342 replies to this topic

[MechaBattler]

J0anna, on 08 March 2017 - 05:21 PM, said:

You forgot reactive and reflective armor which should reduce it's respective damage (Both available by 3063), each can reduce it's respective damage by 50%.

RACs should work like a gauss, the longer it charges, the more slugs it expels. A RAC 5 can shoot up to 6 slugs (each doing 5 damage) so a fully charger RAC would do 30 damage, but might take 2 seconds to fully charge, Imagine a Mauler with 4xRAC 5's...120 to the face.

Actually you might be able to get 4xMRM 40's on a Stalker (7 crits each)....yum.

When the IS gets ER lasers, all ER lasers should go back to 2x range, since clans can never mount regular lasers, regular lasers should be relegated to the dust heap.



NO!!! The whole purpose of creating new weapons was to make mechs more lethal. Weapon advancement should NOT be more of the same. Nobody should expect a Abrams Tank to perform like a Grant. You develop the new weapons to be better than the old weapons, not more of the same with a different colored beam/projectile.

For those who whine about TTK (not me, I'm fine with current TTK, or even reduced), make the bonuses in the armor/structure tree more effective, so you spend more there and less in weapons.

Except this is a video game. An online pvp game. Balance is important. So they will nerf weapons if they're too strong. I hope people have their expectations in check.

[Andi Nagasia]

J0anna, on 08 March 2017 - 05:21 PM, said:

You forgot reactive and reflective armor which should reduce it's respective damage (Both available by 3063), each can reduce it's respective damage by 50%.

ive tried to keep away from Upgrades with this topic which is why the above isnt mentioned,
allot like Light-Ferro, Endo-Composite Gyros, and different Cockpits,

J0anna, on 08 March 2017 - 05:21 PM, said:

RACs should work like a gauss, the longer it charges, the more slugs it expels. A RAC 5 can shoot up to 6 slugs (each doing 5 damage) so a fully charger RAC would do 30 damage, but might take 2 seconds to fully charge, Imagine a Mauler with 4xRAC 5's...120 to the face.

i had a similar idea, see RACs Page1,

J0anna, on 08 March 2017 - 05:21 PM, said:

Actually you might be able to get 4xMRM 40's on a Stalker (7 crits each)....yum.

would be harsh, but not OP if implemented right,

J0anna, on 08 March 2017 - 05:21 PM, said:

When the IS gets ER lasers, all ER lasers should go back to 2x range, since clans can never mount regular lasers, regular lasers should be relegated to the dust heap.

im mixed about this, if IS keep their full x2 it will help IS-ER lasers better Compete with Clans more damage,

J0anna, on 08 March 2017 - 05:21 PM, said:

NO!!! The whole purpose of creating new weapons was to make mechs more lethal. Weapon advancement should NOT be more of the same. Nobody should expect a Abrams Tank to perform like a Grant. You develop the new weapons to be better than the old weapons, not more of the same with a different colored beam/projectile.

i think my implimentation of Heavy Lasers would be balanced,
yes some of my stats need work but i believe its a good starting point,

J0anna, on 08 March 2017 - 05:21 PM, said:

For those who whine about TTK (not me, I'm fine with current TTK, or even reduced), make the bonuses in the armor/structure tree more effective, so you spend more there and less in weapons.

i think TTK should be increased, and its very likely we will get the tools to do so,

[Kin3ticX]

Powercreep already ravaged the game so I dont see any problem with new weapons, most of which I bet will be for IS mechs.

PGI isnt going to grind up KDKs and NTG and sprinkle the fairy dust on the dumpster 'mechs so lets just say hell with it and spread that powercreep love with a big spoon.

[Andi Nagasia]

Kin3ticX, on 08 March 2017 - 06:38 PM, said:

Powercreep already ravaged the game so I dont see any problem with new weapons, most of which I bet will be for IS mechs.

PGI isnt going to grind up KDKs and NTG and sprinkle the fairy dust on the dumpster 'mechs so lets just say hell with it and spread that powercreep love with a big spoon.

it could be fixed with a Global Cooldown Nerf, but that may lead to much Rage,
personally i would be up for a +50% on all Cooldowns then adjust accordingly after,

[Mcgral18]

J0anna, on 08 March 2017 - 05:21 PM, said:

NO!!! The whole purpose of creating new weapons was to make mechs more lethal. Weapon advancement should NOT be more of the same. Nobody should expect a Abrams Tank to perform like a Grant. You develop the new weapons to be better than the old weapons, not more of the same with a different colored beam/projectile.

For those who whine about TTK (not me, I'm fine with current TTK, or even reduced), make the bonuses in the armor/structure tree more effective, so you spend more there and less in weapons.

Allow me to be blunt:

**** that
Your opinion is shite


Sod Legacy Tech™ and Power Creep™
That would be a terrible design, and be harmful to the future of the game

[J0anna]

Mcgral18, on 08 March 2017 - 08:14 PM, said:

Allow me to be blunt:

**** that
Your opinion is shite

Let me help you, who the f*** ever told you your opinion was worth anything? My opinion is no more or less valid than yours, your ideas lead to complete game stagnation. Why would anyone bother upgrading weapons if they were no better than what we have now?

Most of the weapon advancements are for the IS, let them have them, then return clan weapons to their proper values to balance the game. Then introduce tools (like reactive/reflective armor or more nodes in the armor/structure trees, allowing people to choose to increase their TTK by reducing weapon bonuses.

Your opinion (of reducing all weapons to keep 3025 weapons competitive) will mire this game forever where it is atm, and will end this game just as surely as you think my opinion will.

[Mcgral18]

J0anna, on 09 March 2017 - 04:12 PM, said:

Let me help you, who the f*** ever told you your opinion was worth anything? My opinion is no more or less valid than yours, your ideas lead to complete game stagnation. Why would anyone bother upgrading weapons if they were no better than what we have now?

Most of the weapon advancements are for the IS, let them have them, then return clan weapons to their proper values to balance the game. Then introduce tools (like reactive/reflective armor or more nodes in the armor/structure trees, allowing people to choose to increase their TTK by reducing weapon bonuses.

Your opinion (of reducing all weapons to keep 3025 weapons competitive) will mire this game forever where it is atm, and will end this game just as surely as you think my opinion will.

Again, you fail to provide anything useful aside from munckin OP CLAMS PLZ ideology


It would do nothing but kill off the game faster, and remove an entire faction from competitive play (of which, there are...3 chassis presently chosen? Spider, Hammy, Hopper? Everything else Clam)


You don't nerf the Clam Smalls to match the isSL, you buff the isSL to not be complete and utter shite

[Bishop Steiner]

Mcgral18, on 09 March 2017 - 04:19 PM, said:

Again, you fail to provide anything useful aside from munckin OP CLAMS PLZ ideology


It would do nothing but kill off the game faster, and remove an entire faction from competitive play (of which, there are...3 chassis presently chosen? Spider, Hammy, Hopper? Everything else Clam)


You don't nerf the Clam Smalls to match the isSL, you buff the isSL to not be complete and utter shite

or find a place in between. Ridiculous powercreep outliers should get nerfed, just as legacy tech often needsto be buffed. But if it's all buff, all the time, the powercreep remains, and eventually either TTK becomes nonexistent, or the responsive Def Buffs turn everything into boring *** papercut vanilla.

Proper balance is always best when a goal (be it an avg TTK, offensive output level, DPS, whatever) and weapons are both buffed and nerfed as needed to work around that objective.

[J0anna]

Mcgral18, on 09 March 2017 - 04:19 PM, said:

You don't nerf the Clam Smalls to match the isSL, you buff the isSL to not be complete and utter shite

That's one solution, but it results in game stagnation. Since PGI is advancing the timeline to 3068 (whether you like it or not), you give the IS mechs access to IS weapons that BT used to balance the TT game (level 2 weapons).

You give the IS their version of the ERSL (for example) and balance THAT against the clan ERSL. Then you introduce the more powerful weapons into the game (MRM's, RAC's, streak LRM's) and use heat/boating limitations (can't fire more than 2 at once w/o a heat spike (since ghost heat is here to stay). Allow the useless Level 1 IS weapons to go by the wayside. Forcing Level 2 weapons/equipment (available to clans) to try to be equivalent to level 1 equipment/weapons is the heart of the problem of trying to balance MWO.

I'm not saying introduce Level 3 weapons, but IS Level 2 weapons can be well matched against the clans Level 2 weapons. Since we already have Level 2 clan weapons, my solution allows the IS access to equivalent power weapons, and some different more powerful weapons, that might have different drawbacks and does NOT try to balance anything against.

For example:

IS ERML(TT) 5 damage, 5 heat, max 12 hexes
Clan ERML (TT) 7 damage, 5 heat, max 15 hexes

Clan ERML (MWO) 7 damage, 6 heat, 688 max (upgrade to 810), 10 health, 1.15 burn, 3.0 c/d
IS ML (MWO) 5 damage, 4 heat, 540 max, 0.9 burn, 3.00 c/d, 10 health
IS ERML (MWO, example) 6 damage, 5 heat, 760 max, 15 health, 1.05 burn, 3.0 c/d

(numbers for example), slightly less damage and range, better heat, burn, and health - certainly can be tweaked for better balance, but in every way better than the now useless ISML. That's what I am referring to - stop trying to balance against level 1 BT. We already have level 2 in game.....

[Mcgral18]

J0anna, on 09 March 2017 - 05:02 PM, said:

That's one solution, but it results in game stagnation. Since PGI is advancing the timeline to 3068 (whether you like it or not), you give the IS mechs access to IS weapons that BT used to balance the TT game (level 2 weapons).

You give the IS their version of the ERSL (for example) and balance THAT against the clan ERSL. Then you introduce the more powerful weapons into the game (MRM's, RAC's, streak LRM's) and use heat/boating limitations (can't fire more than 2 at once w/o a heat spike (since ghost heat is here to stay). Allow the useless Level 1 IS weapons to go by the wayside. Forcing Level 2 weapons/equipment (available to clans) to try to be equivalent to level 1 equipment/weapons is the heart of the problem of trying to balance MWO.

I'm not saying introduce Level 3 weapons, but IS Level 2 weapons can be well matched against the clans Level 2 weapons. Since we already have Level 2 clan weapons, my solution allows the IS access to equivalent power weapons, and some different more powerful weapons, that might have different drawbacks and does NOT try to balance anything against.

For example:

IS ERML(TT) 5 damage, 5 heat, max 12 hexes
Clan ERML (TT) 7 damage, 5 heat, max 15 hexes

Clan ERML (MWO) 7 damage, 6 heat, 688 max (upgrade to 810), 10 health, 1.15 burn, 3.0 c/d
IS ML (MWO) 5 damage, 4 heat, 540 max, 0.9 burn, 3.00 c/d, 10 health
IS ERML (MWO, example) 6 damage, 5 heat, 760 max, 15 health, 1.05 burn, 3.0 c/d

(numbers for example), slightly less damage and range, better heat, burn, and health - certainly can be tweaked for better balance, but in every way better than the now useless ISML. That's what I am referring to - stop trying to balance against level 1 BT. We already have level 2 in game.....

Again, bringing in new tech doesn't magically make the old stuff better

You are happy with that, I am not
Legacy Tech™ is a cancer that needs to die in a fire, not be fullheartedly supported.


Let me guess, you're also happy with the state of the STD engine, and have no issues with the LFE incoming without any changes to isXL or STD?

[J0anna]

Mcgral18, on 09 March 2017 - 05:16 PM, said:

Again, bringing in new tech doesn't magically make the old stuff better

You are happy with that, I am not
Legacy Tech™ is a cancer that needs to die in a fire, not be fullheartedly supported.


Let me guess, you're also happy with the state of the STD engine, and have no issues with the LFE incoming without any changes to isXL or STD?

No, but bringing in new tech, does not mean that everything needs to be balanced against the weakest, most outdated tech, because then the new tech is basically the same as the old tech, with a different color beam/projectile.

The LFE was there to balance, and since it allows choice, I do support it. You can choose XL engine, gain firepower at the expense of durability, or Standard and gain durability at the expense of firepower. The LFE allows a bit of both. Anything that allows the players to choose, is hard to be against. For balance, the LFE could suffer only 1/2 the clan penalties (more durable) for example.

What are you proposing? Not introduce the LFE and make the ISXL exactly the same as the Clan XL? 1) That's rather unimaginative, 2) That throws balance to the winds, as omnimechs now become significantly worse (why would you ever use them over a battlemech), 3) it eliminates player choice, which is one of the better parts of this game (tinkering with your mech).

You propose balancing Level 2 Battletech against Level 1 Battletech. Something that was never intended, and the biggest hurdle MWO has had to deal with (as well as the continuing source of many people's frustration). I propose balancing Level 2 Battletech against Level 2 Battletech and forgetting Level 1 Battletech all together.

We have a saying, insanity is trying the same thing and expecting a different result. PGI has tried to balance Level 1 BT against Level 2 BT for years, and has been only partially successful (as you, yourself pointed out). Let them try Level 2 against itself, the way BT intended it....

[Mcgral18]

J0anna, on 09 March 2017 - 05:45 PM, said:

No, but bringing in new tech, does not mean that everything needs to be balanced against the weakest, most outdated tech, because then the new tech is basically the same as the old tech, with a different color beam/projectile.

The LFE was there to balance, and since it allows choice, I do support it. You can choose XL engine, gain firepower at the expense of durability, or Standard and gain durability at the expense of firepower. The LFE allows a bit of both. Anything that allows the players to choose, is hard to be against. For balance, the LFE could suffer only 1/2 the clan penalties (more durable) for example.

What are you proposing? Not introduce the LFE and make the ISXL exactly the same as the Clan XL? 1) That's rather unimaginative, 2) That throws balance to the winds, as omnimechs now become significantly worse (why would you ever use them over a battlemech), 3) it eliminates player choice, which is one of the better parts of this game (tinkering with your mech).

You propose balancing Level 2 Battletech against Level 1 Battletech. Something that was never intended, and the biggest hurdle MWO has had to deal with (as well as the continuing source of many people's frustration). I propose balancing Level 2 Battletech against Level 2 Battletech and forgetting Level 1 Battletech all together.

We have a saying, insanity is trying the same thing and expecting a different result. PGI has tried to balance Level 1 BT against Level 2 BT for years, and has been only partially successful (as you, yourself pointed out). Let them try Level 2 against itself, the way BT intended it....

Because PGI is bad at balance doesn't mean everyone is


They released the bloody Kodiak with GodQuirks, FFS
There are plenty of threads out there to discuss proper balancing

STD=significant structure bonuses, be it doubled, flat +x bonus, or percentage. Can also add agility, or heat related bonuses (because of lesser guns VS the other options)
isXL= non-death ST, with equal (or marginally lesser) penalties to Clams. They are larger engines, after all
Alternatively, keep death, add bonuses to STs (double being an option), or agility (to better protect STs)
cXL can remain the baseline
LFE=no penalty, no bonus



Weapon balance can be addressed after that, because it isn't nearly as bad as engine balance as a whole. It's just that the Trash Tier weapons are SO MUCH worse

[J0anna]

Mcgral18, on 09 March 2017 - 05:50 PM, said:

Because PGI is bad at balance doesn't mean everyone is...


Weapon balance can be addressed after that, because it isn't nearly as bad as engine balance as a whole. It's just that the Trash Tier weapons are SO MUCH worse

But it's PGI's game - as they keep reminding us. They are advancing the timeline, which leads me to suspect their thinking is more in line with mine. While I don't disagree with your engine balance ideas (I would keep the ISXL side torso death as it's a choice) but the other thoughts are fine. Weapon balance should be done around Level 2 weapons as half of them are already in game, and balancing them has been eating a significant amount of PGI's time. Just give up level 1 weapons as anything other than filler, as that's what they became.

We disagree on TTK, because it is my belief that increasing TTK (especially significantly) actually increases the difference between "good weapons" and the "trash tier", and result in weapons needing larger balancing moves....

[MechaBattler]

J0anna, on 09 March 2017 - 06:16 PM, said:

But it's PGI's game - as they keep reminding us. They are advancing the timeline, which leads me to suspect their thinking is more in line with mine. While I don't disagree with your engine balance ideas (I would keep the ISXL side torso death as it's a choice) but the other thoughts are fine. Weapon balance should be done around Level 2 weapons as half of them are already in game, and balancing them has been eating a significant amount of PGI's time. Just give up level 1 weapons as anything other than filler, as that's what they became.

We disagree on TTK, because it is my belief that increasing TTK (especially significantly) actually increases the difference between "good weapons" and the "trash tier", and result in weapons needing larger balancing moves....

Then it's ultimately their decision if they don't want to invalidate several years worth of content by not trying to balance new weapons with old.

And people like me will continue to advocate balance over obsolescence for older weapons.

[Metus regem]

*Watching McGrail and J0anna going back and forth*

[Andi Nagasia]

im sure we can all agree that all weapons and equipment and mechs should be balanced and viable,
it allows for more options and ways to play if they are, as such ill wait till the 14th when we learn of new tech,
when that happens this Topic will be updated with all the new tech, and how they should work,
ill expect everyone to help us theorycraft how these weapons will work,

[Metus regem]

Andi Nagasia, on 10 March 2017 - 08:42 AM, said:

im sure we can all agree that all weapons and equipment and mechs should be balanced and viable,
it allows for more options and ways to play if they are, as such ill wait till the 14th when we learn of new tech,
when that happens this Topic will be updated with all the new tech, and how they should work,
ill expect everyone to help us theorycraft how these weapons will work,

I would like to hope that the new tech will be equipment beyond just weapons... I'd like to see other kinds of armour, like reflective, reactive and stealth. Superchargers a peice of kid that could be added to any mech and stacks with MASC, for when you feel the need for speed...

[Andi Nagasia]

Metus regem, on 10 March 2017 - 08:56 AM, said:

I would like to hope that the new tech will be equipment beyond just weapons... I'd like to see other kinds of armour, like reflective, reactive and stealth. Superchargers a peice of kid that could be added to any mech and stacks with MASC, for when you feel the need for speed...

me as well, im hoping for,... Takes Deep Breath,
Mechanical Jump Booster
Partial Wing
PPC Capacitors
Reactive & Reflective armors
Modular Armor
Null Sig
Endo Composite
Light Ferro
All sorts of Gyros

and i know you are all ganna hate me for this but,...
Spot Welder
yes i know what it does(Technicly Melee), but it could add an interesting dynamic to MWO,
i know many dont like the idea of field repairs, thinking it wouldnt work as per Lore, but if used to repair Armor only,
(when welding you penetrate Metal with heat then add your own Metal to Fill the Gap & repair the broken object)
this in mind, you could take damaged armor, and add a bead to partially repair the metal(maybe 50% max Armor)

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 10 March 2017 - 09:22 AM.

[Metus regem]

Andi Nagasia, on 10 March 2017 - 09:21 AM, said:

me as well, im hoping for,... Takes Deep Breath,
Mechanical Jump Booster
Partial Wing
PPC Capacitors
Reactive & Reflective armors
Modular Armor
Null Sig
Endo Composite
Light Ferro
All sorts of Gyros

and i know you are all ganna hate me for this but,...
Spot Welder
yes i know what it does(Technicly Melee), but it could add an interesting dynamic to MWO,
i know many dont like the idea of field repairs, thinking it wouldnt work as per Lore, but if used to repair Armor only,
(when welding you penetrate Metal with heat then add your own Metal to Fill the Gap & repair the broken object)
this in mind, you could take damaged armor, and add a bead to partially repair the metal(maybe 50% max Armor)

..... the Spot Welder could be interesting, provided you had to be out of combat to use it for repairs. I hate HarJel II & III because they are in combat use medpacks for mechs.

[BigBenn]

REMOVE THE CHARGE UP ON GAUSS RIFLES!!! Simply increase the reload time and decrease the reload time for (all) AC's. It is that simple, PGI, that simple.

I'm looking forward to MRM's and the X-Pulse.

Edited by BigBenn, 10 March 2017 - 09:51 AM.