear]

Appogee, on 02 July 2015 - 12:46 PM, said:

I'd still like to see how 2 Clan stars of 5 go against 3 IS lances of 4.

IIRC, I read that they tried that briefly.

After Clans were released, before IS buffs and minor clan nerfs, believe it or not the Clans won 12 on 10.

Just FYI, all the actual data we have (and most of it is not perfect as it comes from CW and tests like the above, which may have been private match only) implies that Clans were significantly OP, and in fact still win more than they lose.

[Lordred]

Water Bear, on 03 July 2015 - 04:53 AM, said:

IIRC, I read that they tried that briefly.

After Clans were released, before IS buffs and minor clan nerfs, believe it or not the Clans won 12 on 10.

Just FYI, all the actual data we have (and most of it is not perfect as it comes from CW and tests like the above, which may have been private match only) implies that Clans were significantly OP, and in fact still win more than they lose.

They did not try 12 on 10, They did however try Clan V IS only at 12 on 12, which was a slaughter.

[Aim64C]

Kristov Kerensky, on 02 July 2015 - 02:08 PM, said:

Aim, if you are in an IS Mech and see an equal tonnage Clan Mech, do you automatically assume you've lost and just give up? Or do you think, 'I wonder if that pilot is any good?' and lay into them, confident that YOU are the better pilot and will win?

Right now, Clan vs IS, equal tonnage, it's not a given that the Clan Mech will be the victor, it's not an autowin. And in some tonnage ranges, the IS has a definite advantage, looking at you Lights... And I'll take my King Crab over my Dire Wolf any day of the week and twice on Sunday, it's just the better Mech, despite the Dire being able to carry more weapons and hit harder.

Parity is difficult to assess the way the game is, currently.

The standard matches drop with a mixed collection of Clan and IS mechs. When I am out-ranged by a Clan mech in my IS mech, I'm more than happy to let a couple of the Clan mechs on my team use their range to pin him/her down while the rest of the team maneuvers.

This tactic is somewhat more difficult with IS 'mechs where the range advantage is not nearly as great. The Clan's medium laser performs more similarly to a stock IS Large laser. Ballistics are a little more equal, but the Clans can mount comparable armament with much greater mobility. This will be even more exacerbated in the IIC mechs as a lot of things that can't be changed about omnimechs can free up a lot of tonnage in the IIC mechs.

In standard matches, this is 'fine' - because there's usually a few good Clan players on the team who can help to allow those of us in IS mechs to maneuver into position and take some of the ground.

Community Warfare is the only scenario where we really see Clan Vs IS with any kind of regularity, and the very nature of the matches throws away many of the Clan's advantages. The Clans have mobility and range - which is far more important than even raw firepower. The force with the greatest speed and range can dictate at what range a battle occurs.

The design of the CW matches operates against this by forcing the Clans to advance against a time limit to destroy structures that force attackers into convenient fatal funnels of fire.

Throw everyone onto a Conquest map - particularly a larger one where there is actually some distance between the teams, and the dynamic changes quite radically. Clans on Alpine can sit there and burn away at IS mechs from very long ranges and the IS has to advance under that superior range advantage. Gauss and ER Large Laser builds have become popular largely for this reason. Mechs that would normally never mount a gauss (such as an Atlas), have been mounting them largely to provide some measure of counter-fire while trying to advance under the superior range of the Clans (where the longer burn times of their weapons does give some time to look into the light and shoot at it - which you may as well do if you're trying to cross some of the open terrain in Alpine... if you don't give them a reason to keep their heads down, they'll just keep chewing on you until you've nothing left to twist with).

When you start taking away the nearly suicidal mission parameters given during Community Warfare matches and the mixed drop queue, the advantage does sway considerably toward the Clans.

Quote

Parity has been achieved, we see it in the solo/group que outside of CW and we see it in CW drops where we actually get Clan vs IS match ups constantly. Clan PUG vs IS PUG, toss up who'll win every single time, teamwork and individual skill are the determining factors, NOT the Tech being used. Organized units, well, that'll be down to who's the better team, exactly as it should be. I've seen IS units take down Clan units and vice versa, the better players are winning regardless of the Tech being used by either side, solo or group, rambo or organized, and that says it all.

I'm skeptical of the claim that there are routine Clan vs IS PUG drops with any kind of frequency. While I'm not the most active player ever, I can't say I've ever seen such a match up in the PUG matches. Even so, I've noticed that the current drop mechanic often will include Clan heavies in IS assault lances. If you have such reports cached, it would be interesting to see what the tonnage breakdown is.

That said, even within the standard rule sets of table top (which gave obscene advantages to the Clans), the IS can and did come out on top in even deployments. Yes, if you can get to situations where the IS is able to force the Clans to face (at that moment in time) a few mechs at once - then the IS can come out on top.

But, generally speaking, when the Clans lose, it is largely because of a failure on their end of the equation. If you have two teams of relatively equal competency, the Clans still have a very large advantage except for, perhaps, light mechs.

Quote

There are some outliers, but we have those on BOTH sides of the equation, Clan and IS both have them. And that's to be expected and it's actually a good thing, since PGI can look at those and see what they did right and wrong. Of course, it's PGI, so they tend to get those 2 backwards

They did right when they made the laser a duration based weapon. They also did right in removing the omniscient 1 kilometer sensors that can see through everything (while there are reasons why the lore says this shouldn't be - I accept it as part of game play).

After that, it pretty much fell apart.

Quote

Role Play..ah..that's a subject I love myself, I played as Steiner in TT and then as a Clan Trueborn in MW2, even earned my Bloodname via Trial as it should be done online playing MW2. Spent 2 years being the Clan Trueborn online, no contractions, no vulgarity, all that stuff, loved it! I still do it to some extent in MWO ingame and on the forums on occasion. Enforcing it, not possible, but WE can do it ourselves and some do, most don't, see that same thing in any MMO out there, RPers are usually a very minor part of the playerbase. We have units in MWO where RP is expected and enforced within the group, others don't care, both IS and Clan. It is what it is, a minority playerbase thing, so those of us who enjoy it do it, those who don't make fun of us

Role play can be fun at times. In all honesty, I wouldn't mind being able to create a 'role' within my account that I could choose to play in and assume that role. You know - create a 'different character' that is still on my account and all. I am not a hardcore RP-type person, but it'd be fun to be able to slip into a role when I feel like it while not being 'confusing' by just suddenly having Aim be a hardcore Free Worlds League guy and then trying to be a Clansman the next... and, otherwise, just a disgruntled American young adult making random quips (such as 'singing' "we're on the road to Viridian City" in Viridian Bog in the text window).

It would be nice to be able to distinguish between those, somehow, in the game...

Of course, it'd also be nice to have a game....

Quote

And while Zellbrigen does influence the Clans in so many ways, it's use against the IS, and lack thereof, is a documented part of the lore, the Crusaders were really not into Zellbrigen with the IS, after all, they are barely better than talking animals! while other Crusaders did offer it, and that varied inside each Clan, some offered, some didn't. The Wardens GENERALLY offered it, but again, it varied inside each Clan, personal feelings always played a part in it, Warden or Crusader. And lets not forget, each Clan had their OWN version of Zellbrigen, and it often had variations inside the Clan as different cliques would have their own ideals when it came to Zellbrigen. It's overall influence on the Clans, definitely visible across so many different aspects of their culture, politics, everything. Like you said, the Clans are really an amazing social construct, both human and alien at the same time, and yet, at the core, totally human through and through.

That's one of the most awesome things about Battletech, in my opinion. I can't honestly say I've seen a greater space opera than Battletech. It's not the overly flowery depiction of humanity that we get within Star Trek. It's got far more depth than Star Wars (though the expanded universe did do some interesting things... and some horrible things).

Even the promises of utopia are often times just as hollow or naive as they are in reality. The Clans have this uber-socialist elite caste that is supposed to inspire unity and prevent the same infighting that destroyed the Star League... and yet the Clans war with each other quite frequently and, arguably, more extremely in the case of Annihilation.

Most of the various agreements and pacts between the various sides have intense political drama behind them and are fleeting in the grand scale. The only lasting one - Devlin Stone and the Republic of the Sphere is delightfully conspiratorial and has just as many skeletons in its closet as any unifying endeavor before it.

It's a story of man constantly struggling against the desire and attempts to control other men and how that part of our nature - the instinct to dominate and command - doesn't change just because we smash or fuse atoms together or tell Relativity to stick its equations up its ******.

That's what I really like about it. It's what I feel would be a very accurate portrayal of an interstellar humanity.

[Kristov Kerensky]

When I said parity is evident in the solo/group non-CW ques I meant you can see that by the fact that everyone isn't using Clan Mechs. If they were as OP as some very vocal minority groups claim, we would see almost all Clan Mechs in every drop, with only the occasional new player or die hard BTech purist House fanatic using IS Mechs.

That's not supposition, it's reality in a video game, the OP toys are ALWAYS used by the majority. And since the best Clan Mechs from Wave I and Wave II have been cbill purchase for a bit now and the ques are not full of Timbys, SCrows, Hellbringers and nothing else, welp, gotta admit, Clan Mechs aren't that OP. Video game reality, the majority WILL always, without fail, use the very best toys they can get, so you can always see what is OP by looking at what the majority use.

CW doesn't actually force the Clans to funnel into the barrel to be shot, I've had top Clan units NOT do that, they've used that range advantage and won as Attackers. I've seen them do the opposite as well and win, and I've seen mixes of those tactics that worked and didn't work. There ARE choices that can be made that don't require you to be targets, but much like Role Warfare, most people ignore what is there and only see what they want to do and say there are NO choices. Alpine is a great example, EVERYONE fights over that damn hill, but there's no reason to do that, there's plenty of other options, but trying to get people to do anything else, yeah, good luck. I've gotten PUGs to occasionally ignore that hill and go elsewhere, totally changes how that map plays out, a lot more fun, but getting people to do that, easier to herd cats with oratory alone.

CW maps seem pretty simple and straight forward, but that's because people ONLY look at the direct objective and getting it done ASAP, much like every other map in this game, and everything else in this game really. Lights who scout, why? Support Mechs, why, LRMs suck, get up there and TANK! Yeah, too many of our playerbase are only looking at the immediate return and nothing else, so they miss everything that's in the game and complain about it not being there.

[Aim64C]

Kristov Kerensky, on 03 July 2015 - 11:43 AM, said:

When I said parity is evident in the solo/group non-CW ques I meant you can see that by the fact that everyone isn't using Clan Mechs. If they were as OP as some very vocal minority groups claim, we would see almost all Clan Mechs in every drop, with only the occasional new player or die hard BTech purist House fanatic using IS Mechs.

Bluntly, Clan mechs aren't as fun, currently.

Aside from grinding up experience on them, there isn't nearly as much that can be done with them because of the way PGI implemented omnimechs. I bought a Nova for C-bills back before all of the quirk nonsense, and it just wasn't nearly as fun to play. The most fun I had was the all-flamer build I tried with it - and I could really do about the same or better with my BJ-1X that I will occasionally modify to run flamer spam just for the hell of it.

The clan mechs are also expensive as all get-out for those of us who had refused to buy them as packages. Grinding up enough for the Timberwolf I have took a few weeks of casual play - give or take (it wasn't like I was playing every day). It will take much longer to build up enough c-bills for enough Timberwolves to master the 'mech. And I've done that while still having a few IS mechs I have been swapping XL engines between - so I've got plenty of reason to not even bother with a class of 'mechs that is basically a hole to throw C-bills into that isn't really all that fun to customize.

The IICs change that, to a degree.

You're also moving the goal posts and redefining what parity means as the discussion migrates.

Quote

That's not supposition, it's reality in a video game, the OP toys are ALWAYS used by the majority. And since the best Clan Mechs from Wave I and Wave II have been cbill purchase for a bit now and the ques are not full of Timbys, SCrows, Hellbringers and nothing else, welp, gotta admit, Clan Mechs aren't that OP. Video game reality, the majority WILL always, without fail, use the very best toys they can get, so you can always see what is OP by looking at what the majority use.

That's specious reasoning.

First - MechWarrior: Online isn't a game in the classic sense of a game. It's a fancy display case that we get to view PGI's product (the 'mech artwork) in.

The Battletech population has always enjoyed playing in their favorite 'mech and customizing it to make it as effective for the given task as they can. For example - even back when LRMs had the splash damage bug (and I wore some egg on my face for a while in the arguments over that, I admit), not everyone was driving around a stalker or a catapult. While LRMs were somewhat more common, there were quite a few non-LRM platforms that people enjoyed playing and there were a lot of people who didn't switch to using LRMs.

Generally speaking, people didn't give up driving their favorite 'mechs unless the 'mech was not playable in the game environment. Much like how I haven't really played the Catapult, much, in over a year. You have to be a walking ammunition dump that is rendered virtually useless in the presence of a 'mech with ECM - and there is usually at least one ECM hellbringer be-bopping along with drops, these days.

Players in MechWarrior don't necessarily gravitate toward the best gun. They gravitate toward the most effective loadouts of the designs they wish to play unless and until those designs become nearly impossible to enjoy within the game environment.

Quote

CW doesn't actually force the Clans to funnel into the barrel to be shot, I've had top Clan units NOT do that, they've used that range advantage and won as Attackers. I've seen them do the opposite as well and win, and I've seen mixes of those tactics that worked and didn't work. There ARE choices that can be made that don't require you to be targets, but much like Role Warfare, most people ignore what is there and only see what they want to do and say there are NO choices.

The Clan's can't dictate engagement range in CW.

The Clans can offer to fight with the range advantage, and the defending IS mechs can be stupid enough to accept it by stepping out of cover and losing.

If the Clans want to destroy the generators - they have to yield much of the range of their weapons in order to advance. They can't shoot what is behind cover, either - and there is often cover that provides overlapping fields of fire along approach paths to generators that simply must be crossed at some point in time if one wants to get a firing position on the generator.

Quote

Alpine is a great example, EVERYONE fights over that damn hill, but there's no reason to do that, there's plenty of other options, but trying to get people to do anything else, yeah, good luck. I've gotten PUGs to occasionally ignore that hill and go elsewhere, totally changes how that map plays out, a lot more fun, but getting people to do that, easier to herd cats with oratory alone.

This does depend upon the game objective. If the name of the game is to kill all the enemy 'mechs - then if I'm the team that starts closest to the hill - then that hill represents some fairly formidable high ground. It's deep enough to block pie-cutting shots and to confound LRM fire, and steep enough that it really only has one approach that can be reliably used for a forward thrust.

So long as I can keep my team on that hill and playing defensively - the only way the opposing team can win is if they accept one of a few courses of action - all of which I can organize to impose high rates of attrition upon them.

The gambit is that my team has to be willing to be patient and accept a draw.

If I hold that hill with a team of sentient beings - I win or draw as I essentially dictate where combat happens.

If I am on the team that starts more distant from the hill, my options are much more limited and would generally be to try and put as much firepower on that hill as possible as early in the game as possible to prevent the opposing team from effectively organizing a defense of the superior strategic position. Meanwhile - I'm organizing any long-range Clan mediums or lights to take positions on the flanking hill near the border of the map.

Though the team that starts more distant from the hill is generally at the disadvantage if forced to be the aggressor. Pulling into a defensive position elsewhere, being willing to accept a draw and being patient, then the opposition can be pulled into an offensive.

Generally, when the team I'm on has won when starting more distant from the hill, it involves advancing under the long range fire down the gully before pulling along the ridge line and waiting for the ambitious types to storm down the gully and into waiting guns.

If the game is Conquest or ... I forget what the base-capture mode is about - the hill is best ignored, though people generally dislike a capture win (and I can't blame them) - so it plays out the same as an annihilation round. Conquest moved most of the capture positions away from the hill, so there's a lot more action in the hills and valleys down below, and people seem to have really yet to figure out a pattern that they like, there.

People love the castle on tourmaline - but I've noticed that a lot of teams have begun patterning themselves in the regions 'behind' and in the canyons to the side of the 'castle,' lately. It could just be that I've been playing less at 2 in the morning than I used to. I've noticed play styles and behaviors vary considerably across the various server times.

Quote

CW maps seem pretty simple and straight forward, but that's because people ONLY look at the direct objective and getting it done ASAP, much like every other map in this game, and everything else in this game really. Lights who scout, why? Support Mechs, why, LRMs suck, get up there and TANK! Yeah, too many of our playerbase are only looking at the immediate return and nothing else, so they miss everything that's in the game and complain about it not being there.

Kind of.

Take the base capture win. Generally, it is not rewarding. To my knowledge, there's not a title for it, or, really, anything.

There's also a weird paradox when it comes to death. On one hand - there is little reason to be concerned over losing a 'mech or match in an overly aggressive push. There's no repair fees, no ammunition supply issues, and no "we are stuck on this planet until we complete our mission."

MechWarrior 3 is what I grew up playing - and the salvage system in MW3 drove home just how important it was to properly assess each situation. Of course... the AI wasn't exactly stellar by today's standards - but it was neat how you'd occasionally have to change up how you were running your lance because you were running low on ammunition for a weapon system or because you lost that weapon system (or mech) in the previous engagement.

There's not even a shadow of that in MWO. It would be kind of neat to be able to group with a lance and drop on a series of missions where our lance actually has different objectives from other friendly lances and we have to play conservatively within our 'drop deck' over the course of several missions. We have to weigh accepting high losses and the limited ability to repair and re-arm underway (perhaps there is where repair and re-arm expenses could be implemented) against the ability to complete the entire contracted set of missions.

These could be such things as destroying a supply convoy where an opposing lance is tasked with guarding it.

But, from a more in-the-current-game standpoint - there really isn't any reason to not go about the straight-forward metal-mash. Conquest victories can be won by points, but it generally doesn't make sense for 'mechs to break up into lances to capture various positions. One lance eventually encounters the 'mob' of the main opposition's main body and is steamrolled with the rest of the team too distant to provide much more than moral support. The opposing team can then afford to split a few of their lights to capture activities and will just steamroll the survivors with numerical superiority.

On larger maps, there is room to get fancy - but fancy also means communicating and a lot of moving parts that can run into bad luck.

My main quip with player tactics in the game is that everyone likes to try and stand on top of each other. There is a reason in the military why we train to fan out with overlapping fields of fire. It means we can work cooperatively while making it far more difficult to pin down the group... and it also makes friendly fire less likely.

Of course... then nobody wants to stack up when it is appropriate to stack up (such as when preparing to breach and clear a room).

Otherwise, from a game strategy standpoint - there really isn't any reason for them to do much other than what they are doing. It's true that there are other ways the game -can- be played... but that largely breaks down into role play - pretending there is a reason to capture the base or pretending that your're standing guard and the other team is the aggressor (since this makes it easier to control inertia in annihilation rounds).

The game is, essentially Team Solaris with minor variations on that theme that don't really do much other than try to give a very generic reason as to why these two forces would be in this box canyon in the first place.

Scouting is not really all that important because we know the game is going to try and drop relatively balanced teams into the map (it's at least better than it was when there were matches with 6 Atlases on the same team... that was nuts), and that the team numbers are going to be even provided no one is AFK. The maps are pretty small, and the only real reason the other team would be going much of anywhere other than where their known spawn points are is to come shoot at one's own team. It's not like there is a munitions plant somewhere nearby that they -could- be after. Most of the maps are small enough, anyway, that all you need is a good vantage point and you can pretty much see which direction things are rolling.

It's built to mimic the FPS models that clock in at about 10 minutes per round, except this one is a little bit different because it is single-elimination (Which would normally be like a thirty second round in call of duty, these days).

This is partially due to market research that suggests people don't like to commit to periods of game play much longer than about ten to fifteen minutes at a time within the competitive multiplayer circuits across RTS, RPG, and FPS games. I can't deny that research, but I think that it is something of a self-fulfilling prophecy. As games design for that 'target,' they don't incorporate features to make them sensible to play for longer blocks of time, and therefor the people playing for longer blocks of time say: "... Uh... you know... this could have been much shorter."

Indeed - if the point of the game is just to shoot other 'mechs.... then why mess around stomping across three kilometers of terrain to get there? If that's what the game is designed around (and this is designed around shooting other players in other 'mechs as -THE- core game experience) - then why get incorporate long walks, capture objectives, etc?

I'm being somewhat cynical - but compare to this:



The objective of the game is to destroy the enemy base. The players on the opposing team are obstacles to that objective.

The player in question isn't necessarily what I would call "good" - but at least he didn't give his vehicle over to the enemy (as you can see in the game - one of the strategies is to capture enemy vehicles and preserve them in the back of the base since they contribute toward the other team's vehicle limit).

The game is heavily reliant upon teamwork and upon prompting and exploiting lapses in base defense (or outright shock&awe).

While not all elements of that game translate into a battletech context - the idea of a persistent battlefield that is deployed to with objectives being pursuant to attacking your opponent indirectly (destroying the harvester, which usually must trek outside of the base, deprives the enemy players of the 300 credit bonus it provides upon its return; destroying their special characters with 'free' characters is an economic attrition where the enemy spends more than it gains while making no headway).

I saw matches in that game last longer than 24 hours. I left a game, went to sleep, got up, went to work, came back - and it was the same match on the server playing when I logged back in.

Granted, there wasn't an external role-playing game aspect tied to it, but the idea is simply that there are many different ways to build a game's objectives that change much about what the game does. Death in Renegade is a minor setback or an economic loss (or a pride hit if you are going for high K/D ratios - but that's hardly worth bragging about in the context of the game). If you die saving the power plant - what's important is that the power plant survived and you are glad for the fact that the power plant survived when you respawn.

The consequences of failing the objective carry over into gameplay, and the benefits of accomplishing objectives also carry over. The team's failure to save the Air Strip at the end likely cost them the game. It's not impossible for them to turn the tables around (Nod tends to have infantry better suited to infiltration and sabotage), but they must now defend against similar strikes on their base as the previous without vehicular support (and their enemy will be targeting their surviving vehicles to rid the field of them since they can't be replaced).

It's not just important to defend these structures because "we're supposed to" - it's important to defend them because losing them takes some of your favorite toys out of play and also has lasting consequences to your chances of winning the game (or even preserving your K/D ratio, if that's your thing). Of course - it also makes it very satisfying when you pull off a successful operation and turn the game back around in your favor. I was a part of many successful "Hail Mary" raids with the last few credits pooled across our team that turned the battle at least back on an even tilt.

The name of the game in MWO is to just destroy the enemy players on the field. They are not obstacles to an objective (which is what military forces are, really). They are the singular objective.

There's no real objectives that emphasize any kind of strategic or tactical diversity. It's simply how you wish to go about destroying the opposing players. There's no convoys we're supposed to escort or peripheral structures we are supposed to defend/destroy.

Despite often having fairly linear vehicular and infantry approach routes in Renegade - the game was very fun and successful (even inspiring a completely fan-made remake/successor on UT3's engine) because it divorced the concept of 'death' and 'loss' in its gameplay. While dying was not a good strategy to victory - neither was simply killing the enemies coming out of the base.

Exploring these divisions of gameplay victory/loss and death/survival conditions is something that can and should be done within a broader section of MWO's gameplay. Perhaps the relationship should be inverted from what it is in Renegade - with victory being more about survival and preservation of capability while objectives are more sacrificial to that cause. Teams have to weigh (within non-solaris modes) the cost of completing an objective against the penalty and reputation of failing to complete it.

Of course - this almost requires more persistent modes of gameplay that are way above and beyond PGI's apparent capabilities - but is not unlike various RPG servers set in ARMA 3 - where teams can be assigned dynamic objectives and then set out to complete them in a map hundreds of square kilometers in landmass which also happens to be populated with other players (of varying factions/allegiances). Completing the objective is rewarded; dying while completing the objective is sub-optimal, and declining the objective is not positive, but preferable to the consequences of dying.

But, in many respects, I'm an idealist and perfectionist with a preference for hardcore simulation.

In my little dream-world - the ideal MWO is Arma 3 merged with many of the dynamics of Renegade (but expanded) set to a Battletech theme. Hardcore simulation with the objective of defending various portions of a supply or industry transport network within the territories of faction bases while striking at and undermining others. Throw in more than two/three factions, and you have the potential for alliances and betrayals to play out, as well.

Of course - you'd have to sit your butt down and be ready to play for an hour or more - but 'death' shouldn't kick you out of the game or be the end of your MWO experience. It just may mean that you need to wait for your 'mech to be repaired while pulling another one from your dropship or getting to pilot around a VTOL or something in support for a time while still contributing to the team. Of course - within an environment like ARMA - ejecting from a 'mech could also be complemented by a need to return to base (and the team would be wise to speed that effort along).

But, at this point, I'm rambling way off topic, here.

[Alek Ituin]

Why not give the IS the advantages they had in lore: numbers, numbers, numbers. IS Mechs were easier to build, maintain, supply, repair, and were cheaper by an order of magnitude than a similar Clan Mech. What I suggest is simple:

Let IS Mechs respawn a number of times to simulate their strategic advantages. Obviously, the number of respawns is chassis and variant dependent. Un-nerf and un-buff ALL equipment, reset to TT stats, and do 10v12.

Clanners don't get respawns though. Any damage they take is final. You may be able to kill two KC's 1v1 in your Timbie, those same pilots are dropping in fresh KC's... while your arse is sitting with a missing leg, both ST's red, orange CT, one arm, and maybe half your guns. On top of that, Clanners would make ~1/3rd of the space monies and XP for any kills/assists/etc. on an IS Mech. But the IS pilots get filthy amounts of space monies for killing a Clanner, something like 3x more than average. It doesn't take skill to shoot fish in a barrel, but if one of the fish shoots you back...



I'm just spit balling here, though. Feel free to tear this apart.

[Aim64C]

Alek Ituin, on 03 July 2015 - 06:06 PM, said:

Why not give the IS the advantages they had in lore: numbers, numbers, numbers. IS Mechs were easier to build, maintain, supply, repair, and were cheaper by an order of magnitude than a similar Clan Mech. What I suggest is simple:

Let IS Mechs respawn a number of times to simulate their strategic advantages. Obviously, the number of respawns is chassis and variant dependent. Un-nerf and un-buff ALL equipment, reset to TT stats, and do 10v12.

Clanners don't get respawns though. Any damage they take is final. You may be able to kill two KC's 1v1 in your Timbie, those same pilots are dropping in fresh KC's... while your arse is sitting with a missing leg, both ST's red, orange CT, one arm, and maybe half your guns. On top of that, Clanners would make ~1/3rd of the space monies and XP for any kills/assists/etc. on an IS Mech. But the IS pilots get filthy amounts of space monies for killing a Clanner, something like 3x more than average. It doesn't take skill to shoot fish in a barrel, but if one of the fish shoots you back...



I'm just spit balling here, though. Feel free to tear this apart.

I'm not totally against that idea - but then we need to un-gimp the Clans.

The other problem is that MWO is still Team Solaris - so that really puts the Clans in an environment where many of their advantages don't manifest as strongly.

Consider that Clan omnimechs would often drop with ballistic and missile-heavy designs that could simply blast right through IS defenders. They would use their great firepower and maneuverability advantages to take a foot-hold, then pause to swap over to more efficient energy weapons with their omnimech designs, where they largely had range and maneuverability advantages to pursue withdrawing forces.

Tie them down into a Solaris arena designed mostly around Inner Sphere weapon ranges, and the advantage declines, somewhat. Table Top Clans on a more realistic battlefield could often handle IS teams that outnumbered them 2:1 with roughly double the effective tonnage. They were absolutely roflstomp.

MWO basically removed LRMs from the game - which does a substantial disservice to the Clans that pretty much get free LRMs with every build and has increased weapon burn times - not to mention their whole 'ghost heat' system compounded upon their horrible heat system in the first place. That does gimp the clans considerably from where they would be, otherwise - not to mention the lack of customization that came with the omnipod concept PGI came up with.

So, at present - while I do argue that Clan mechs are still considerably superior to Inner Sphere 'mechs (and I don't believe that is an inherent problem if the gameplay were something other than team deathmatch), to allow for re-spawns on the IS side of things would require us to un-gimp the Clans, re-implement LRMs, and fix the broken heat system.

[Alek Ituin]

Aim64C, on 03 July 2015 - 06:25 PM, said:

I'm not totally against that idea - but then we need to un-gimp the Clans.

The other problem is that MWO is still Team Solaris - so that really puts the Clans in an environment where many of their advantages don't manifest as strongly.

Consider that Clan omnimechs would often drop with ballistic and missile-heavy designs that could simply blast right through IS defenders. They would use their great firepower and maneuverability advantages to take a foot-hold, then pause to swap over to more efficient energy weapons with their omnimech designs, where they largely had range and maneuverability advantages to pursue withdrawing forces.

Tie them down into a Solaris arena designed mostly around Inner Sphere weapon ranges, and the advantage declines, somewhat. Table Top Clans on a more realistic battlefield could often handle IS teams that outnumbered them 2:1 with roughly double the effective tonnage. They were absolutely roflstomp.

MWO basically removed LRMs from the game - which does a substantial disservice to the Clans that pretty much get free LRMs with every build and has increased weapon burn times - not to mention their whole 'ghost heat' system compounded upon their horrible heat system in the first place. That does gimp the clans considerably from where they would be, otherwise - not to mention the lack of customization that came with the omnipod concept PGI came up with.

So, at present - while I do argue that Clan mechs are still considerably superior to Inner Sphere 'mechs (and I don't believe that is an inherent problem if the gameplay were something other than team deathmatch), to allow for re-spawns on the IS side of things would require us to un-gimp the Clans, re-implement LRMs, and fix the broken heat system.

Sorry if it wasn't obvious in the OP, but I did mean ALL equipment resets to TT stats... ALL of it. Clan included. Plus, 30 heat scale w/ true dubs is a given with all my suggestions.

As for LRM's... Ehhh. I guess I see them as what they are: Support weapons. Used for closing distance or peppering the enemy in addition to other weapons.

[Kristov Kerensky]

I like how you think Aim, those ideas about game play are awesome, and it's what a lot of us want for CW. We'll see how PGI ends up working it out, many of us will stay or go based entirely on that, and I think PGI is aware of this.

As for the Clans and being OP, top comp teams are fielding IS Mechs over Clan Mechs, the masses are fielding IS Mechs as often if not more than Clan, and those 2 factors combined show that Clan isn't OP, it's powerful, definitely, but it's not OP, and parity is pretty much achieved currently, slightly favors the IS really, but it has gone back and forth a bit as 'balance' changes come and go.

HSR fixes next week will probably toss it all up into the air again, we'll have to see just HOW bad it's really been before we know though. Could be that most people really are just bad shots, so we may see little difference, in which case the masses will scream that PGI didn't actually FIX anything

That and the balance pass that PGI is about to start regarding quirks will really change up the game I think, and I think people are in for a bit of a shock, as I personally believe that the IS will be getting some nerfs. I could very well be wrong, and I'll admit it if that's the case, you can quote me on that too, but I think the IS is going to get some nerfs.

[Andi Nagasia]

i think we need to Re-Examine the OmniMechs to BattleMechs,
as the Jenner Vs Jenner-IIC i feel will help with Faction-Tech Balance,
i think we need to look at OmniMechs and perhaps look at how they work,

im not saying make OmniMechs into BattleMechs,
but some Rules i think need to Change, such as Locked(JJ, Case, Weapons, CAP, BAP)
some Wiggle room is needed as the most powerful OmniMechs dont have Much Locked,
(Example, unlock NVAs JJ and DHS, and it has 22.5FreeTons, and can Run 2AC5s)

[Nightshade24]

NeoAres, on 01 July 2015 - 03:42 PM, said:

-snip-

Hello, it is your friendly neighbourhood Nightshade24 who everyone instantly see's respond on a thread like this and automatically already coming up with clanner test tube cry baby insults to try to win an argument.

HOWEVER. the Topic of clan battlemechs is where this is much more different situation...

This is where we are discussing clan IIC mechs and not omnis, so the hardship and weaknesses of the omnimechs are not here. ranging from very slow light mechs, to stupidly high engines/ low engines, to no Endo and stuff.

This is a battlemech now. and thus my comment will reflect on 1 I keep saying about ealrier on these battlements- THESE will be the BASE mechs that would be used for clan ballance for there technology. Thus when weapons are 100% balanced (well more like 80%...) then we can efficiently balance Clan omnis, Rather similar to the OP...

HOWEVER I have to say this now; the OP sounds rather poor in his post, demonizing clans and making them look like they are the criminals that need punishment... which I will say now is a no no.

Ahem... let's look at your post now.





*C-CASE: included free on clan mechs. Balance with a small decrease to component health for all clan ammo bins and c-gauss rifles.

*C-Gauss: I would think lowering velocity is very bad, especially due to the fact that many clan mechs use targeting computers to get even better velocity and clan mechs in general should have a better aim (thus velocity... at least for this weapon). one problematic thing is IS mechs have quirks that basicly equals to a Targeting computer X or XII... which doesn't exist for clans.

I would instead say lower the reload time a bit... slightly increase charge time. But magnify the time they got to shoot after charging. This way it still has the feature of being an accurate weapon (jn some ways a bit more) while the IS one is having a DPS advantage.

*C-ERPPC: I would say the nerf has already been done. It may be slightly better then the IS ER PPC but the normal PPC for IS is far superior when you take range away due to heat...
I would say instead of nerfing the Clan ER PPC... buff the normal IS ones... increase the time a mech will have no ECM upon hit (aka ECM effect) and slightly increase the velocity of both clan and IS ER PPC but not the IS PPC.
Note: some clan mechs with ER PPC's instead of getting the typical heat/ fire rate/ range / velocity quirks... should possible get a quick to turn the splash damage into pinpoint damage... so some clan mechs say get 12 damage and 1.5 damage splash. or 14 damage and 0.5 splash, or 15 damage and no splash (for thos mechs in very dire need of quirks ie Adder)

The main quirk difference thus makes IS more heat effecient and/or higher DPS due to current theme of quirks but for Clans make it more of a heavy hitter of a weapon but still hot and not that fast at reloading on most mechs.

*C-SRM: This is relatively true, however I think there should be a difference between omnimech and battlemech C-SRM... the omnimech one is relatively untouched... but Omnimech one will stream out BUT have no ghost heat (and some battlemechs will have quirks to lower the distance of the first and last missile of the stream)... another thing is I think it would be best if they stream maybe in staggered sets of 2 instead maybe?

This is to not destroy the weapon for Omnimechs BUT not make them inferior on battlemechs either. Artemis can be used on clan SRM's which will increase the tonnage and make it resemble something between the non and post artemis SRM's for IS... it isn't as accurate as artenus IS SRM's, but it's in a very tight group and lsightly more accurate then non Artemis SRM's.

*C-SSRM: Not really same problem as normal SRM's.. these things have a much lower velocity but longer range then IS SRM's... the longer range isn't much of a bonus due to the velocity. Also AMS is much more effective against clan SSRM's... hence why spamming SSRM's is the only way to use them for clans or hide them amungst other missiles.
Also the clan SSRM 4 and 6 theoretically would have a much longer reload then the IS SSRM 4 and SSRM 6...

HOWEVER the stream effect should be simular as I proposed for the normal C-SRM's... the only difference is maybe lower the cool down rate a little bit on the Battlemech versions?
I am not sure, SSRM's for clans already have issues and are only good in spam. We probably need to look more in depth for this weapon...


*C-LBX: I would disagree. the thing is the Clan LBX is actually underpowered... look at how the IS LBX functions...
IS: 1 crit slot less then AC, 1 ton smaller then AC, slightly colder then AC.
Clan: 1 crit slot MORE then UAC, same tonnage as UAC, (for some) no heat difference to UAC.

If the IS LBX behaves like a clan LBX, it would be 3 crit slots bigger, 2 tons heavier, and more hotter.
The reason this is how it is is because the Clan LBX was made to switch the ammo type in mid game, this is the difference between slugs (aka IS AC type of shots...) and scatter. this is why the clan LBX is different in characteristics... BUT in MW: O PGI said they couldn't do this and put the LBX slug ammo as a udnerpowered Clan AC weapon... making both under powered.
I would actually say buff the clan LBX... lower the spread a little bit, increase crit chance maybe... make it higher velocity. and probably give it a bit longer range... because ATM there is no reason for the clans to use an LBX or AC besides being a lunatic like me.

IS LBX already has the advantage in terms of size and such... ofc, the ocmparison of IS and Clan LBX is rather simular. I would suggest the IS one being the more colder one then the clan one and a slight but not to huge DPS increase.

*C-Narc: Instead of nerf the clan one... why not make the IS one have a higher velocity and also give it maybe 1 extra round per ton?

*C-MG: The whole crit system is all wacky atm... we need ot be allowed to crit more things (ie arm actuators, leg actuators, sensors, gyro, etc). as atm these act as crit sponges... Anyway.

I think both Clan and IS MG's need to be restored to 1.0 DPS. the IS one should have less spread.


*C-Flamer: This time I will say NO... in reality this weapon should DECREASE your own heat, not generate heat. This thing uses the waste heat from your mechs engine (which normally would be causing you to be hotter...) and instead turns it to Damage, crits, and putting heat onto the enemy...

Beside buffing all flamers IS or Clan to longer range, disposing heat, and giving the enemy more heat (and after we hit the 90% heat barrier PGi put in to prevent heat stun lock... turn the heat damage into crits and damage the internals even if the mech isn't cored yet).

I think the IS one would be better as a crit monster while the Clans has a miniscule DPS increase. On top of this IS will dispose of more heat then clan


Electronics now...

*C-ECM: Instead of removing counter mode... why not a couple second delay when switching... those brief seconds you might have neither counter OR disrupt on. I think 1-3 seconds would be best.
Also I think this should be much smaller on omnimechs because atm at least the ECM omnimechs are not that good... only redeeming feature is ECM and thats it... Gargoyle hero (if it is the cannon one). Hellbringer, Kitfox, Mist lynx, etc...

*CAP: It isn't that much lighter then is. 0.5 tons. You could shave your head armour from 18 to 2 to fit a IS BAP over a CAP... however it is a ton smaller. I think no nerf should occur for Omnimechs, but for battlemechs I think maybe 10 meter less range would do for countering. but 10 meter range for sensors. This way they are different but not worse.

*C-Double Heatsinks: I do not think a nerf is needed, most- if not ALL clan weapons are hotter and this is technically already a penalty to clans.


Now equipment...
*C-XL Engines: ATM omnimechs do not need this nerf at all: as on most mechs the Clan XL does not compare to the IS XL but instead to the IS Standard engine... for eg all clan lights, nova, hellbringer, summoner, direwolf, etc...

For battlemechs I will say for now there IS already a nerf like this... look at the IIC mechs.
Hunchback IIC: 2 huge hunches begging to die for clan XL due side torso explosion...
Jenner IIC: much bigger then the IS Jenner unless scalling goes weird... would be easier to hit and thus kill.
Highlander IIC: lowest engine cap for any mech 40 tons+ in game... This thing is practically forced to go atlas speed regardless of what engine it chooses.
Orion IIC: to use the best load outs on it (ie duel Gauss rifle) you need a standard engine.

I say for now let's not talk about engine nerfs... however I wouldn't mind say a 10% heat spike to a mech if he losses a ST. Nothing to serious.

*Endosteel: Maybe crits instead?... just a very minor thing like 5%. Trust me it isn't a big number but it means a LOT.

*Ferro Fibrous: This is armour... not internals. This thing doesn't defend against crits at all!... for now lets not nerf Ferro Fibrous, atm FF on either faction is a drag. Takes space on clan mechs, Sacrafices equipment for IS mechs and is reserved for most lights and some mediums. We do not need nerfs for practically the most rarest armour in game.

*C-CASE: Errrrrrr. WRONG! It's only free for OMNIMECHS. the clan CASE is basicly equal; if not WORSE to the IS CASE on battlemechs... I think it is literally the same CASE here...

For now: no nerfs, as this is basicly the same for IS and Clan Battlemechs and would only hurt omnimechs... that do not have the change to remove CASE or not... Most omnis already struggle to use ammunition weapons... If you want all omnimechs to mount large pulse lasers and ER medium lasers. then I guess this is a good nerf... Otherwise: no.


I see where you are coming from with this. but you look at everything if it is JUST that. and doesn't react with any other thing around it... That and you make clans sound like you are trying to crimilise clans over this.

Water Bear, on 02 July 2015 - 12:35 PM, said:

Do you want to know why no clan player will get behind this? Because it might actually work. They've got something to protect here.

It's like the suggestion for making IS XL's behave like Clan ones. Number one, it would work. Number two, there is no number two. Half the mechs in the game already have this advantage, no clear reason not to spread the joy if it is in fact balanced.

Hello, I am the unnofficial forums icon as the counter arguement in deffense of the clanners and people usually represent all of the clan loyalists under my name half the time on the forum even though I am more of a inner sphere freebirth more then I am a clanner as I preffer my atlas over a direwolf, I preffer my locust or urbanmech over a kitfox, and most certainly love the catapult more then a timberwolf.

HOWEVER this would be basicly the first time I am saying the oppasite in the debate to what most people will expect,

I; a filthy no good clanner. Wants these nerfs and ballance changes to occur when IIC mechs arive. and thus your comment is incorrect!

















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

Alright, I have to mention 1 more major defining thing here: most of the ballance would occur simply as Clans having less quirks or different set of quirks to IS...

So clanners may have quirks like UAC volley decrease (ie instead of firing 5 bullets for UAC 20, this bla bla mech fires 4, or 2.)
ER PPC damage increase (decreases splash for damage)
etc...


Anyway just because our OP missed it out...

I think clan pulse lasers should have 50% less heat, 50% less cool down, but 50% less damage.

that or 66.66...% less.

Why? As we did for the volleys of ballistics (Mechwarrior 4)... streams of LRMs... (Mechwarrior 2), etc...

This idea is based on a DIFFERENT concept of pulse lasers... which is a fast fire rate DPS weapon: closest thing you can find to a energy machine gun.

This will make it more of a DPS weapon then a pinpoint hit meta weapon. this is good as it breaks the current meta of duel large pulse and er medium lasers AND can break the ghost heat for clans between pulse and non pulse weapons.

I think some numbers needed to be switched around (ie the clan might have not exactly 50%/ 66.66...% decrease of damage... maybe a 49%/66% er... so it does more DPS a little tiny bit).

I think this can be a great ballancer for the game...