460 replies to this topic

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Blueduck, on 15 July 2015 - 08:17 PM, said:

Except we've rolled Phoenix Legion, HHOD, and SROT with it. xD

Those teams don't inspire much confidence, I'm trying not to be an elitist a**, but when we are talking about one of the most dangerous mechs in the game that also happens to have one of the highest skill floors, it seems necessary.

Blueduck, on 15 July 2015 - 08:17 PM, said:

Where did I say it didn't work?

No, but you said it was heavily niche, then again, taking a Dire in CW is somewhat niche....but that is enough about bad game modes. Dire's are still THE assault mech, and I'm getting tired of having to repeat that.

Blueduck, on 15 July 2015 - 08:17 PM, said:

Hate you use it as an example but given the examples you've given and your lack of understanding of the game I'd say you're actually pretty bad.

I'm mediocre, I'm not on the same level as the better players like Proton or TFun, but I'm sure most of the better players would tell you the Dire is not niche.

Blueduck, on 15 July 2015 - 08:17 PM, said:

Ug, read my previous argument on gauss cauldron born and why the hellbringer is a better comparison.

Gauss vomit Ebon Jag is just as good as the Gauss vomit Hellbringer. No, I'm not talking about the dual Gauss Ebon Jag either, since the Hellbringer does not run dual gauss in your example. Timber can also do it, but it is slightly heavier.

[Star Wolves Admin Account]

"Those teams don't inspire much confidence, I'm trying not to be an elitist a**, but when we are talking about one of the most dangerous mechs in the game that also happens to have one of the highest skill floors, it seems necessary"

I'll let you know when I see groups like Kcom and 228 roll them regularly as it isn't happening now when we play them. It is all gauss hellbriners, laser blaarg hellbringers, cauldron borns, and crows.

"No, but you said it was heavily niche, then again, taking a Dire in CW is somewhat niche....but that is enough about bad game modes. Dire's are still THE assault mech, and I'm getting tired of having to repeat that."

I don't care if you're getting tired of repeating it or not. The dire is a niche mech compared to all around better assaults like the stalker due to his low mounted weapons. You will see groups like 288 do nearly all stalker pushes; I have yet to see them do an all dire push. And again, we like CW as I pull in around a 1 mil cbills a game with it and in general we find it provides more tactical options than other modes. Just because you don't care about its balance doesn't mean others don't

"I'm mediocre, I'm not on the same level as the better players like Proton or TFun, but I'm sure most of the better players would tell you the Dire is not niche."

Heavies/mediums are the kings of this game, some of the IS assault mechs are comparable. The dire is a niche mech due to his speed, low mounted weapons, and tonnage. And if you're mediocre stop copping an attitude when my arguments are perfectly logical. I'm not saying IS gauss is better but simply as a quirked aggregate it is comparable and you shouldn't nerf clan gauss without first considering the whole package.

"Gauss vomit Ebon Jag is just as good as the Gauss vomit Hellbringer. No, I'm not talking about the dual Gauss Ebon Jag either, since the Hellbringer does not run dual gauss in your example. Timber can also do it, but it is slightly heavier. "

Guass hellbringer beats gauss cauldron born on the hot maps due to his geometry and ecm. Again, the discussion centers around IS quirked out mech vs closest clan equivalent.

Gauss hellbringer and gauss jaegar are the two best comparisions.

Edited by Blueduck, 15 July 2015 - 08:42 PM.

[MischiefSC]

CW drop decks are not so much about which mech is superior as which set of 4 weighing 240 tons is superior.

You'd see way more DWs in CW if there was no tonnage limit. Same reason you see so few TWs in CW in comp teams - because 1 TW is better in general than 1 Hellbringer; however 2x Hellbringer + 2x Stormcrow > 2x TW + 2x Ice Ferrets.

The Dire Wolf isn't uncommon in CW because it's inferior. It's uncommon because the Scrow, EJ and Hellbringer are so good and hit the sweet spot for tonnage.

Got to think you know that already though.

[Star Wolves Admin Account]

I'm not trying to be unreasonable. I'm simply saying consider the IS mechs and quirks in total when you compare it to the clan gauss mechs. I don't see a major issue with the gauss balance honestly; there are faaaar bigger balance issues in this game right now. Is this really an unfair point? It seems as if what your group wants me to do is either jump on the clan OP or IS OP bandwagon in regards to gauss which I'm not going to do. In my view they are actually one of the better balanced systems in the game with quirks and everything else rolled in.

MischiefSC, on 15 July 2015 - 08:49 PM, said:

CW drop decks are not so much about which mech is superior as which set of 4 weighing 240 tons is superior.

You'd see way more DWs in CW if there was no tonnage limit. Same reason you see so few TWs in CW in comp teams - because 1 TW is better in general than 1 Hellbringer; however 2x Hellbringer + 2x Stormcrow > 2x TW + 2x Ice Ferrets.

The Dire Wolf isn't uncommon in CW because it's inferior. It's uncommon because the Scrow, EJ and Hellbringer are so good and hit the sweet spot for tonnage.

Got to think you know that already though.

Naturally tonnage is a consideration in everything. People would bring nothing but assault ever if tthere were no limitation. And you are exactly correct, the hellbringer is such a powerful gauss sniper for the tonnage; this regulates the gauss dire to a niche role. Not a bad mech but certainly not the best either.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Blueduck, on 15 July 2015 - 08:39 PM, said:

And if you're mediocre stop copping an attitude when my arguments are perfectly logical.

They aren't because your argument hinges on CW being the only game mode, when it is far from it, plus what Mischief added.

Blueduck, on 15 July 2015 - 08:49 PM, said:

I'm simply saying consider the IS mechs and quirks in total when you compare it to the clan gauss mechs.

Quirks really don't do much for the Jager though, if you were talking about the GI, then you would have a case. The point is that as a whole, Gauss is one of the smaller pieces that help Clan Gauss mechs be awesome, because they synergize so well with the high heat and effective Clan lasers. Throw a Clan XL in the mix and thus why the IS needs serious quirks to balance out even if they have really well placed weapons like the Stalker. They are all factors that have made the Clan Gauss vomit such a dominant fixture of the meta.

Then you have the impending IIC mechs which throw yet another wrench in the entire balance discussion.

Edited by WM Quicksilver, 15 July 2015 - 08:59 PM.

[Star Wolves Admin Account]

Look, I really don't think we're disagreeing. I would agree with you if they do not rebalance the game before the IIC's role out that the IS would be in major trouble. But they have already said they are going to rebalance based upon quirks, high mounts, and other factors.

My point is that clan/gauss/laser belch is comparable to IS pure gauss with high mounted weapons with quirks rolled in. Difference is the clan gauss is more a staple item while IS is more of a niche item. You may not like that but you can't change it without first tweaking the balance as a whole.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Blueduck, on 15 July 2015 - 09:02 PM, said:

My point is that clan/gauss/laser belch is comparable to IS pure gauss with high mounted weapons with quirks rolled in.

This is the point of dissension, they are comparable, but they are NOT equal, which is what the problem is. High mounts and quirks still can't save them from being second rate.

[Y E O N N E]

High mounts and other geometry boons and pitfalls are 'Mech features, not equipment features. You do not take those into consideration when balancing weapons within a single tech set, let alone across differing sets.

Similarly, quirks exist to overcome inherent deficiencies with current balancing practice, and should not be considered when trying to figure out what is wrong with the equipment. Trying to consider the quirks is like trying to solve a complicated math problem with a flawed underlying assumption, i.e. that Earth's gravitational acceleration at sea level is actually 10 m/s^2 instead of ~9.81 m/s^2. Your errors start compounding each other and that final answer you think is right, that balance, is actually wrong and will blow up in your face upon activation.

You don't balance 'Mechs with equipment stat changes, through quirks or direct manipulation of the XML files. Bad 'Mechs are bad because they are less survivable, and improving survivability with hit-point and movement buffs is far less obtuse than trying to improve it with cute, special-snowflake weapon behavior.

If anybody wants to know what's wrong with Clan vs. IS, this is the entire story right here:

Spoiler

Values on the far right of the upper table are derived from the weighted average of the values in the lower table. The fact that there is any difference at all in the utility value of any two weapons is the problem. I feel that the weights are in the ball-park for how the game plays, +/-0.03 for damage, range, and duration.

Normalization for Range, Duration, Heat, and Cool-down are all along an exponential curve. Everything else is linear.

Edited by Yeonne Greene, 16 July 2015 - 12:56 AM.

[IraqiWalker]

Telmasa, on 15 July 2015 - 03:45 PM, said:

So nobody likes my idea from page 5 about Clan tech having less crit health (lighter/less structural integrity explaining the weight reduction) compared to IS tech?

No. I feel that is too much of a nerf for clan mechs. Especially when we consider that Gauss Rifles (the item in discussion here) already have a very tiny health pool.

CrushLibs, on 15 July 2015 - 06:41 PM, said:

Yegger can do high mounted quad UAC-5s and dual gauss too

Its the best mech for guns bar none in its class

Spoken like a true "never piloted a jager in my life" pilot.

1- A Jager would NEVER do a quad UAC5 build, simply because you don't have the tonnage to do it, and carry a feasible amount of ammo.

2- No, it really isn't the mech for guns, as we've already established that the EBJ, and the DWF already out-class it by orders of magnitude.

3- Here are some builds for you, please explain to me how the jager is the superior one here:

A- Dual Gauss:
Jager: FIREBRAND
(needs an IS XL to move at 70Kph - STD engine version: FIREBRAND yep, it moves at 54.8 with 1 ton of ammo less)
EBJ: EBON JAGUAR EBJ-PRIME (Do you want to see what I can do when I start shaving armor from that left arm and using the extra tonnage for other things?)

Keep in mind, we're talking XL engines here, so the EBJ can actually use an entire side to shield. While the Jager can't.

B- Gauss + Laser vomit:

Jager: FIREBRAND (With an XL engine, this thing moves at the same speed as the EBJ, while packing 5 medium lasers, and a stumpy left arm that can't shield anything. - STD version:FIREBRAND respectable speed, lose 50 engine ratings, and 3 DHS, and you still don't have a shield side.)



EBJ: EBON JAGUAR EBJ-PRIME Without breaking a sweat a firepower increase of 60% for about the same tonnage. If we really wanted to match based on range, swap the C-ERMLs for C-ERSPLs, or SLs. Or if we want to be serious. Swap the LT for the -B config one, reducing your total laser count to 6, and add an extra heatsink. Like so: EBON JAGUAR EBJ-PRIME)

[Telmasa]

IraqiWalker, on 16 July 2015 - 04:31 AM, said:

No. I feel that is too much of a nerf for clan mechs. Especially when we consider that Gauss Rifles (the item in discussion here) already have a very tiny health pool.

Well, flip it around then - buff the IS gauss health pool a bit. You can shift the scale wherever it has to be, y'know? (and remember, clan XL isn't as vulnerable to explosions)

The main point is to explain the fact that Clan-tech equipment is lighter: by saying they found ways to shave weight while keeping acceptable levels of structural integrity.

Kinda fits with the canonicity of IS vs Clan-tech anyway, to my mind: rugged older 'tech that can get blown to smithereens (and often does) but can still keep on ticking just long enough (like what happens with Zombie builds), versus fancy expensive newer Clanner tech that appears overwhelming, but can be blown up like anything else.

It might not be canon that the tech advantage becomes an exploitable disadvantage, but out of any of the solutions that come to mind, this one makes the most sense to me.

Edited by Telmasa, 17 July 2015 - 04:33 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Telmasa, on 17 July 2015 - 04:29 AM, said:

Well, flip it around then - buff the IS gauss health pool a bit. You can shift the scale wherever it has to be, y'know? (and remember, clan XL isn't as vulnerable to explosions)

The main point is to explain the fact that Clan-tech equipment is lighter: by saying they found ways to shave weight while keeping acceptable levels of structural integrity.

Kinda fits with the canonicity of IS vs Clan-tech anyway, to my mind: rugged older 'tech that can get blown to smithereens (and often does) but can still keep on ticking just long enough (like what happens with Zombie builds), versus fancy expensive newer Clanner tech that appears overwhelming, but can be blown up like anything else.

It might not be canon that the tech advantage becomes an exploitable disadvantage, but out of any of the solutions that come to mind, this one makes the most sense to me.

lower muzzle velocity would also fit in with Clan Philosophy. Since standing back and sniping is no the clan way, they would easily have viewed that as an acceptable trade.

(Of course, since Gauss kill by kinetic energy transfer and not explosives, one would have to assume the Clan Gauss used heavier shells to comp for the lost velocity. Which could open up another can of worms, if one was really wanting to be picky...that either it used the same projectile, and did reduced damage, or a heavier projectile and thus reduced number of shots per ton....but that's only if we follow the laughable premise that things have to make sense in Battletech. )

Or one could add a second of cooldown.

But let's face it, the QQ will be strong by the Crutch Jockeys, no matter what was done to balance it.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 17 July 2015 - 05:11 AM.

[Hit the Deck]

Bishop Steiner, on 17 July 2015 - 05:11 AM, said:

...
(Of course, since Gauss kill by kinetic energy transfer and not explosives, one would have to assume the Clan Gauss used heavier shells to comp for the lost velocity. Which could open up another can of worms, if one was really wanting to be picky...that either it used the same projectile, and did reduced damage, or a heavier projectile and thus reduced number of shots per ton....but that's only if we follow the laughable premise that things have to make sense in Battletech. )
....

One could also assume that they use denser material and thus keeping the same number of shots. The use of this dense material is to give the projectile better armor piercing characteristic. This might be added to the weapon that cGauss can crit equipment even with armor on

[Lily from animove]

Yeonne Greene, on 15 July 2015 - 09:35 PM, said:

High mounts and other geometry boons and pitfalls are 'Mech features, not equipment features. You do not take those into consideration when balancing weapons within a single tech set, let alone across differing sets.

Similarly, quirks exist to overcome inherent deficiencies with current balancing practice, and should not be considered when trying to figure out what is wrong with the equipment. Trying to consider the quirks is like trying to solve a complicated math problem with a flawed underlying assumption, i.e. that Earth's gravitational acceleration at sea level is actually 10 m/s^2 instead of ~9.81 m/s^2. Your errors start compounding each other and that final answer you think is right, that balance, is actually wrong and will blow up in your face upon activation.

You don't balance 'Mechs with equipment stat changes, through quirks or direct manipulation of the XML files. Bad 'Mechs are bad because they are less survivable, and improving survivability with hit-point and movement buffs is far less obtuse than trying to improve it with cute, special-snowflake weapon behavior.

If anybody wants to know what's wrong with Clan vs. IS, this is the entire story right here:

Spoiler

Values on the far right of the upper table are derived from the weighted average of the values in the lower table. The fact that there is any difference at all in the utility value of any two weapons is the problem. I feel that the weights are in the ball-park for how the game plays, +/-0.03 for damage, range, and duration.

Normalization for Range, Duration, Heat, and Cool-down are all along an exponential curve. Everything else is linear.

Yes this is the entire story of how to judge anythign very biased.
So you wanna judge a system objectively by a lost showing "utility" of a weapon which has its utility values given by also subjective judgement.

IS wepaons have a lot more heat efficiency, so who is in charge to say heat is only a 0.18 modifier?

CERLL are a good example, they suddenly get so much more "utility value" by their range, while in fact on many maps you can not even play this range, yet their heat is so much more, but this hardly effects the utility score. and 1.5 secons beamduration is a real ****** thing hence why everyone uses C-LPL if possible. Yet in this list they are considered of having less utility value. So the clan beamweapon thats said to be the worst, turns out in your list as the best. That alone shows how wrong the list is.

The list may be an interesting way trying to compare the systems, but the judgement of the values weights is totally off.

Edited by Lily from animove, 17 July 2015 - 06:37 AM.

[Burktross]

Kain Demos, on 13 July 2015 - 04:52 PM, said:

Honestly at this point I wish they do just relax the construction rules to "everything goes for everything" and flush all the quirks because maybe the cry-hards would finally STFU then.

My mg locust will never be the same.

[IraqiWalker]

Telmasa, on 17 July 2015 - 04:29 AM, said:

Well, flip it around then - buff the IS gauss health pool a bit. You can shift the scale wherever it has to be, y'know? (and remember, clan XL isn't as vulnerable to explosions)

The main point is to explain the fact that Clan-tech equipment is lighter: by saying they found ways to shave weight while keeping acceptable levels of structural integrity.

Kinda fits with the canonicity of IS vs Clan-tech anyway, to my mind: rugged older 'tech that can get blown to smithereens (and often does) but can still keep on ticking just long enough (like what happens with Zombie builds), versus fancy expensive newer Clanner tech that appears overwhelming, but can be blown up like anything else.

It might not be canon that the tech advantage becomes an exploitable disadvantage, but out of any of the solutions that come to mind, this one makes the most sense to me.

The problem is that aside from the engines providing less power (clan mechs had serious problems firing two Gauss Rifles, many actually couldn't charge the capacitors), everything else about the tech is explained by simply saying "they improved the design" they didn't cut corners. They just refined the technique, and developed it more.

It's why their Endo, and Ferro take less space. It's why they don't use regular ACs, when their LB-Xs, and ultras made them obsolete. (even in the IS, if you could fit an LBX 10, you usually took it. Only downside to LBXs is the inability to fire specialized ammunition, which Ultras can do instead).

Honestly, if I wanted to balance C-Gauss against IS Gauss, I'd make the rifle fire two shells at a 0.08s or 0.09s (or maybe 0.11 like the UACs) rate of fire. That way it's slinging them a bit faster than the UACs, so the weapon is still powerful, even at long range, and torso twisting has an effect on it, but not too much that the weapon is considered bad.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

IraqiWalker, on 17 July 2015 - 09:35 AM, said:

Honestly, if I wanted to balance C-Gauss against IS Gauss, I'd make the rifle fire two shells at a 0.08s or 0.09s (or maybe 0.11 like the UACs) rate of fire. That way it's slinging them a bit faster than the UACs, so the weapon is still powerful, even at long range, and torso twisting has an effect on it, but not too much that the weapon is considered bad.

You wanna talk about nerfs, that is a bigger nerf than anything else suggested in this thread.

[IraqiWalker]

WM Quicksilver, on 17 July 2015 - 09:42 AM, said:

You wanna talk about nerfs, that is a bigger nerf than anything else suggested in this thread.

The shells are firing at almost instant speed, with Gauss velocity. Basically short of the target mech being in the middle of a torso twist, it's 15 PP FLD damage still. At any range under 700 meters it's identical to IS Gauss.

I'm really not seeing it as that big of a nerf. If you would elaborate more on why, or how you think that's bigger than anything else, I'd really appreciate it.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

IraqiWalker, on 17 July 2015 - 09:56 AM, said:

The shells are firing at almost instant speed, with Gauss velocity. Basically short of the target mech being in the middle of a torso twist, it's 15 PP FLD damage still. At any range under 700 meters it's identical to IS Gauss.

I'm really not seeing it as that big of a nerf. If you would elaborate more on why, or how you think that's bigger than anything else, I'd really appreciate it.

Instant speed, at midrange maybe, but once you get 500+ it does have a noticeable speed especially when you compare it to lasers. It would also mess with the ability to make snapshots which is very important with any PPFLD weapon, good aim can almost overcome good twisting.
Basically you are messing with its combat capability, where as things like giving the IS Gauss higher health or lower explosion damage do not effect its combat ability yet still give a slight buff to things where the IS could benefit thanks to lack of CASE everywhere and Clan XLs.

[Gyrok]

You guys should seriously just stop circle jerking over this.

There are 2 rules here that will not be invalidated and no amount of forum warrioring will change that:

1.) Altering tonnage to weapons breaks stock mech builds...thus it will never happen

2.) Altering crit slots to weapons breaks stock mech builds...thus it will never happen

Then, you also have to consider, at some point, the IS gets Light Gauss rifles...and a bunch of other stuff too.

Then what? How do you balance all the new tech the IS gets after you kept screwing with clans? Put them back arbitrarily to balance it out because the new IS tech is significantly stronger than even the SLDF tech?

Might as well just drop it and see how bad PGI screws up the implementation of BV. Then you have something legitimate to rage about. B!tching about IS vs. Clan Gauss, when the 2 are arguably the most balanced weapons between the 2 groups...is a fool's errand.

Remember...when it comes to weapons...crit slots and tonnage mean nothing for omnimechs versus battlemechs.

IICs...well...that is going to be what it is going to be...PGI let that cat out of the bag...so I would expect 3060 tech soon...personally...

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Gyrok, on 17 July 2015 - 10:35 AM, said:

1.) Altering tonnage to weapons breaks stock mech builds...thus it will never happen
2.) Altering crit slots to weapons breaks stock mech builds...thus it will never happen

I don't know that either of these were suggested to be changed. That fact your argument is based on this makes no sense. Not to mention you are begging the question in almost all your hypothetical questions.

Edited by WM Quicksilver, 17 July 2015 - 10:43 AM.