No replies to this topic

[Arctourus]

Bored, have a few minutes, so I figured I would try to impart some common sense (but probably just start a forum war).

Quirks were, and should be, a way to add a little uniqueness to a chassis, sometimes to its benefit and sometimes not. Think of it like a car...it's like when you hear someone say "yeah, the '56 chevy was a great car but it suffered from transmission issues." Now that we've had quirks for while and everyone is arguing about how good they are or should be on certain mechs, we have to keep in mind what they exist for.

In the realm of a game like this, they really have two reasons to exist. One, they fulfill a vaguely lore-oriented function of giving a certain mech a flavor....such as a mech that was designed from the drawing board to house lots of medium lasers, or lrms, or ac5s being in some way optimized or more efficient in using that type of weapon. Makes sense, right? The second, and harder to quantify, is basically making a mech that is perhaps less effective on the battlefield a better weapons platform for the people who want to use it, or in other words, balance.

When quirks first appeared, they took the mechs that were, to be honest, very weak, and used the quirks to give them a buff in certain areas to help level the playing field. Since then, we have seen mechs that have always performed well, such as the timberwolf, get quirks that make them subtly worse. And in the middle, we have the mechs that have always performed just like they should, and have therefore received no quirks or very few.

I think this is where some people get confused. Some mechs, such as the shadow hawk, were once revered as top mechs, but are now rare since they have few quirks. The reason for that is that they have always performed well and don't need buffing to improve. Now, when people look at mechs, the whole discussion is on the quirks, and good mechs that don't need them are somehow viewed as inferior or nerfed. The question, however, is about balance though: and that question is "is it necessary?"

Certain mechs were meant be either excellent or poor performers. Every mech on the field doesn't need to equal each other. All of these threads on "buffing this" or "nerfing that" are essentially a slippery slope. If you keep adding to a mech's performance to "balance" it, you'll just end up with a '72 Pinto that inexplicably outperforms a Ferrari. The aim should fall less in the realm of balance and making every mech roughly equal. It should fall more into giving each mech a certain flavor, a certain strength to go along with certain weaknesses. This might help spur the growth of role warfare, that elusive unicorn of joy that everyone is seeking.

Ok, tired of typing. Complain away at my temerity.