129 replies to this topic

[Greenjulius]

Andi Nagasia, on 01 July 2015 - 07:29 PM, said:

if we are on the "Clan Weapons Still OP" Kick,
then can i trade out my C-ER-ML for some IS-ML Love on my Nova?

I don't think you want to do that... You're better off running ER Smalls for the same damage, less heat, half the weight, and very similar range. Not to mention, the exact same ghost heat cap of 6 lasers.

Why do people forget how damn good ERSL and C-SPL are?

Edited by Greenjulius, 01 July 2015 - 07:33 PM.

[Eider]

bad arcade kitty, on 01 July 2015 - 07:30 PM, said:

>When a large portion of the playerbase cries that things are "just fine" because they enjoy having an advantage over others

clan mechs are so advantageous that pgi had to decrease the inner sphere's deck size recently
so op

Yea i mean ever since IS won the battle of.. none, total sense dat cw is so IS advantage. What a lot of people who are defending the current meta seem to forget is lore went out the window when they decided it would be 12 on 12. You HAVE to balance mechs out to be in line with each other as a result. And even with those supposed god quirks.. i mean 10% le gasp. Clan weapons have overall better stats. You want to trade in those medium lasers for IS meds that have less range/damage/more weight ? gg.

[Johnny Z]

Eider, on 01 July 2015 - 08:18 PM, said:

Yea i mean ever since IS won the battle of.. none, total sense dat cw is so IS advantage. What a lot of people who are defending the current meta seem to forget is lore went out the window when they decided it would be 12 on 12. You HAVE to balance mechs out to be in line with each other as a result. And even with those supposed god quirks.. i mean 10% le gasp. Clan weapons have overall better stats. You want to trade in those medium lasers for IS meds that have less range/damage/more weight ? gg.

Well lets not be hasty, its a known fact that many Clan players are sub par and should retain some of the easy mode at least. Higher damage weapon and superior XL engine for example.

They paid to win and totally balancing their mechs wouldnt be entirely fair.

I am however convinced the CERML should be 6 damage instead of 7 considering the Inner Sphere medium laser does 5 damage with shorter range.(yes quirks could even up the remaining difference so that while one side does more damage the other fires slower etc)

Weight of CSSRM's should be increased.

Inner Sphere standard engine and Gauss rifle needs durability increases.

Inner Sphere XL should do a shutdown on side torso loss and speed decrease instead of entire mech going boom.

Omni XL should have speed decrease on side torso loss.

Omni free built in CASE should be removed. Omni's should have to equip CASE like Inner Sphere mechs if they want that protection.

Omni ac's shouldnt be able to blind pilots. Somehow this needs to be changed.

After all these changes and a few other minor issues(like mech scaling) the fight will finally be more fair minus the MANY advantages Omni mechs would still retain like less slot endo and ferro and generally higher damage and less weight and less space taking weapons and the still supieror Omni XL, 2 slot double heat sinks, etc etc.

These Omni advantages would be offset by the quirks system that favours the Inner Sphere mechs.

Edited by Johnny Z, 02 July 2015 - 05:45 AM.

[Greenjulius]

Johnny Z, on 01 July 2015 - 09:00 PM, said:

I am however convinced the CERML should be 6 damage instead of 7 considering the Inner Sphere medium laser does 5 damage with shorter range.

I find it amusing that the closest equivalent to 4xERML that IS has is 3xLL. 4 tons vs 15 tons. Go figure.

[Mystere]

Telmasa, on 01 July 2015 - 05:11 PM, said:

Holy crap, is that really you Mystere? You sound like me after grinding for a week day, go watch some cartoons or something.

But just one more day and then:

Edited by Mystere, 01 July 2015 - 09:32 PM.

[Sjorpha]

I'm not sure I agree with the detailed suggestions, but I whole heartedly agree with the OP that IS and Clan tech needs to be balanced in itself ton for ton, item by item.

The basic principle should be that if you had access to both IS and Clan tech when building a mech, it should never be a no brainer which version of a given piece of equipment to use.

So for example if you had to choose between a clan or IS xl engine on a mech, the answer should not always be the same. There should be builds where IS XL is the better choice, and so on for every piece of tech on both sides.

[Joseph Mallan]

Mystere, on 01 July 2015 - 04:19 PM, said:

******* whiners, they're the bane of all online games since time immemorial. ******* whiners.
You don't like the game? Go ******* build your own.

******* anti-Clan Crusaders, they just can't ******* let go and move on with their lives. ******* anti-Clan Crusaders.
You don't like the lore? Go ******* create your own game universe and lore.

I'm ******* sick and tired of all of your ******* ****. It's the reason the rest of us cannot have nice things.

What do you have against the Wardens?

[MeiSooHaityu]

It's interesting to talk about how OP the IICs MIGHT be, but we have no information from PGI saying how these mechs will be implemented into the game.

Therefore all these detailed balancing "solutions' might be for a non-existant problem.

Really, any complaining about IICs before knowing anything about them is very premature. Lets wait till they launch first (or atleast we have more info from PGI on how thwy will be implemented/balanced). One step at a time.

[bad arcade kitty]

jenner might be broken, hunch is just strong other two are so-so
imo

[Sjorpha]

MeiSooHaityu, on 02 July 2015 - 02:30 AM, said:

It's interesting to talk about how OP the IICs MIGHT be, but we have no information from PGI saying how these mechs will be implemented into the game.

Therefore all these detailed balancing "solutions' might be for a non-existant problem.

Really, any complaining about IICs before knowing anything about them is very premature. Lets wait till they launch first (or atleast we have more info from PGI on how thwy will be implemented/balanced). One step at a time.

I'm personally not worried specifically about the iic from a balance PoV, except that I thematically dislike the concept of having similarly looking/functioning mechs in both factions, IMO they should look and work as different as possible.

But I don't think worrying about iic is the point here, or the point of the OP.

The point is that there are certain principles that make a faction based multiplayer game good, and one of them is good balance. Good balance isn't merely equal strength, it is also having a framework of mechanics for the different factions that makes sense and matches up asymmetrically.

There are basically two alternatives when balancing factions.

1. Equal #players per team with tools that roughly match up in power.

2. One faction has stronger tools for each player, but fewer players.

PGI is trying to have the cake and eat it

They are supposedly going with alternative 1, but they want the feel of alternative 2 as per BT lore. Their solution is to keep Clan tech superior in itself but patch this difference up with a convoluted system of "quirks", the application of which is arbitrary and makes it almost impossible to judge or discuss balance when nothing is what it says it is. I understand the goals is to keep both lore buffs and other people happy, but it isn't working very well is it?

The IS weapons are no longer ever what it says in their stats, and that is a big problem. The fact that IS mechs needs quirks to be competitive is just completely unsustainable, only the absolute worst mechs withing each faction should need special treatment to work. Most mechs should be ok in themselves, just from the general design of the game and faction tech balance.

PGI should make a choice.

Either they keep the ambition of equal size teams, screw the lore and balance the factions properly with IS and Clan equipment being truly "equal but different" in such a way that good mechs on both sides don't need quirks, and then minor quirks can be used only to help the worst mechs on each side.

OR they go with a more true to lore approach and balance the games by having more players on the IS side, 10 vs 12 or whatever is needed. That would require a redesign of the public queues to separate clan and IS teams.

I think the second alternative would be the most fun, really asymmetric balance with 10 vs 12 players, I would still be IS and I bet so would most IS fans.

But the first alternative would at least be better than the current "clans are superior...but not really maybe because magic little numbers in a corner...or maybe they are...or..." approach, which ruins the discussion and just isn't good enough for anyone.

PGI has supposedly committed themselves to alternative 1, equal but different. Well ok then go ahead and do the changes that are actually needed, because you won't satisfy any lore buffs no matter how you implement that choice. Might as well go ahead and do proper game design, which the quirk system isn't.

Edited by Sjorpha, 02 July 2015 - 03:15 AM.

[Raggedyman]

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

That's basically the analogy I have for what I'm trying to say regarding Clan vs. IS balance. With the impending entry of clan 2nd line mechs, IS pilots are already QQing about the combination of clan technology with the freedom of IS mechbuilding styles. And sadly enough, they are correct. The clan omnimechs' build limitations are a crutch upon which PGI has been leaning because of their imperfect job balancing clan tech to IS tech. With the advent of clan 2nd line mechs, that crutch will disappear. It's time to make the proverbial punishment fit the crime, which is to say, it's time to finish balancing clan and IS tech on a part-by-part level.

Okay, once more and with feeling and before people start the "it's not TT QQ WTF BBQ!!"

According to lore and TT Clan and IS ARE NOT balanced on a part by part/mech by mech/ton by ton basis.
They are balanced by the clan tech being more expensive, so clan sides fielding less units.

Trying to balance out clan and IS whilst trying to keep them as Clan and IS WILL NOT WORK

Any complicated plan you have for balancing (or, for example, "quirking" everything...) is going to be a ball ache and cause more problems than it solves because the more complicated something is the harder it is to balance when the basic problem is that the two sides aren't balanced and not all mechs are equal.

If you want to keep the variances between builds then the best way to do it is to assign each individual component on the mech a value, and then balance according to those values, not according to weight or 12 v 12 as those balances don't work without murdering the Lore.

[Lynchpin789]

I may have missed soemthing here...the spirit of the tabletop doesn't come into consideration? Not to mention the cbill difference...

[Nik Reaper]

There's an even simpler solution, after 3064 there is little difference between IS and Clan tech, and you could chalk it up to more damage longer burn time more heat and lighter, but IS would have light fusion engines, ermedl, ultra 20's, MRM's and so on , and at that point even clan fero end endo doesn't make that much a difference, too bad there are so many mechs to release till then, and it doesn't feel like and advancmat in time will be made before all the mechs of a time are sold...

Edited by Nik Reaper, 02 July 2015 - 04:09 AM.

[Mystere]

Joseph Mallan, on 02 July 2015 - 02:03 AM, said:

What do you have against the Wardens?

I was not referring to the Warden Clans of lore, but to these real-life people who have been around since the Clans were created by FASA:



those anti-Clan Crusaders.

[Joseph Mallan]

Mystere, on 02 July 2015 - 04:13 AM, said:

I was not referring to the Warden Clans of lore, but to these real-life people who have been around since the Clans were created by FASA:



those anti-Clan Crusaders.

I kinda figured that but wanted to try the joke out anyway.

[Vellron2005]

During the last town hall meeting, Russ Bullock said that they are rebalancing all the mechs.. ALL OF THEM.. and the rebalance will hit us all in one patch.

So nuff said.

Edited by Vellron2005, 02 July 2015 - 04:22 AM.

[Johnny Z]

Sjorpha, on 02 July 2015 - 03:10 AM, said:

I'm personally not worried specifically about the iic from a balance PoV, except that I thematically dislike the concept of having similarly looking/functioning mechs in both factions, IMO they should look and work as different as possible.

But I don't think worrying about iic is the point here, or the point of the OP.

The point is that there are certain principles that make a faction based multiplayer game good, and one of them is good balance. Good balance isn't merely equal strength, it is also having a framework of mechanics for the different factions that makes sense and matches up asymmetrically.

There are basically two alternatives when balancing factions.

1. Equal #players per team with tools that roughly match up in power.

2. One faction has stronger tools for each player, but fewer players.

PGI is trying to have the cake and eat it

They are supposedly going with alternative 1, but they want the feel of alternative 2 as per BT lore. Their solution is to keep Clan tech superior in itself but patch this difference up with a convoluted system of "quirks", the application of which is arbitrary and makes it almost impossible to judge or discuss balance when nothing is what it says it is. I understand the goals is to keep both lore buffs and other people happy, but it isn't working very well is it?

The IS weapons are no longer ever what it says in their stats, and that is a big problem. The fact that IS mechs needs quirks to be competitive is just completely unsustainable, only the absolute worst mechs withing each faction should need special treatment to work. Most mechs should be ok in themselves, just from the general design of the game and faction tech balance.

PGI should make a choice.

Either they keep the ambition of equal size teams, screw the lore and balance the factions properly with IS and Clan equipment being truly "equal but different" in such a way that good mechs on both sides don't need quirks, and then minor quirks can be used only to help the worst mechs on each side.

OR they go with a more true to lore approach and balance the games by having more players on the IS side, 10 vs 12 or whatever is needed. That would require a redesign of the public queues to separate clan and IS teams.

I think the second alternative would be the most fun, really asymmetric balance with 10 vs 12 players, I would still be IS and I bet so would most IS fans.

But the first alternative would at least be better than the current "clans are superior...but not really maybe because magic little numbers in a corner...or maybe they are...or..." approach, which ruins the discussion and just isn't good enough for anyone.

PGI has supposedly committed themselves to alternative 1, equal but different. Well ok then go ahead and do the changes that are actually needed, because you won't satisfy any lore buffs no matter how you implement that choice. Might as well go ahead and do proper game design, which the quirk system isn't.

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.


Debatable reasons why there should be balanced gameplay are less simple and have to be argued that as a standard balanced gameplay makes for a more realistic game. Thats not to say there shouldnt be numbers disparity in game at some point, but that disparity should come from planetary seiges in some way or something similar. Not a one side is "better" than the other sort of thing.

If they add seiges where garrison numbers deplete then both sides may be in a last match for the planet outnumbered. Thats not possible without balanced mechs. Many senarios similar to that in depth and mechanics wouldnt be possible without balanced mechs. Just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to balance.

In many great Sports one of the KEY factors is endurance. How do you balance that with uneven numbers? Its just not done. It is in fact impossible. Just another hint of why balanced gameplay is where its at.

No game with lopsided balance has lasted or became popular. I am sure examples can be made but again they arent really popular or long lasting example.

There isnt really a serious debate on if the mechs should be balanced or not. The debate should be how to have roughly the same number of player representing each faction... Which was in fact mentioned in the most recent podcast.

Edited by Johnny Z, 02 July 2015 - 05:24 AM.

[Wildstreak]

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

That's basically the analogy I have for what I'm trying to say regarding Clan vs. IS balance. With the impending entry of clan 2nd line mechs, IS pilots are already QQing about the combination of clan technology with the freedom of IS mechbuilding styles. And sadly enough, they are correct.

Actually, no.
The Jenner looks strong so far, the Hunchback not so much it rather ties the IS one in a different way.
I have not looked too much into the Orion and Highlander but they have obvious limitations too.
Look into this more.

[Water Bear]

Text formatting and tl;dr has begun.

As with all video games, the people who have the OP tend to argue vehemently and to the death that it's balanced. I can't imagine why.

[Wildstreak]

Eider, on 01 July 2015 - 08:18 PM, said:

Yea i mean ever since IS won the battle of.. none, total sense dat cw is so IS advantage. What a lot of people who are defending the current meta seem to forget is lore went out the window when they decided it would be 12 on 12. You HAVE to balance mechs out to be in line with each other as a result. And even with those supposed god quirks.. i mean 10% le gasp. Clan weapons have overall better stats. You want to trade in those medium lasers for IS meds that have less range/damage/more weight ? gg.

Funny since more IS units are getting more high point scores than Clans.in the current tournament.
10%? You really are going overboard on the sarcasm. There are plenty of Mechs with 15%, 20%, 25% and more quirks.
I will agree on the past question.