25 replies to this topic

[1453 R]

Since nobody else can figure it out despite the forums once again growing thick with “CLANZ OP” threads, lemme take a crack at it.

The problem is not that Clanz are OP.

The problem is not that quirks are OP.

The problem is not that anything which currently exists is OP.

The problem? The problem is that we’re all fighting in 3052.

People keep trying to come up with some bizarre contortion of physics and reality in which, for example, a cERML is completely equivalent to an iML. That’s not going to happen. The iML should be a 5/3 dagger-fighting weapon, the iERML should be a 5/4 medium-range weapon, and the cERML which it directly compares to should be a 6/5 medium-range weapon with longer burn than the iERML.

You cannot make Level 1 IS tech directly competitive with Clan technology. That’s not going to happen, ever, nor should it. Level 1 stuff should be reliable, easy-to-use workhorse gear with a minimal heat load people take to supplement Level 2 or better guns, or on certain ‘Mechs able to make most effective use of the shorter-ranged, lower-heat weapons.

You know what should be competitive with Clan gear? Level 2 tech. We need to be playing in 3065, not 3052. Once the Sphere gets ER medium and small lasers, Ultras of all sizes, Streaks of all sizes, and also the half-dozen unique-to-them guns they’ll have snagged by this point (MRMs, Light/Heavy Gauss, X-pulse lasers, Bombast lasers – yes, I want Bombast lasers in this game, and if you want to know how they should work I’ll tell you – the million and three breeds of PPC, other funky junk), as well as compensating technologies like the LFE, C.A.S.E. II, and other catch-up items, the gap between the two sides will be vanishingly small, if not reversed. Especially when the Sphere gets 50% quirks on top of a proper suite of L2 or higher tech.

Yes, there are balance tweaks left to be made – notice I said the cERML should be 6/5, not 7/6. That was not a typo, nor is it the only tweak I’d make – but this notion than Clan gear needs to be pounded into oblivion For Balance (Corerule Ignore) is erroneous.

We don’t need to kill Clan tech. We need to give the Spheroids the rest of their gahdamn stuff. If we do the one, then you’d best hope they never get around to doing the other because then your stuff would have to be pounded into the dirt, too. Brutalizing Clan technology, then introducing all the stuff the Sphere came up with in canon to compete with Clan technology, sounds like an utterly fantastic way to jack this game up beyond repair.

So can we not do that?

Edited by 1453 R, 09 July 2015 - 09:17 AM.

[CDLord HHGD]

cdlord, on 09 July 2015 - 08:55 AM, said:

I do not think Clan mechs in and of themselves are OP. I do think the meta is OP and the Clan mechs are some of (but not all) the best at it.

Clan mechs are supposed to be OP. That's lore. What we're incapable of doing however is balancing that with the number of units (10 Clan vs 12 IS which is two Clan stars vs 1 IS lance). Failing that, we got what we got.

You fix the meta (championed ideas below) would go a long way to resolve this basic and fundamental failing.

Sized Hardpoints
The important thing here is to keep it simple. Some have argued that this would complicate the mechlab. Well, Mechwarrior mechlabs, both the UI and the rules, are pretty darn complex to begin with. Adding what I describe below should not be an issue.

Essentially make two different sized hardpoints for each weapon type. Large/Small Energy/Ballistic/Missile. Those weapons that classify as small weapons can be equipped in a large hard point, but large weapons cannot be equipped in small hardpoints. This has the added benefit of those smaller mechs that do mount the large weapons in their stock configuration unique and valuable. The hardpoint size would be determined by the chassis stock loadout.

Small weapons: TAG, Small Laser, Medium Laser, Machine Gun, AC2, AC5, NARC, SRM2, SRM4, LRM5, LRM10.
Large weapons: Large Laser, PPC, AC10, AC20, Gauss Rifle, SRM6, LRM15, LRM20.

Realign Ghost Heat
Determine (via testing) an appropriate non-meta damage output number. For the sake of this intro, I will use 20 points of damage. For grouped weapons or weapons fired simultaneously, track the potential damage output. Anything that goes over 20 points, begin the application of ghost heat. Fire one AC20 or 3 Medium Lasers, no ghost heat. Fire 4 Medium Lasers and you start to get GH. Fire two AC20's (40 points damage) you get GH. Apply a "cooldown" time of .25 seconds or so to separate the GH mechanic application to volleys.

Realign Quirks
There should be NO negative quirks! All positive quirks should be realigned to apply only to stock loadouts of those variants with the quirks (and possible even apply limiters based on the number of stock weapons vs available hardpoints).
NOTE: Just because a mech doesn't have a quirk that supports your loadout, you are not prevented from or penalized for running your loadout. Everyone will agree that the stock loadouts are sub-par so quirks that strengthen those loadouts make the most sense.

Note: This is all taking the game as it is now. IF PGI gets around to introducing separate weapons/equipment manufacturers, quirks would transfer from the chassis (in most cases) to the different manufacturers.

Because I'm lazy.

[LordBraxton]

That's what they will do to sell more mechpaks

Let them milk us (the clanners) for another year or so, and when the community get tired of Clan dominance we will get OP level 2+ IS tech behind half-year paywalls.

I'll switch back to Lyran Guard instead of falcon guard when the time is right

And the beat goes on

Edited by LordBraxton, 09 July 2015 - 09:20 AM.

[DONTOR]

Cant wait till is gets there advanced weaponry so we can get our Clan Battlemechs! KODIAK!!!

[1453 R]

Heh...well, just because I'm sitting here bored at work and all:

cdlord, on 09 July 2015 - 08:55 AM, said:

I do not think Clan mechs in and of themselves are OP. I do think the meta is OP and the Clan mechs are some of (but not all) the best at it.

Clan mechs are supposed to be OP. That's lore. What we're incapable of doing however is balancing that with the number of units (10 Clan vs 12 IS which is two Clan stars vs 1 IS lance). Failing that, we got what we got.

Most people have accepted that asymmetric balancing is never going to happen. For one, everyone and their mother would want to be on the 'outnumbered' Clan side. After all, more enemies means more kills to be had, and everybody wants to be in the big nasty mean powerful Clan 'Mechs pounding on the unwashed masses. Even if Piranha's tech allowed it, it's just a bad idea overall.

The only potential for asymmetric balancing you get is 12v12, with the Sphere getting a respawn/two-Mech drop deck. Leaving aside for the moment that respawns/drop decks are the unholy filth of the Inferno and should be expunged from my MechWarrior game with the purifying flames of righteousness...at this point Clansmen would have to get their tech back up to original specs. And we have the problem, once again, of everybody wanting to be in the OP Clan 'Mech cutting down the legions of barbaric primitives.

Just not going to work.

cdlord, on 09 July 2015 - 08:55 AM, said:

You fix the meta (championed ideas below) would go a long way to resolve this basic and fundamental failing.

Sized Hardpoints
The important thing here is to keep it simple. Some have argued that this would complicate the mechlab. Well, Mechwarrior mechlabs, both the UI and the rules, are pretty darn complex to begin with. Adding what I describe below should not be an issue.

Essentially make two different sized hardpoints for each weapon type. Large/Small Energy/Ballistic/Missile. Those weapons that classify as small weapons can be equipped in a large hard point, but large weapons cannot be equipped in small hardpoints. This has the added benefit of those smaller mechs that do mount the large weapons in their stock configuration unique and valuable. The hardpoint size would be determined by the chassis stock loadout.

Small weapons: TAG, Small Laser, Medium Laser, Machine Gun, AC2, AC5, NARC, SRM2, SRM4, LRM5, LRM10.
Large weapons: Large Laser, PPC, AC10, AC20, Gauss Rifle, SRM6, LRM15, LRM20.

I'm going to spare you my usual irritable vitriol for this incredibly tired idea and give my feedback on it straight. Please be aware, however, that this is about the seventeenth time I've laid this out so if any irritation slips through, bear that in mind.

First of all: sized hardpoints essentially removes customization from this game. A sized hardpoint system will, for the most part, force a 'Mech to utilize its stock weapons loadout, as the stock loadout is the only thing that 'fits'. While this is seen by most 3025ers as extremely desirable and, in fact, The Point Of The Whole Thing, the first issue arises when you patch this in and the playerbase discovers that in one fell download, over ninety percent of the 'Mechs currently in people's hangars are suddenly illegal. It is easily conceivable that a player would have neither the equipment nor C-bill stockpile to restore 'Mechs rendered invalid by hardpoint sizing issues to working order. You would see an eruption of nerdrage such that the dark, forboding days of 2013 seemed naught but a single cloud marring a sunny afternoon.

Second of all: sized hardpoints does not, in any way, 'fix' the meta. The Timber Wolf, for example, would barely have to make any modifications at all. The only thing it would lack would be Gauss capability, but elsewise it would have numerous 'large' energy hardpoints and a dizzying profusion of 'Large' missile hardpoints to choose from. Its Laser Vomit builds would be entirely unaffected, its SRM builds would be unaffected. Furthermore, changing which 'Mechs can equip powerful loadouts does not actually alter what makes a loadout powerful. You simply restrict those loadouts to a different set of 'Mechs, enforcing harsh restrictions on those 'Mechs not blessed forty years ago with a stock loadout conducive to the reality of MWO gameplay. These ancient-TT-woes penalties already exist - see the Ice Ferret and Summoner for great examples.

You make new loadouts viable by making new loadouts viable, not by telling nine out of ten 'Mechs in this game that they're not longer allowed to use viable loadouts.

cdlord, on 09 July 2015 - 08:55 AM, said:

Realign Ghost Heat
Determine (via testing) an appropriate non-meta damage output number. For the sake of this intro, I will use 20 points of damage. For grouped weapons or weapons fired simultaneously, track the potential damage output. Anything that goes over 20 points, begin the application of ghost heat. Fire one AC20 or 3 Medium Lasers, no ghost heat. Fire 4 Medium Lasers and you start to get GH. Fire two AC20's (40 points damage) you get GH. Apply a "cooldown" time of .25 seconds or so to separate the GH mechanic application to volleys.

First of all, twenty damage is kinda ridiculous, don't you think? Heh, may as well just force chainfire at that point. I get that the intent is to eliminate huge damage spikes, but at this point it's getting difficult for even Inner Sphere 'Mechs to fire more than one weapon at a time. Minute-long facederp contests between 'Mechs forced by the system to resort to chainfire if they don't want to generate ten times the heat they should just sounds like a bad day to me.

Second of all, this sounds even more complicated and difficult to work with than ghost heat as currently exists. Your penalties would have to start pretty small because people would be tripping this all the time. A Nova Prime firing more than two of its twelve freaking lasers simultaneously would be incurring ghost heat. A Timber Wolf firing two anything-it-has would incur ghost heat, unpredictably and mostly without the ability to compensate save for, again, forced chainfire on everything. And later weapons which deal more than twenty damage in a single shot from a single gun? An MRM-40, for example? Does it ghost heat itself? Can you call it ghost heat at that point?

No, no. Ghost heat in general could use no-longer-existing, replaced by a heatscale system which actually does its job. If people had real penalties for riding the edge of shutdown for minutes at a time, that would discourage energy-heavy loadouts - which is all Ghost Heat is actually in the game for - without any sort of weird, non-intuitive behavior that makes no sense and pretty much requires forum screwabouting to actually understand.

cdlord, on 09 July 2015 - 08:55 AM, said:

Realign Quirks
There should be NO negative quirks! All positive quirks should be realigned to apply only to stock loadouts of those variants with the quirks (and possible even apply limiters based on the number of stock weapons vs available hardpoints).
NOTE: Just because a mech doesn't have a quirk that supports your loadout, you are not prevented from or penalized for running your loadout. Everyone will agree that the stock loadouts are sub-par so quirks that strengthen those loadouts make the most sense.

Note: This is all taking the game as it is now. IF PGI gets around to introducing separate weapons/equipment manufacturers, quirks would transfer from the chassis (in most cases) to the different manufacturers.

'Quirks' shouldn't just mean weapon buffs. The Quickdraw, for example, is canonically listed as being able to climb gradients twelve degrees steeper than other 'Mechs of its weight due to specialized ankle actuator designs. That's a picture-perfect example of a quirk. I believe quirks should be used for flavor and coolness as much as for balance, but I'm admittedly in the minority there. And let's be honest, man - nothing in Creation is going to make bone-stock loadouts worth anything in MWO. Pretty much ever. Best to just give up that pipe dream while it's young.

[LordNothing]

i just want new weapons because im getting bored with the usual stuff.

[Adiuvo]

And this is why balancing around TT is a horrid idea.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Honestly, I think this game shoulda started in 3015, so by the time the clans showed up we were all old and gray....

stayed in IS vs IS.........then this whole arguement wouldnt even be.

[CDLord HHGD]

1453 R, on 09 July 2015 - 10:27 AM, said:

Look dude, some of the stuff you say is so batshit crazy it doesn't warrant direct response line by line...

We all know they cannot do asymetrical drops, I said as much, so you just adamantly confirmed me. Thanks.

Everything else you're just being obtuse and close minded about the potential because my ideas might wreck your precious little meta....

Oh and I used 20 as an example (again, I said as much) so getting bent on that figure was a waste of your effort. I'll keep championing these ideas until the end of days or another idea comes along I like better.

[1453 R]

cdlord, on 09 July 2015 - 11:52 AM, said:

Look dude, some of the stuff you say is so batshit crazy it doesn't warrant direct response line by line...

We all know they cannot do asymetrical drops, I said as much, so you just adamantly confirmed me. Thanks.

Everything else you're just being obtuse and close minded about the potential because my ideas might wreck your precious little meta....

Oh and I used 20 as an example (again, I said as much) so getting bent on that figure was a waste of your effort. I'll keep championing these ideas until the end of days or another idea comes along I like better.

And that’s what I get for trying to be polite, eh?

All right, let’s do this the hard way, then.

I’m assuming you’re miffed primarily because I shot down sized hardpoints, and because I don’t like a weird, scaling Ghost Heat system which whacks you for unpredictable spikes of ghost heat on unpredictable combinations of weapons fire which go over some arbitrary ‘allowable alpha’ number, yes? All right. Let’s address that second one first.

I am a proponent of eliminating ghost heat altogether and replacing it with a functional heat scale system. You get a 60-point heat bar, the bottom 30 points of which are ‘safe’. Within those 30 points, you’re fine. At 31 points of heat and over, the ‘Mech is increasingly at risk of suffering heat-related malfunctions including but not limited to: reduced agility, reduced sensor effectiveness, reticle jitter, coolant failure (blown heat sinks), ammunition explosion, pilot heat exhaustion (watery, wavey ‘video game drunk’ filter applied to screen to simulate pilot being overstressed by heat). The further above 30 points of heat you go, and the longer you stay there, the greater your risk of heat-related malfunctions.

Heat Retention, in the pilot tree, could be replaced with an efficiency that (slightly) lowers the chances of sustaining heat-related malfunctions. Heat sinks, obviously, increase your dissipation rate and get you back below 30 faster.

Simple. Clean. Intuitive. Lore-friendly. It makes sense, and it does a better job of limiting huge alpha surges than ghost heat of any sort ever could, as it doesn’t give the remotest frog where the heat came from, only that you generated it doing something. It’s on you to make that something as harmful to the enemy as possible.

We don't need ghost heat, of any sort. We need a heatscale system that DOES ITS FREAKING JOB. Once we get that, energy-heavy loadouts fall in line nicely.

Now. As for sized hardpoints? Point me at one single ‘Mech which would actually benefit from sized hardpoints. I get the bog-standard “it makes the Awesome relevant again!” argument, but I don’t really buy it. Let’s face it – right now, with the weapons in the state they’re in, taking a half-dozen cERML – listed as ‘Small’ weapons by your system, and thus unrestricted – and twelve extra heat sinks is a much better use of tonnage than taking three PPCs of any sort ever will be. Until that is no longer the case, restricting ‘Mechs to what amounts to their stock loadouts, or Midgetized versions of their stock loadouts, is a mistake because it does absolutely nothing to balance weapons, it simply removes viable weapons configurations from ‘Mechs which could otherwise run viable weapons configurations.

In order to balance the weapons, you need to balance the weapons. Elsewise, all sized hardpoints does is change which ‘Mechs get to run the already existing meta. A fact which should be blatantly self-evident to everyone, but which somehow never seems to stick with the sized-hardpoints people. I mean, I get it – sized-hardpoints people aren’t actually looking to improve game balance, they’re trying to restrict people to stock or near-stock loadouts because it offends their sensibilities when a ‘Mech’s armament is wildly divergent from its tabletop canonical loadout…but c’mon.

Are we going to go with sized ammo bays, too? Can’t carry any more ammunition than the ‘Mech’s stock loadout does, or anywhere in the ‘Mech that did not previously contain ammo? Because frankly that doesn’t make any less sense than saying “You can’t put this gun here because TT said so.”

Edited by 1453 R, 09 July 2015 - 12:25 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

1453 R, on 09 July 2015 - 09:17 AM, said:

Since nobody else can figure it out despite the forums once again growing thick with “CLANZ OP” threads, lemme take a crack at it.

So can we not do that?

The biggest problem is that they never even balanced Level 1 (3025) tech before introducing level 2 (Star League).

Those absolutely should have been balanced, then set in stone and LOCKED in Closed Beta, before Level 2 ever arrived.

Then, Level 2, should have been balanced and built around it. Using perfect imbalance to make it close, msotly balanced, yet different.

AFTER that was done, then Level 3 (Clan Tech) could have been introduced against the Lev 2. And after that, Level 2.5 tech (3050/3060 Inner Sphere) Balanced off of that. Or imbalanced.

All of this would have been a lot easier to accomplish with sized hardpoints, too. And likely it would have obviated the need for quirks except in case of stuff like terrible hitboxes, or to add some flavor to chassis. But not the crutches they are today.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 09 July 2015 - 12:33 PM.

[CDLord HHGD]

1453 R, on 09 July 2015 - 12:24 PM, said:

And that’s what I get for trying to be polite, eh?

All right, let’s do this the hard way, then.

I’m assuming you’re miffed primarily because I shot down sized hardpoints, and because I don’t like a weird, scaling Ghost Heat system which whacks you for unpredictable spikes of ghost heat on unpredictable combinations of weapons fire which go over some arbitrary ‘allowable alpha’ number, yes? All right. Let’s address that second one first.

I am a proponent of eliminating ghost heat altogether and replacing it with a functional heat scale system. You get a 60-point heat bar, the bottom 30 points of which are ‘safe’. Within those 30 points, you’re fine. At 31 points of heat and over, the ‘Mech is increasingly at risk of suffering heat-related malfunctions including but not limited to: reduced agility, reduced sensor effectiveness, reticle jitter, coolant failure (blown heat sinks), ammunition explosion, pilot heat exhaustion (watery, wavey ‘video game drunk’ filter applied to screen to simulate pilot being overstressed by heat). The further above 30 points of heat you go, and the longer you stay there, the greater your risk of heat-related malfunctions.

Heat Retention, in the pilot tree, could be replaced with an efficiency that (slightly) lowers the chances of sustaining heat-related malfunctions. Heat sinks, obviously, increase your dissipation rate and get you back below 30 faster.

Simple. Clean. Intuitive. Lore-friendly. It makes sense, and it does a better job of limiting huge alpha surges than ghost heat of any sort ever could, as it doesn’t give the remotest frog where the heat came from, only that you generated it doing something. It’s on you to make that something as harmful to the enemy as possible.

We don't need ghost heat, of any sort. We need a heatscale system that DOES ITS FREAKING JOB. Once we get that, energy-heavy loadouts fall in line nicely.

Now. As for sized hardpoints? Point me at one single ‘Mech which would actually benefit from sized hardpoints. I get the bog-standard “it makes the Awesome relevant again!” argument, but I don’t really buy it. Let’s face it – right now, with the weapons in the state they’re in, taking a half-dozen cERML – listed as ‘Small’ weapons by your system, and thus unrestricted – and twelve extra heat sinks is a much better use of tonnage than taking three PPCs of any sort ever will be. Until that is no longer the case, restricting ‘Mechs to what amounts to their stock loadouts, or Midgetized versions of their stock loadouts, is a mistake because it does absolutely nothing to balance weapons, it simply removes viable weapons configurations from ‘Mechs which could otherwise run viable weapons configurations.

In order to balance the weapons, you need to balance the weapons. Elsewise, all sized hardpoints does is change which ‘Mechs get to run the already existing meta. A fact which should be blatantly self-evident to everyone, but which somehow never seems to stick with the sized-hardpoints people. I mean, I get it – sized-hardpoints people aren’t actually looking to improve game balance, they’re trying to restrict people to stock or near-stock loadouts because it offends their sensibilities when a ‘Mech’s armament is wildly divergent from its tabletop canonical loadout…but c’mon.

Are we going to go with sized ammo bays, too? Can’t carry any more ammunition than the ‘Mech’s stock loadout does, or anywhere in the ‘Mech that did not previously contain ammo? Because frankly that doesn’t make any less sense than saying “You can’t put this gun here because TT said so.”

Ok so assuming we can stay calm enough for this....

I like heat scale too. Use the TT 30 point system and GH is a thing of the past. If they insist on keeping GH though (because we all defend our brainchilds to the last) then this is an alternative.

Sized hardpoints... Name ANY light mech that comes with a large weapon in my system stock and you'll see a mech that benefits from it. Note that for this I could the champion builds as a unique variant.

Sized ammo bays?? C'mon man... You're not one of those who think that now gays can marry in the US, next they'll want cross species relationships validated too are you?

Also, we can go there for the TT rules for field refits of mechs... You think things are broke now... But hey, I'm good with it.

I must be one of the few people who think weapons are balanced and only breaks when you boat them for maximum effect because of the bloated hardpoint system MWO uses. We can also take the hardpoints down to represent the stock loadout too. One ballistic for the HBK-4G instead of 3 for example....

We've seen the effects of leaving the system the way it is. Deserted CW, new player retention is in the *******..... From my analysis based on playing this and many other games as well as what I've read on these forums, I believe my ideas, while not perfect, have merit. Trust me, I'm an engineer! (really, I am)

[1453 R]

cdlord, on 09 July 2015 - 12:47 PM, said:

Ok so assuming we can stay calm enough for this....

I like heat scale too. Use the TT 30 point system and GH is a thing of the past. If they insist on keeping GH though (because we all defend our brainchilds to the last) then this is an alternative.

Sized hardpoints... Name ANY light mech that comes with a large weapon in my system stock and you'll see a mech that benefits from it. Note that for this I could the champion builds as a unique variant.

Sized ammo bays?? C'mon man... You're not one of those who think that now gays can marry in the US, next they'll want cross species relationships validated too are you?

Also, we can go there for the TT rules for field refits of mechs... You think things are broke now... But hey, I'm good with it.

I must be one of the few people who think weapons are balanced and only breaks when you boat them for maximum effect because of the bloated hardpoint system MWO uses. We can also take the hardpoints down to represent the stock loadout too. One ballistic for the HBK-4G instead of 3 for example....

We've seen the effects of leaving the system the way it is. Deserted CW, new player retention is in the *******..... From my analysis based on playing this and many other games as well as what I've read on these forums, I believe my ideas, while not perfect, have merit. Trust me, I'm an engineer! (really, I am)

Oh, now you said it. I'm a technician working in the logistics end - engineers are my mortal foe.

You and I must now fight to the death. Name the battlefield.

ANYWAYS.

Light 'Mechs with 'large' weapons do not benefit from the system as proposed; they are less hindered by it, which is not even remotely the same thing. Sure, the Panther is now the only light 'Mech in the game which can carry anything bigger than a medium flashlight (yes, I know, UrbanMech. UrbanMechs do not, and never will, count ) - but that strikes me as being a downgrade to light 'Mechs across the board, not a boon to the Panther.

I can think of a number of 'Mechs which would be ruined by a sized hardpoint system. Dragons, for example. Assuming for the moment that all this balance-dancing includes the removal of stupidiculous 50% quirks, the Dragon is now a 'Mech which has a small number of 'Small' hardpoints in inconvenient locations scattered across its frame. You can no longer utilize a PPC or some large lasers, or a Gauss, in the shoulder hardpoints to make a semi-passable sniper. You get light autocannons, a single light missile launcher, and a small number of poorly-converged light lasers. The 'Mech is essentially rendered completely unplayable.

The Shadow Hawk is in a similar boat - a whole lot of 'Small' hardpoints, and nothing worthwhile it can do with them. The Blackjack's damn-near-iconic Boomjack build is relegated to the annals of history - no AC/20 on your Blackjack. Hope you like being a slow 45-tonner that needs to stare down enemies with unquirked AC/2s. Let's not even talk about Quickdraws.

A number of other 'Mechs people scrape by with by utilizing focused armaments centered on one or two heavy weapons are flushed, forced by a sized hardpoint system to resort to an awful smattering of inconsequential sidearm-grade guns because their stock configurations - all of which were built for a game which is forty years old and has nothing to do with MWO, remember - didn't include anything big enough to actually hit somebody with. For every 'Mech which would gain any ground, relatively speaking, in a sized hardpoint system, I can usually name three that lose pretty much any reason they have for existing.

Awesomes are relevant again? Fantastic - Stalkers no longer are. Every Stalker in the game loses its ability to hill-peek - often the very reason people bought the damn things in the first place. Even the Misery, possibly the only remaining non-quirked Spheroid assault that can hold its own toe-to-toe against top-end Clan machines outside Krabs, loses its iconic shield-side builds to sized hardpoint systems. Same with the Zeus - a Large/Small hardpoint system would generally restrict it to two at most assault-grade weapons in weird spots and a handful of popguns. And do you think the Manshee would be anywhere remotely as threatening as it currently is if it was limited to two or three big guns, followed by whatever random array of popguns they can cram in the rest of their once vast and limitless hardpoints?

The Summoner finally gets an edge over the Timber Wolf! Yeahno. First of all, no it doesn't - the TBR gets a Large hardpoint in virtually every arm-mounted omnipod it owns. it can still carry more heavy energy weapons than the Summoner can, and more large missile racks. No, the TBR doesn't get heavy ballistics, but unlike the Summoner it can also use dual light ballistics reasonably well. And on the other end, we have the Thunderbolts - poor roller coaster riders they are, they go from being on top of the heap straight on back down to being junk, with their primary advantages of high-mounted energy ripped away from them. Just like the Zeus, they get two at most large weapons, one of which is a missile launcher, and the one large energy they get is in a wide, low-slung gorilla arm that falls off in three seconds because it's the approximate size and shape of the Goodyear Blimp. Great for shielding torsos, not so good for retaining armaments. The Orion, too, is suddenly unable to carry any heavy energy, forced to resort to a single heavy ballistic and a single heavy missile launcher for its damage, hoping its popgun sidearms can make up the spare. And the poor Cataphract loses most of its sniping ability to being unable to mount heavy energy in its once-prized high shoulder hardpoints.

The UrbanMech claims its rightful place as the king of ballistics lights! First of all, that's a throne nobody was fighting over . Second of all, I will grant that light 'Mechs as a whole aren't generally going to be as hurt by this change as the other classes would be. Most lights rely on an array of popguns anyways - but you are denying most of them the use of SRM-6s for basically no reason. As well, the DuaLarge Raven and other perfectly legit light snipers are forced to trade their ERLL in for brawling kits - and if you've ever tried brawling with a Raven since their leg hitbox 'fix', well, you know how that will go.

You'd give a relatively tiny handful of 'Mechs a brief leg-up...by chopping the legs off of over half our current roster. I just don't see how that's a net positive.

[Aim64C]

Machine guns were equipped on 'mechs to allow them to more effectively engage infantry. They weren't really supposed to be an effective anti-mech platform. They could be used in addition to normal weapon systems, sure, but the logic behind many weapon systems isn't that they "sacrificed range for..." - it's that they were intended to engage a completely different class of targets all together.

In an engagement taking place primarily between battlemechs; designs like the locust are meant mostly to engage things that aren't battlemechs. They aren't -designed- around combating other 'mechs.

The other thing is that if I had to actually keep my machines fed with ammo, locate repairs, and operate through multiple engagements before being able to re-visit facilities capable of replacing lost limbs (or outright rebuilding them), repairing destroyed equipment, etc - then 'balance' also takes on a completely different meaning as the scope of our challenge changes to include things that are currently absent. This is where stock 'mechs had logistical advantages that highly customized 'mechs often did not.

When the name of the game is Solaris with unlimited repair/rearm funding - then you're going to see the exceptionally high dollar Solaris builds manifest in such a game and dominate it. You'll see certain weapon systems fall largely or completely out of favor because they aren't as efficient at killing enemy 'mechs (probably because that was a secondary use for the weapon system as employed on most designs).

Of course - everyone loves stompy robots versus stompy robots.

[Nightmare1]

I've been saying "Timeskip" for a while now.

Once we finally do timeskip, it's just going to mean re-balancing the entire game all over again once the IS gets its own good Tech and Omnis. Why break backs trying to balance now if we're just going to suffer through it all over again later? Make the jump to lightspeed, take us on a timeskip, and then do the needed balancing.

Edit: You know the saying: "Once done is twice done!"

Edited by Nightmare1, 09 July 2015 - 03:53 PM.

[1453 R]

I want to be playing in 3065. I want Spheroid missile batteries with feet shooting a full ton of MRM ammo at me a plug. I want Bombast lasers holding a charge for 1.75 seconds before doing fifteen damage in a single brutal quarter of a second, hang the TT numbers. I want Clan heavy lasers that do a(n adjusted for fairness) butt-ton of damage in exchange for a butt-ton of heat and also fuzzing your HUD - including your reticle - for a few seconds. I want MG Arrays that expand one ballistic hardpoint into four Machine Gun hardpoints. I want heavy PPCs, light PPCs, snub-nosed PPCs, red PPCs, blue PPCs, one PPCs, two PPCs. I super want rotary autocannons that aren't found in the right arms of DRG-1Ns. I'm not actually sure I want HAGs, those seem like they might be something of a genie in a precarious bottle, but I'll sure as shootin' give 'em a shot if they turn up.

I want superchargers, improved Jump Jets, TSM, C3-that-actually-costs-weight-and-does-something. I want LAMS - the missile defense, not the Robotech ripoffs. I want the Watchdog CEWS - GOD I want the Watchdog CEWS. I want to see what sort of crazed insanity you Spheroid types can come up with using XXL engines, after you spend a solid month grinding for the C-bills for one.

All this Invasion-era crap? I've played with it for, like, seven MechWarrior games now. Gimme the meaty stuff, Piranha!

Edited by 1453 R, 09 July 2015 - 04:12 PM.

[Alistair Winter]

cdlord, on 09 July 2015 - 09:18 AM, said:

Because I'm lazy.

As the game grows older, the number of people in the General Forum dwindles every day. And most of the surviving Forum Warriors have all written multiple theses about the biggest problems in the game. I love that we're at the point now where we all just quote ourselves whenever one of these threads come up. With a list of references... which are all older threads, written by ourselves. Peer reviewed. Also by ourselves.

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

I've been wanting the newer IS tech since Clans released.

But the big selling point (and PGI knows this) is the Clan Invasion. Half the player base wants the Clan invasion, the other half wants FedCom Civil war era.

I want FedCom Civil war era because the tech levels are far more equal and we don't get stupid **** like the Thud-5SS and Drag Queen-1N.

The IS wouldn't need weapon modifiers. Quirks? Sure, the mechs like the QKDs, AWSs, and Summoners could use quirks (read: actual quirks like improved hill climb for Quickdraws). The AWS is known as one of the most dangerous IS assaults EVER that can shoot all day without heat worries. The Summoner is known as an agile Clan heavy with a few weapons that hit like freight trains.

But the problem with this train of thought is all the sellable nostalgia between 3052 and 3065.

[El Bandito]

1453 R, on 09 July 2015 - 09:17 AM, said:

You know what should be competitive with Clan gear? Level 2 tech. We need to be playing in 3065, not 3052.

Bye Clan Smoked Jaguar--cause you are already dead by then.

[Maxx Blue]

I started a thread maybe a week ago and basically asked if other folks were ready for new weapons. I certainly am, but the response wasn't as overwhelming as I expected. I'm all for a time skip and more weapons, even though it will absolutely screw up balance. It will give me something to do with new mechs so they don't all feel like something else I've already mastered.