460 replies to this topic

[Lugh]

Johnny Z, on 14 July 2015 - 10:30 AM, said:

Clan responses to having a weapon 3 tons lights and taking up less space in the mech. How has Clan easy mode gone on this long?

It's not 'clan easy mode' you IS entitled birther.

There are tons and tons of Locked and Unchangeable pieces to the clan mechs. There are also NO updgrades available EVEN TO THOSE MECHS THAT HAVE THE FREE SLOTS for Ferro and Endo unless it is ALREADY ON THE CHASSIS.

[Dimento Graven]

Gas Guzzler, on 14 July 2015 - 11:22 AM, said:

On paper, yes, but that is not the reality of it. Small mechs don't die the second they come under fire.

Very true that statement. Had a match last night where I did very well, mainly by being the 'janitor', a match we were initially losing but had 'mechwarriors who were at least doing damage, I came out with 8 kills, and one of the last two enemy 'mechs on the field, one was a Locust.

It's not uncommon at all to see light 'mechs lasting an entire battle.

Edited by Dimento Graven, 14 July 2015 - 11:52 AM.

[MeiSooHaityu]

Well, you need SOME sort of convergence. Weapons don't just fire straight ahead. Even WWII fighter planes (with weapons on each wing) had convergence.

So, does arms maybe get separate convergence from the torso? It wouldn't really fix issues. Mechs like the Top Dog (8 torso energy hard points) or dual gauss Jagers or Catapults would still have dangerous convergence because their big weapons are either both in arms or in the torso together.

Do mechs (like the fighter example above) get manually set fixed convergence? Maybe set all weapons to converge at 300m? Maybe that isn't too bad, but it could still create a benefit for mechs with more torso weapons more closely grouped near the CT vs arm mounted weapons.

A dual gauss Catapult has it's gauss rifles very close together near it's CT. Even with fixed convergence it's rounds have a better chance of both weapons hitting the same location at different ranges vs the Jager with arm mounted Gauss rifles spread out far a part.

I'm not against a convergence change, but it might not fix what some might think it will fix. It might shuffle around what is OP, but there will still be builds superior to other builds.

[Mcgral18]

Dimento Graven, on 14 July 2015 - 11:43 AM, said:

And heat sinks and non-exploding gauss ammo, and BAP, and AMS, and ECM, any other weapon, etc. etc., and yes, the moment you put ANYTHING ELSE that can be crit'd in a location with a Clan gauss, it automatically has 1/7th, less a chance of being crit'd out. Over the long haul that's fairly significant, especially in CW where 'mech survivability can be more paramount than maximized DPS.

And yet, the Timby with ST Gauss has a 66% chance to lose the Gauss, while the arm mounted Jaeger only has a 58% chance, even with the +1 crit.


Ebon Jag arm is 60% even (10 slots can be crit), ST is 54% (only 1 crit slot taken by FF or Endo)



Crit slots able to be crit is another factor. Whale withstanding.

[Lugh]

Mister Blastman, on 14 July 2015 - 11:18 AM, said:

The mech/class balance is terrible because of the core mechanics. If you allow a 75 - 100 ton 'mech dump 50 - 70 pts of damage into a single torso panel, the smaller 'mechs are just going to spontaneously combust. One simple solution is removing convergence (NO cone of fire, no RNG!) and while not perfect (there are a few big 'mechs that will be fine regardless), the smaller, narrower 'mechs will naturally have more concentrated fire against the bigger ones and tend to do more damage per panel than a wider behemoth can. 12v12 doesn't help smaller 'mechs, either. 8v8 would help--but some folks not even that would help.

OR you could use the orininal TT Heat scale where one could NOT fire more than 30 heat worth of weapons without exploding...

[Dimento Graven]

Necromantion, on 14 July 2015 - 11:45 AM, said:

Were talking gauss not C-XL engines. The potential amount of damage afforded via a gauss as IS in a build is the same as Clans. The amount that can be viably used in builds while running acceptable amounts of ammo in the same weight classes are identical as well.

Of all the weapons that IS players want to whine about were now talking gauss? this is laughable.

BS, don't try and ignore the aggregate of Clan benefits as an excuse that SOME HOW the Clan's version of the gauss is actually balanced. That's BS, and if you don't understand WHY it's BS, you should probably just stop trying to participate.

Yes, the OP of this thread was specifically about gauss, but you can't have true balance unless you maintain a broad view of the affects of a change on the entire system. As I've stated pretty much from my first post on this thread, the one thing that we SHOULD have (at least as far as CW is concerned) is 10 Clan vs. 12 IS match making.

The ONE THING that the IS had to balance the superior Clan tech was being able to bring greater numbers to the battle. Without that, all the other balancing ******** that PGI reflexively does won't work, because as soon as some IS build/weapon/item comes close to being on par with Clan tech, all the screaming whining Clanners come out of the woodwork about how it's the end of MWO and PGI must be worshipping Satan, and whammo, PGI does something to IS that either significantly curtails gains made, or does something to Clan that increases the total OP factor.

Lugh, on 14 July 2015 - 11:46 AM, said:

It's not 'clan easy mode' you IS entitled birther.

There are tons and tons of Locked and Unchangeable pieces to the clan mechs. There are also NO updgrades available EVEN TO THOSE MECHS THAT HAVE THE FREE SLOTS for Ferro and Endo unless it is ALREADY ON THE CHASSIS.

I agree to let you change out ferro/endo if you agree to die when I shoot out only one of your torsos...

[Dimento Graven]

Mcgral18, on 14 July 2015 - 11:49 AM, said:

And yet, the Timby with ST Gauss has a 66% chance to lose the Gauss, while the arm mounted Jaeger only has a 58% chance, even with the +1 crit.

Ebon Jag arm is 60% even (10 slots can be crit), ST is 54% (only 1 crit slot taken by FF or Endo)

Crit slots able to be crit is another factor. Whale withstanding.

Nuh uh, on that same Jaeger, if he's got an XL loaded he has a ZERO percent chance of surviving if he loses a torso, while that same Timby has a 100% chance to survive a torso loss. Even if the Jaeger pilot chose to run with a standard engine, now he has to suffer a SIGNIFICANT speed and maneuverability handicap vs. his Clan opposite.

You can't balance in a vacuum, as hard as you my want to try to try and justify your 'easy mode' (I'm warming up to the term considering how vociferously tunnel visioned you clanners seem to be), otherwise it just raises more issues later on down the line.

[Bishop Steiner]

Lugh, on 14 July 2015 - 11:51 AM, said:

OR you could use the orininal TT Heat scale where one could NOT fire more than 30 heat worth of weapons without exploding...

that would be 30 pts of WASTE heat, for the record. For instance, an AWS-8Q could fire all it's weapons, while running, without exploding. That would be 33 heat. But due to having 28 SHS, it only accrues a heat burden of 5. And 30 pts of waste heat actually just caused an automatic shutdown. Mind you, along the way, you ran a goodly chance of an ammo explosion, or the pilot blacking out, but not auto death.

Where do these myths keep coming from? More Megamek?

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 14 July 2015 - 12:04 PM.

[Mcgral18]

Dimento Graven, on 14 July 2015 - 11:57 AM, said:

Nuh uh, on that same Jaeger, if he's got an XL loaded he has a ZERO percent chance of surviving if he loses a torso, while that same Timby has a 100% chance to survive a torso loss. Even if the Jaeger pilot chose to run with a standard engine, now he has to suffer a SIGNIFICANT speed and maneuverability handicap vs. his Clan opposite.

You can't balance in a vacuum, as hard as you my want to try to try and justify your 'easy mode' (I'm warming up to the term considering how vociferously tunnel visioned you clanners seem to be), otherwise it just raises more issues later on down the line.

And just how clueless are you?

Jagermech. Gauss rifles. Side torso? The ****?



Here you are bullshitting even more. 20 damage to an armoured Jager ST won't kill it. Has to go through whatever remaining arm ST first (but isn't halved unlike regular damage).



I'm trying to educate you, so try to learn. Also, you'll note I have made suggestions to change Gauss on the first page of this thread, AND made a thread on how to normalize XL engines.



Here you are throwing utter ********, please at least TRY to be factual. You're coming off as a ******** IS whiner.

[Ultimax]

Mister Blastman, on 14 July 2015 - 10:34 AM, said:

They are Clan 'mechs. They are supposed to be superior! Until Level 2 Inner Sphere weapons come, they should be! Or do you propose nerf the Clan 'mechs into the ground now only to see the disaster that is made of them when the Inner Sphere gets all those new, fancy weapons? Instead of nerfing Clan tech, PUG queue should have been Inner Sphere vs. Clan and it would be 3 lances vs. 2 stars. 12 vs. 10. It is lunacy to nerf Clan tech. Play the game how it was meant to be. This isn't even Battletech anymore. All the crap that has been changed--this is some freak show robot simulation where we're constantly adding in magic this, fairy tale that. It's ludicrous.

I'm not sure if you've really given this idea much thought.

It's been tossed around on the forums a number of times, and while its "easy" to suggest - actual feasibility seems extremely low.


For starters how would PGI keep IS & Clan numbers "even" enough to fill queues for games of 10 v 12?
That is to say, enough that you can make solo teams out of just PUGs who are "locked" into a faction.

What happens if they change mech factions in between one match to the next, creating lopsided-ness?


How would the team queue be handled?

Is everyone locked into their faction like CW - but all of the time?

Do we respect 3/3/3/3 for IS? Then what does Clan become? Lose Assaults, or lose assaults/heavies?

Are there enough teams to mix and match and do this, now we need jigsaw pieces to match for two different sized teams PLUS elo PLUS tonnage/class, etc.




Then there is the fact that most good players, power players, will gravitate to whatever is the best - and in your version of this game, that equals clan mechs.


Very few people want to play underdog scrub-mechs that are ripe for being farmed.





The concept of 10v12 is flawed at the very core, and would likely be a nightmare scenario for PGI - and probably for the playerbase as well.

Edited by Ultimatum X, 14 July 2015 - 12:13 PM.

[MeiSooHaityu]

Ultimatum X, on 14 July 2015 - 12:08 PM, said:

The concept of 10v12 is flawed at the very core, and would likely be a nightmare scenario for PGI - and probably for the playerbase as well.

I'm sure it would be as well.

Remember, when someone basically says "To fix problem X, do Y, it's that simple", there is going to be problems the person saying it didn't think through.

[Wrathful Scythe]

So much hate in this thread, no wonder why the devs are ignoring this forum. I would do the same. Watching two sides throwing sh*t at each other isn't really pleasant.

My two cents: IS Gauss should lose the crit chance and shouldn't explode. Make it meatier, so it can withstand more damage and doesn't take the component with it.

[DONTOR]

I would LOVE to be able to aim with Gauss in my Clan mechs arms, can i.s. mechs do this? YES

Are there many Clan mechs capable of running dual Gauss even though they weigh 3 tons less? NO

i.s. dual gauss mechs jaeger, cataphract, Catapult, King Crab. = 4

Clan Dual Gauss mechs, Cauldron Born, Dire Wolf, Warhawk. = 3

Wrathful Scythe, on 14 July 2015 - 12:15 PM, said:

My two cents: IS Gauss should lose the crit chance and shouldn't explode. Make it meatier, so it can withstand more damage and doesn't take the component with it.

I'd be fine with this also, make it a bit tougher anyhow, should still probably explode but I dont really care.

[MeiSooHaityu]

DONTOR, on 14 July 2015 - 12:27 PM, said:

I would LOVE to be able to aim with Gauss in my Clan mechs arms, can i.s. mechs do this? YES

Are there many Clan mechs capable of running dual Gauss even though they weigh 3 tons less? NO

i.s. dual gauss mechs jaeger, cataphract, Catapult, King Crab. = 4

Clan Dual Gauss mechs, Cauldron Born, Dire Wolf, Warhawk. = 3


I'd be fine with this also, make it a bit tougher anyhow, should still probably explode but I dont really care.

I could have sworn I saw a dual gauss Mad Dog. Is that possible or am I imagining that?

[Kristov Kerensky]

Wrathful Scythe, on 14 July 2015 - 12:15 PM, said:

So much hate in this thread, no wonder why the devs are ignoring this forum. I would do the same. Watching two sides throwing sh*t at each other isn't really pleasant.

My two cents: IS Gauss should lose the crit chance and shouldn't explode. Make it meatier, so it can withstand more damage and doesn't take the component with it.

Simple question, by what logic do you set the inferior hardware to be better built than the superior hardware built by a more warlike and advanced culture? We're not talking the difference between an M1 and an M16A1 here, where I would buy that logic because it actually applies. We're talking the difference between the M16A1 and the M4A1, so please, show me the logic behind your reasoning so I can get behind it. Otherwise...sorry, but no, I can't get behind making a superior piece of hardware specifically designed for combat usage by a more advanced AND warlike culture being less structurally sound than the older version they updated from. Again, M1 vs M16A1, yes. M16A1 vs M4A1, no.

[Mcgral18]

MeiSooHaityu, on 14 July 2015 - 12:29 PM, said:

I could have sworn I saw a dual gauss Mad Dog. Is that possible or am I imagining that?

Stock, yes.


About as effective as a Dual Gauss Blackjack, though. Low ammo, low armour.



IIC robots will bring two more, the Hunch (as agile as a Warhawk) and Orion (STD300).

[Lugh]

Dimento Graven, on 14 July 2015 - 11:53 AM, said:

BS, don't try and ignore the aggregate of Clan benefits as an excuse that SOME HOW the Clan's version of the gauss is actually balanced. That's BS, and if you don't understand WHY it's BS, you should probably just stop trying to participate.

Yes, the OP of this thread was specifically about gauss, but you can't have true balance unless you maintain a broad view of the affects of a change on the entire system. As I've stated pretty much from my first post on this thread, the one thing that we SHOULD have (at least as far as CW is concerned) is 10 Clan vs. 12 IS match making.

The ONE THING that the IS had to balance the superior Clan tech was being able to bring greater numbers to the battle. Without that, all the other balancing ******** that PGI reflexively does won't work, because as soon as some IS build/weapon/item comes close to being on par with Clan tech, all the screaming whining Clanners come out of the woodwork about how it's the end of MWO and PGI must be worshipping Satan, and whammo, PGI does something to IS that either significantly curtails gains made, or does something to Clan that increases the total OP factor.

I agree to let you change out ferro/endo if you agree to die when I shoot out only one of your torsos...

You clearly won't be satisfied until everyone is in the same fricking robot. There is obviously no talking to you. In LORE Clan makes were essentially 200% better than IS mechs. Which is why you say 5 v 8 games played with the clans winning.

Currently despite all the IS fanboy screaming about Clans being OP, if you do the math, the clans have only a 10% advantage overall bottom line.

(no I will not do the math for you AGAIN)

So Given those numbers PGI has done their durndest to dumb it down so clans lose 190% of the advantage to a mere 10% of advantage. And YOU cannot build a more durable mech? What is your problem? STD engines are there for you. You can be within just a few percentage points of the same mech with XL and be MORE durable than a clan mech, granted then you will be SLOWER than everyone for sure, but it can be done.

[Gas Guzzler]

Mcgral18, on 14 July 2015 - 11:49 AM, said:

And yet, the Timby with ST Gauss has a 66% chance to lose the Gauss, while the arm mounted Jaeger only has a 58% chance, even with the +1 crit.


Ebon Jag arm is 60% even (10 slots can be crit), ST is 54% (only 1 crit slot taken by FF or Endo)



Crit slots able to be crit is another factor. Whale withstanding.

Yeah and these mechs are so far from competitive they need to be buffed in order to see use again.

Kristov Kerensky, on 14 July 2015 - 12:31 PM, said:

Simple question, by what logic do you set the inferior hardware to be better built than the superior hardware built by a more warlike and advanced culture? We're not talking the difference between an M1 and an M16A1 here, where I would buy that logic because it actually applies. We're talking the difference between the M16A1 and the M4A1, so please, show me the logic behind your reasoning so I can get behind it. Otherwise...sorry, but no, I can't get behind making a superior piece of hardware specifically designed for combat usage by a more advanced AND warlike culture being less structurally sound than the older version they updated from. Again, M1 vs M16A1, yes. M16A1 vs M4A1, no.

The same reason UACs fire in burst mode and clan lasers have longer duration...

[Mcgral18]

Gas Guzzler, on 14 July 2015 - 12:47 PM, said:

Yeah and these mechs are so far from competitive they need to be buffed in order to see use again.

Which changes the fact he's wrong how?

[Lugh]

Bishop Steiner, on 14 July 2015 - 12:00 PM, said:

that would be 30 pts of WASTE heat, for the record. For instance, an AWS-8Q could fire all it's weapons, while running, without exploding. That would be 33 heat. But due to having 28 SHS, it only accrues a heat burden of 5. And 30 pts of waste heat actually just caused an automatic shutdown. Mind you, along the way, you ran a goodly chance of an ammo explosion, or the pilot blacking out, but not auto death.

Where do these myths keep coming from? More Megamek?

It's a hasty generalization thrown out by someone too tired to remember the TT rules he last played 25 years ago. MY BAD.