45 replies to this topic

[Hit the Deck]

Lily from animove, on 21 July 2015 - 08:11 AM, said:

that does not work, because you feel the difference when playing them and so they can not be the same thing in how they currently are. Mastering a mech means playing many many many of matches in it, knowing every bit and byte of its behavior. Now I have 3x the same mech behaving differently, this may for newbies be even more confusing. Thats quite far away from what an omnimech should be. Further I bought omnimechs back them, not semi battlemechs.
....

Maybe Alwrath's suggestion above would be more fitting since PGI has decided to buff certain Omnis (CT), i.e. the same quirks for all of CT on a particular Omni.

Edited by Hit the Deck, 21 July 2015 - 08:37 AM.

[Fate 6]

Point remains, variety is good. A brawler Warhawk wants twist, while a poker wants accel/decell. Same for the Adder. The 20% twist rate is also quite a bit and comes with some extra yaw distance which is icing. Twist rate is super important in keeping yourself alive, and in competitive it's generally better than accel/decell. The fact that we can even have this debate means having both choices is good for the game

[One Medic Army]

I like the CTs having different quirks, the same way I like the legs having different quirks. It lets you specialize your mech to what you want.

If the OP is angry that there are different options, then I hope PGI ignores him, and he can just buy 3 of the same CT he thinks is the best rather than complaining about the others being different.

Now, the fact that the different CTs aren't equally good is an issue, but it doesn't mean the whole idea has to be scrapped.

[Deathlike]

Arg.

The only real point of having different CT quirks is to differentiate.

If you didn't have them, the only differentiating factor is the hardpoint. In many cases, the CT hardpoint is irrelevant on many mechs (Kitfox, Adder, Mist Lynx to name a few) where it is actually significant enough in others (Timberwolf, Ice Ferret, Dire Wolf, Gargoyle as examples).

When you don't have differentiating hardpoints, there genuinely is no value to the other variants... particularly if you rely on using the Prime Invasion variants for the C-bills bonus.


However, it is indirectly being used to sell "powercreep" just as well, so it is what it is, and while it's fine to have a different opinion here, there are logical reasons to have or not have different quirks. It simply isn't just one-sided as it sounds on paper.

[Alistair Winter]

The 3-to-master rule is already dumb as hell. If they're going to force players to master 3 identical mechs, it makes the whole experience even more pointless. At least give me a tiny bit of variation to ease the pain of the grind.

[Lily from animove]

Fate 6, on 21 July 2015 - 08:47 AM, said:

Point remains, variety is good. A brawler Warhawk wants twist, while a poker wants accel/decell. Same for the Adder. The 20% twist rate is also quite a bit and comes with some extra yaw distance which is icing. Twist rate is super important in keeping yourself alive, and in competitive it's generally better than accel/decell. The fact that we can even have this debate means having both choices is good for the game

can you please stop talking non evaluatd nonsense, all WHK's do have yaw turnrate, we talk about individual quirks, and if you have a look at the warhawks individual ones on the CT ou will realise thre is significant superiority/inferiority on all of them. All you do is talking rather crappy nonsense that just is going to confuse newbies not able to see the nonsense you talk by not knowing the quirks and stuff the emcs have. But probably you don't even know them yourself.

yeha adder twistangle is icing to get rekt, because you offer your bakc better to get shot, GG.

One Medic Army, on 21 July 2015 - 09:00 AM, said:

I like the CTs having different quirks, the same way I like the legs having different quirks. It lets you specialize your mech to what you want.

If the OP is angry that there are different options, then I hope PGI ignores him, and he can just buy 3 of the same CT he thinks is the best rather than complaining about the others being different.

Now, the fact that the different CTs aren't equally good is an issue, but it doesn't mean the whole idea has to be scrapped.

if we could swap CT's you would be right, but the fact that your mech is defined by the CT does not make it able to be "specialised as you want" it is predefeined and so it will cater better to specific roles than another which is entirely the opposite of " specilased as you want"

and no sry I can not buy 3 of that kind, unless I go and write amail to support asking to exchange all my package mechs to a specifc chassis which PGI decided to do after we bought them. Those mechs aren't true omnimechs anymore, they are biased now already, youc na not make "what you want" without being gimped on specific chassis.

Deathlike, on 21 July 2015 - 09:00 AM, said:

Arg.

The only real point of having different CT quirks is to differentiate.

If you didn't have them, the only differentiating factor is the hardpoint. In many cases, the CT hardpoint is irrelevant on many mechs (Kitfox, Adder, Mist Lynx to name a few) where it is actually significant enough in others (Timberwolf, Ice Ferret, Dire Wolf, Gargoyle as examples).

When you don't have differentiating hardpoints, there genuinely is no value to the other variants... particularly if you rely on using the Prime Invasion variants for the C-bills bonus.


However, it is indirectly being used to sell "powercreep" just as well, so it is what it is, and while it's fine to have a different opinion here, there are logical reasons to have or not have different quirks. It simply isn't just one-sided as it sounds on paper.

People initially hoped for the Omnimechs because they don't like to have "obsolete" mechs, whcih now is reverted
And no those mechs would not have "no value" only in case you all equip them with the same laodout, but if you do, you do not understand the entire purpose of omnimechs: swapping hardpoints and making laodouts on one and the same mech. But this is gettign irrelevant if variant X is more suited for thsi build. each OMNI-mech should be equally good with the same configs.

Alistair Winter, on 21 July 2015 - 09:00 AM, said:

The 3-to-master rule is already dumb as hell. If they're going to force players to master 3 identical mechs, it makes the whole experience even more pointless. At least give me a tiny bit of variation to ease the pain of the grind.

users fault if they use omnimechs and make all 3 the same. and if peopel with the chance to swap serveral locations and entire hardpoints still try to make the same build on any chassis, then those CT quirks will hardly change this habit.

Swapping pods is what should define the omnimech, not the CT, or at leats the CT on any chassis should be swapable as well.

[Revis Volek]

Joseph Mallan, on 21 July 2015 - 08:18 AM, said:

PGI. All Omni Variants Use A Single BASE Chassis. it is why it is called a Base Chassis! There should be only ONE perk for the CT of any one OmniMech type.

[One Medic Army]

Lily from animove, on 21 July 2015 - 09:54 AM, said:

if we could swap CT's you would be right, but the fact that your mech is defined by the CT does not make it able to be "specialised as you want" it is predefeined and so it will cater better to specific roles than another which is entirely the opposite of " specilased as you want"

and no sry I can not buy 3 of that kind, unless I go and write amail to support asking to exchange all my package mechs to a specifc chassis which PGI decided to do after we bought them. Those mechs aren't true omnimechs anymore, they are biased now already, youc na not make "what you want" without being gimped on specific chassis.

You can swap CT. You select the other CT from mechlab, and build your mech off of that one instead.

You can totally buy 3 of a kind via cbills or MC, the package gives you 1 of everything and that's what it's advertised to do.

Let's be honest, most people only keep 1 or 2 CTs anyway and sell the rest to get CBills and free up mech bays, this way there's actually a reason for me to use omnis other than my Invasion primes.

[edit] For the record, I couldn't give a crap about "true omnimechs" and other lore arguments.

Edited by One Medic Army, 21 July 2015 - 10:05 AM.

[MischiefSC]

Lily from animove, on 21 July 2015 - 08:11 AM, said:

that does not work, because you feel the difference when playing them and so they can not be the same thing in how they currently are. Mastering a mech means playing many many many of matches in it, knowing every bit and byte of its behavior. Now I have 3x the same mech behaving differently, this may for newbies be even more confusing. Thats quite far away from what an omnimech should be. Further I bought omnimechs back them, not semi battlemechs.





just with the difference that they are more expensive as package and that you first have to pay extra c-bills for swapping pods. On an IS, mech you at leats reuse a engine of another mech you already own, master it and then rip off all components, while the clan equipment and engnes is what you always pay for and can not slaughter from the mech to use it on other mechs.

You can reuse the omnipods and weapons - the omnis are about a std engines worth in cost. You run about the same overall is to clan for cost. Difference is that you are paying cash for endo/xl.

Same deal with all packages. You pay the full price knowing most of what you buy is ****. Not just that it is **** but that it is designed to be **** and you are forced to play it to level your mechs up.

Because that is good business sense.

I am always astounded by the effort pgi goes through to make segments and aspects of the game unenjoyable but make you play it anyway. Also effort to design a system guaranteed to make it's consumers bitter.

[Lord Perversor]

Lily from animove, on 21 July 2015 - 07:21 AM, said:

in regards of that question: YES then I better have none, because then my mechs are equally valued, now I have mechs being less worth than others. Because if you build a mech in comparison to others, cost of opportuntaty is what comes into play. And so you can not really pretent it does not have these quirks, becaue on this table, the Non prime adder basically has -10% acc/decc in comparison to the adder prime. Further you realise this when you play these mechs. So simply saying "pretent they aren't there" is not working.

If you play to troll around it does not care, but if you play the game and wanna give your best, building the best is also initial part of MWO, because doint the best starts with building the right mech. because otherwise you coudl also say: hey cool I have +100% ballistic cooldowns on my mech only having E hardpoints. (ok extreme example, but basically the issue of having soemthing, even if it's the wrong thing, doesn't makes it a good thing at all)

With all my respects your rant seems missguided.

bitching about all CT not being the best for Adder min/maxing builds when speaking specifically of a mech who is nowhere near the *top* min/maxing favourites of meta tryhards seems kind of pointless.

[Lily from animove]

One Medic Army, on 21 July 2015 - 10:04 AM, said:

You can swap CT. You select the other CT from mechlab, and build your mech off of that one instead.

You can totally buy 3 of a kind via cbills or MC, the package gives you 1 of everything and that's what it's advertised to do.

Let's be honest, most people only keep 1 or 2 CTs anyway and sell the rest to get CBills and free up mech bays, this way there's actually a reason for me to use omnis other than my Invasion primes.

[edit] For the record, I couldn't give a crap about "true omnimechs" and other lore arguments.

No, most people have many of those mechs, becasue you could in the past make many premade mechs with no need to swap entire loadouts all the time. The convinient thing about omnis and why people hoped for omnis. Now of course you can sell most inferior ones, until PGI decides to totally change quirks so people can sell all again buying the other chassis again.

And If the quirks would have been kown before, a lot people probably would not have bought some variants at all due to being pointless.

people didn't liked having to buy mechs just for mastering one and then throwing them away. Which now happens again. Only f2p players do so, since they would have to buy more mechbays.

One Medic Army, on 21 July 2015 - 10:04 AM, said:

You can swap CT. You select the other CT from mechlab, and build your mech off of that one instead.

yeha trololol. mising the entire point of omnimechs.

Lord Perversor, on 21 July 2015 - 10:10 AM, said:

With all my respects your rant seems missguided.

bitching about all CT not being the best for Adder min/maxing builds when speaking specifically of a mech who is nowhere near the *top* min/maxing favourites of meta tryhards seems kind of pointless.

No its not, Adder is nto half as bad as people make it look like, they just are too lazy to adopt the palystyle. Further this so called meta crowd guys are exactly those who min max everything, and those would tell you how stupid many of the CT qurks are. But actualyl they don'T care because they simply use THE ONE and nothign else.

ALSO: the adder is just the example, it counts for all the clanmechs havign gotten CT quirks.

Edited by Lily from animove, 21 July 2015 - 10:13 AM.

[Deathlike]

Alistair Winter, on 21 July 2015 - 09:00 AM, said:

The 3-to-master rule is already dumb as hell. If they're going to force players to master 3 identical mechs, it makes the whole experience even more pointless. At least give me a tiny bit of variation to ease the pain of the grind.

Fun right?

Lily from animove, on 21 July 2015 - 06:05 AM, said:

Doing so on CT's which have the absolute identical specifics (hardpoints) while we can not swap CT's does not only remove the point of "omnimechs" it also creates inferior chassis.
It does devalue mechpacks by including dead mechs, it also hardly motivates people to buy individual mechs (either mc or C-bills) because its basically like:

"Hey buy this mech that can be entirely like the one you already have, except being a bit more worse."


So lets get a bit in detail here, because it matters.

I previuslly to the Podquirks, had 3 adders that I loved.

• 4x CERML Adder
  
• 2x PPC Adder
  
• 4xsrm6 Adder

My basic loadout. yet I still played some others a few times, which I had to swap builds for. Like 2 LPL's and some others.



Anyways, at this point it would have been appealing to buy 2 more adders, So I can have all my beloved loadouts ready on demand.

But suddenly you brought in Omnipod quirks. One of the worst things in my opinion, Since many were chosen not so fine, further the CT choice was a total fail.

Lets have a look:

The adder quriks and what they turned out



Now any decent player building a mech, will "sort out" invalid, or pointless quirks.

On a light mech, such as the adder this means, yaw angles, torso turn rates and angles are complete garbage NO ONE NEEDS. It can turn far enough and fast enough anyways due to being a light mech.

Yet mobility is very important, and this will just our of this list mean: the ADR-PRIME is plain out superior to the other Variants. Only the ADR-B is a tiny "maybe useful" for having Turnrate mobility. Yet as a light mech, this is also "not much". Especially compared to the prime which now means, for 5% turn rate you sacrifice 10% acc/decc and 10%reverse speed. (suddenly, a very sh*tty tradeoff). It does not add the diversity you hoped to create, all it does was creating a performance gap between those chassis and also other chassis receiving CT quirks.

As Invasion pack owner this leads me now from having 3 well and valid working mechs, to having one or two inferior ones. And not only for the adder, this counts for serveral mechs that received those weird CT quirks.

66% of my regulary used mechs suddenly were devalued.

I'll try to sort out the comments, as this feels like a wall-of-text at times.

The point of the quirks themselves is differentiation (as I've said earlier - didn't have time to quote/respond in full before the downtime).

If you feel that some quirks are better than others, it is the natural of the beast, unless you can suggest better values or solutions to make them have a use. I can't say there are great quirks, but some will be inherently be better than others.

However, using the Adder as an example is a bad one.

The Adder NEEDS a lot of the quirks to excel over the dominant Stormcrow (even if you subtract all of its torso twist quirks), the Adder is an inferior Light mech that is masquerading as a undersized Medium with an oversized Light chassis. So, it's not a great deal for the Adder (this convo couldn't get any further w/o mentioning "Badder" in a post).

Quote

This leaves me up to 2 possbilities:

• Buying 4 more prime adders to the 5 wanted loadouts.
  
• Constantly swapping laodouts on my prime.

both is personally INVALID, because the first option means owning more and more and more mechs, next to spending lots of cbills. And the more mechs you own, the longer takes the mechlab to load after first connecting to MWO. THATS ANNYOING



the second is similar ANNOYING to having swap loadouts and pots all the time.

So this change did:

• devalue many of my mechs
  
• force me to do more annoying things by either buying more mechs of the same type, which is totally now how omnimechs were supposed to be. "Omnimechs" with the identical laodout and identical pods should not differ at all unless the CT brings up some individual fixed equipment or hardpoints.

I own all 3 Waves, and many of the mechs in those are rather untouched due to not having much interest in them. Yet of those I have interest, mostly 1/3 or 2/3 are now staying untouched as well. So its now like 20% of those mechs being used by me.


Do you really think I feel motivated to buy further packs if the amount of "viable" content within is that low?


The consequences are

that I hop online, feel the mood to play mech X with loadout Y and simply logoff again, because I am not in the mood to swap laodouts first or using a gimped variant of a chassis already being subtier mech. If you are lucky, I grab another "already done" mech and use it. I spent now less time in MWO in a week than I previously did PER DAY. and having checked my own motivation, it is esaxctly and only because of this secifc decision your balance team made.

But the consequences reach further, for YOU PGI
The interest in buying new mechs is related to my MWO motivation. I wanted to buy another Gold, pack, Now I rarely even play. And I guess writing this post even exceeds my ingame time of the last 14 days.
I usually give any mech I like and use regulary Cockpit items and camo (one shots). So ALL my adders, ALL my TBR's ALL my MDD's ALL my NVA's do have cockpititems and camo (none of those free from the packs). Stuff I paid money for that you got. Now with giving those crappy quirks, I have "obsolete" mechs, So I will not have use for the cockpit items in them. This means I am going to take them out and slap them into new mechs of the Wave 3. At least those you haven't gimped with weird CT quirks AGAIN. The Shadowcat and Ebon jaguar, are very much mechs I like by desing, because chicken legs and such. But with the SHC's quirks, and whatever future feraking stuff you may do, I will not buy new cockpit items for them. Now calculate what 3x8 cockpit items means in MC (not) spent.
Because currently, ther eis no CT differenc eon the SHC and so the quirks already tell me:
SHC B > SHC P >SHC A > the rest. basically only owning SHC B variants would be the best.
Same goes for the reinforcement Variants. While initially it was planned to own them all, and equip the ones I like with camo and cockit items, most stay untouched and even unbought due to pointless quirks.
You said in future we will have the ability to put playerdecals on our mechs - for mc charge. Well, that will also mean instead of 30 mechs receiving them instant, it's probably 5 or 6 of my mechs getting them, givne ther eis any motivation left when this happens.

So many things impoved in MWO, so many new mechs came out, yet the motivation is totally down for me due to this little thing that didn't even helped those chassis in diveristy. All it did is creating infreriority even amongst the same chassis of omnimechs, which will also lead many people to not buy specific omnimech chassis beyond 3 chassis to max their skills. Equal CT chassis should only receive quirks that are equal for all mechs amongts this chassis

Please revert this omnimech destroying imbalance creating nonsense.

tl:dr - whale swimming in other seas now.

Why did you buy a Gold Mech anyways? That might be the first error.

Let's get to the point though.

As far as MOST people are concerned, omnimechs just w/o the quirks are more or less the SAME mech that you can retrofit however you want. So, anyone with all the variants (with a non special CT) could just outright build the same thing and grind ALL variants (at least 3) the same way. It's boring, but doable. Some of us prefer to create the diversity and build them 3 different ways (so we don't bore ourselves to death). With CT quirks, it makes it a little complicated, but while I min-max a lot, the way I've decided is to optimize around them in such a way that I don't worry too much of a quirk here or there unless a particular quirk is hurting/helping a build.

For instance, the Summoner-B and Gargoyle-A lends to SPECIFIC builds. While I prefer my Prime Invasion builds, but using the stock hardpoints for some extra bonuses (which seem kinda out of left field) isn't complicated to work with (it's awesome for both variants IIRC with the specific omnipod set), but these are exceptions to the rule.

Most people would NEVER consider OMITTING certain omnipods (Executioner-D side torsos) due to the extreme usefulness/utility that they can provide. So, you'll still be able to build what you want, but there will be many optimal omnipods used... and this includes the CT (had to rebuy the Nova-S due to a better torso twist rate... argh).


More importantly, some of the quirks are kinda needed.

In the case of the Ice Ferret, the Prime variant is garbage, and it can do a Mist Lynx impression.

However, the non-Prime variants allow for a little diversity. The Ice Ferret-D exists to allow MPL be useful (although it sucks with 4 due to heat, although 5ML is really sweet).

While not every example is ideal or perfect, but having a niche is better than doing nothing at all, being just another mech I can just copy the same build on all 3 variants. I can't say the CT quirks will ever be the same (and it's fun mocking the ones that make no sense), but there's no reason to buy the variant otherwise if there wasn't a quirk. If anything, I'd rather sell them off because I don't need another mech variant that will literally do the same thing that the others could do anyways.

Right now, they add value. The only "devaluing" is if you have to buy the same variant to get the specific quirks. In most cases, the quirks in question aren't really world-beating (tell me which CT is "OP" compared to the rest, and be serious about the answer here) so in MOST cases, there isn't anything that would put one over the top.

[Mawai]

Alwrath, on 21 July 2015 - 08:32 AM, said:

Going to have to agree on all points made in this long post. CT omni quirks should be the same across all variants of a chassis, because you end up taking the variant with the best CT quirks for any loadout all the time, especially for competitive play. Having to swap loadouts for every single build you have for a chassis just because it has more CT armor or internal structure or better quirks is too time consuming. Buying more of the same variant is not the answer.

PGI FIX THIS PLS.

Why? I am not sure I really understand the issue ...

1) PGI has CT sections that are used to uniquely identify the variant for omnimechs
2) Some of the existing CT have varying hard point configurations ... demonstrating that not all CT for each variant are identical
3) PGI has added different quirks to both previously identical CT sections and different ones of the same mech
4) This has created a situation where all of these CT sections are better than without the quirks but that some are perhaps better than others depending on what quirks you prefer
5) This means that instead of having 3 identical clan CT with different load outs .. you now have to either switch load outs to use your preferred CT or live with whatever positive quirks were given to that CT section

You find it more convenient to have CT with identical quirks so you don't have to switch builds. Omnis that already have different CT ... well they were already different so you built your mechs around that.

Does that about sum it up?

----

I am in the other camp. I like having different quirks on each CT since it gives each omni mech a little more character. It is up to PGI to assign quirks that are more or less of equal interest and balance depending on what sort of mech you want to build. If folks can argue about whether 10% more turn rate, torso twist or pitch/yaw is better then great ... since it means that there is no clear winner on best choice.

I just build the omni-mech to accommodate any quirks on the CT. I don't think they should all be the same just so that some folks don't have to change builds to obtain and optimum min/max configuration in their opinion.

If this is more than just a convenience issue then please make it more clear. In the case of IS mechs, each variant differs by FAR more than one minor quirk on the CT ... and yet most variants see use ... so I don't think the argument that some slight quirk differences between clan mech CT will make those CT much less attractive makes any sense at all.

[Alwrathandabout42ninjas]

One Medic Army, on 21 July 2015 - 10:04 AM, said:

Let's be honest, most people only keep 1 or 2 CTs anyway and sell the rest to get CBills and free up mech bays, this way there's actually a reason for me to use omnis other than my Invasion primes.

For the record, I couldn't give a crap about "true omnimechs" and other lore arguments.

I keep every single mech I purchase. I find my own build for each variant I deem the most competitive and like to leave it at that. When 1 variant has + 13 CT armor and the rest dont, you have to use only that variant for competitive play because it is flat out superior to the other omnis. Also, lore and true omnimechs are the reason this game has flavor and is enjoyable, if we didnt have lore based design decisions, we may as well go play counterstrike or call of duty.

[Deathlike]

Lily from animove, on 21 July 2015 - 09:54 AM, said:

People initially hoped for the Omnimechs because they don't like to have "obsolete" mechs, whcih now is reverted
And no those mechs would not have "no value" only in case you all equip them with the same laodout, but if you do, you do not understand the entire purpose of omnimechs: swapping hardpoints and making laodouts on one and the same mech. But this is gettign irrelevant if variant X is more suited for thsi build. each OMNI-mech should be equally good with the same configs.

The irony is what you're suggesting makes them obsolete. I sold variants because the CT quirks were worse. In the case of the Nova-S, the CT quirk was WORSE than the others because of the AMS. Ironically, it now got THE BEST torso twist quirk of all the Novas after some requirking.

Also, I did actually buy the Nova-A when it was on sale to take advantage of the omnipod set quirks to boot (although, I regret the build a bit since it was limiting to have 3E, 1E on the side torso).

Edited by Deathlike, 21 July 2015 - 10:19 AM.

[Star Colonel Silver Surat]

Taking an Adder "gimps" you from the start. A difference of 10% Acceleration here or there won't change that. It's not really worth worrying about.

[Alwrathandabout42ninjas]

Star Colonel Silver Surat, on 21 July 2015 - 10:23 AM, said:

Taking an Adder "gimps" you from the start. A difference of 10% Acceleration here or there won't change that. It's not really worth worrying about.

No but taking an Ice Ferret with the CT energy hardpoint and CT armor is clearly the only one to play over the rest. Its blatantly superior to the other Ice Ferrets, and thats just one example.

Also, why do people hate the adder so much? FFS it has the most pod space out of any light in the game, is 35 tons so has the best in class armor/internal structure, has endo AND ferro, manages to have decent speed, and is tiny. The only thing it doesnt have is JJ's or ecm. L2P?

Edited by Alwrath, 21 July 2015 - 10:29 AM.

[Chuck Jager]

MischiefSC, on 21 July 2015 - 08:11 AM, said:

Wow. That is almost as bad as every IS package. You have to buy all three in the hopes that 1 of them isn't terrible.

Truth hurts

Clan are only better in TT silly rabbit. It is still easier to level 3 overpriced clan "omni" mechs with one good shared build than 3 IS mechs with only one good build on one chassis.

[One Medic Army]

Alwrath, on 21 July 2015 - 10:18 AM, said:

I keep every single mech I purchase. I find my own build for each variant I deem the most competitive and like to leave it at that. When 1 variant has + 13 CT armor and the rest dont, you have to use only that variant for competitive play because it is flat out superior to the other omnis. Also, lore and true omnimechs are the reason this game has flavor and is enjoyable, if we didnt have lore based design decisions, we may as well go play counterstrike or call of duty.

I also keep every mech I purchase, and I said in my first post that unequal CT quirks are a separate issue and not a reason to ditch making the CTs distinctive.

[Lily from animove]

Deathlike, on 21 July 2015 - 10:18 AM, said:

The irony is what you're suggesting makes them obsolete. I sold variants because the CT quirks were worse. In the case of the Nova-S, the CT quirk was WORSE than the others because of the AMS. Ironically, it now got THE BEST torso twist quirk of all the Novas after some requirking.

Also, I did actually buy the Nova-A when it was on sale to take advantage of the omnipod set quirks to boot (although, I regret the build a bit since it was limiting to have 3E, 1E on the side torso).

See another reason why CT's should never have these kind of unique quirks, it makes no sense except making people do weird decisons they later regret and then maybe get mad at PGI as well.

Star Colonel Silver Surat, on 21 July 2015 - 10:23 AM, said:

Taking an Adder "gimps" you from the start. A difference of 10% Acceleration here or there won't change that. It's not really worth worrying about.

i have tons of 1000+ damage sessions my adder pulled of in his tiny life in CW, and my best adder dmg CW match is 1848 damage. the adder is far from "gimped".
People saying this should worry about their playstyle in some mechs.

Alwrath, on 21 July 2015 - 10:25 AM, said:

No but taking an Ice Ferret with the CT energy hardpoint and CT armor is clearly the only one to play over the rest. Its blatantly superior to the other Ice Ferrets, and thats just one example.

Also, why do people hate the adder so much? FFS it has the most pod space out of any light in the game, is 35 tons so has the best in class armor/internal structure, has endo AND ferro, manages to have decent speed, and is tiny. The only thing it doesnt have is JJ's. L2P?

yeh thats the issue, in the forum you have to argue with people hardly having some real decent idea how the game works. No wonder PGI regulary pulls of weird decisions with those feedbacks.