80 replies to this topic

[Mcgral18]

KraftySOT, on 19 August 2015 - 12:43 PM, said:

If they lower the medium laser heat.

I want my medium pulse heat lowered too. Because ours was raised because theirs was raised.

Moar wub.

It was already decreased to the proper 4 (same as the ML).

[Lugh]

Gas Guzzler, on 19 August 2015 - 12:22 PM, said:

Well, large groups of Clan players believe that IS medium lasers are as good as c ER MLs but just have a different role, due to their lower heat and lower duration, so if this buff were to come out, the tears would be real, and PGI would be labeled as hating clans, favoring IS, and people would demand refunds because of how underpowered Clan mechs would become as a result of this.

That said, I think that MLs can use some help, as they significantly underperform compared to cER MLs.

You can have that heat level as long as the Clan Lasers get the 5 heat the ER ML is supposed to have as well, now mind you that's 5 heat over a 10 second firing window...

[Jack Shayu Walker]

Rhaythe, on 19 August 2015 - 12:30 PM, said:

Arguably, should we be buffing up toward the ever-shrinking, twitch-based TTK, or nerfing down toward a more tactical, lower TTK?

Obviously my vote is the latter.

I noticed that these TTK complaints really flared up again after the hit reg fixes. I don't want to say your quick death is your fault per say, but... well the weapons aren't any more powerful friend lag just got nerfed. It's not to say that I don't feel the sting occasionally, I'm definitely a lot more afraid of large pulse lasers than I used to be, but I don't think it means we need to start nerfing all the weapons.

I feel as though the smaller IS lasers need a shameless buff, we can talk about nerfing certain weapons on both sides once the IS has more viable small arms.

[M4rtyr]

Do people still not understand the difference between Clans and IS?

They were never ment to be balanced with weapons or equipment. They were balanced more on numbers, Clan mechs were all better pure and simple and hence had higher BV so you'd have fewer/less tonnage in Clan mechs than you'd have for the same BV of IS mechs. Aslo Tactics, clanners were ment to only fight 1v1 and not focus... house rules apply here if you actually wanted to play that way or not but it was a balancing mechanic.

However PGI in their infinate wisdom, decided to throw the Clans in without ANYTHING to balance them. So yeah you have big questions as far as equipment levels go. Why someo people would say an IS ML is on par with a C-ERML... well yeah, we have the comminuty element here sadly.

[Jack Shayu Walker]

KraftySOT, on 19 August 2015 - 12:43 PM, said:

If they lower the medium laser heat.

I want my medium pulse heat lowered too. Because ours was raised because theirs was raised.

Moar wub.

Naturally, pulse variants are supposed to share heat stats with their standard counterparts.

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

M4rtyr, on 19 August 2015 - 01:10 PM, said:

Do people still not understand the difference between Clans and IS?

They were never ment to be balanced with weapons or equipment. They were balanced more on numbers....

Just gonna stop you right there... Starcraft does that with Zerg vs Terran vs Protoss.

Would you REALLY want to be a zergling with only one life against a Protoss Zealot?

[Night Thastus]

IS meds have been like that since closed beta. It's absolutely nothing to do with clans.

However, the heat cap on all 'Mechs is also 60, not the lore 30. So stop complaining, it's already generating WAY less heat than it would to a normal 'Mech.

[Dimento Graven]

Lord Scarlett Johan, on 19 August 2015 - 01:13 PM, said:

Just gonna stop you right there... Starcraft does that with Zerg vs Terran vs Protoss.

Would you REALLY want to be a zergling with only one life against a Protoss Zealot?

AND YET, that is ACTUALLY how IS and Clans were balanced...

You can't escape it, you can't give ONE side superior technology, and the SAME numbers as the other side, and sit there claim that you've achieved "balanced".

The amount of BS that attitude is rivals Herford, TX's yearly output...

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

Dimento Graven, on 19 August 2015 - 01:14 PM, said:

AND YET, that is ACTUALLY how IS and Clans were balanced...

You can't escape it, you can't give ONE side superior technology, and the SAME numbers as the other side, and sit there claim that you've achieved "balanced".

The amount of BS that attitude is rivals Herford, TX's yearly output...

It works fine in strategy/tactical games. For FPS'? Hardly.

They should've either stuck no later than the War of 3039 (where there is no Clan-tech) or gone full Post-Jihad (where the IS is almost on par).

[LookUpGaming]

Gas Guzzler, on 19 August 2015 - 12:22 PM, said:

Well, large groups of Clan players believe that IS medium lasers are as good as c ER MLs but just have a different role, due to their lower heat and lower duration, so if this buff were to come out, the tears would be real, and PGI would be labeled as hating clans, favoring IS, and people would demand refunds because of how underpowered Clan mechs would become as a result of this.

That said, I think that MLs can use some help, as they significantly underperform compared to cER MLs.

Lol. Need to get some math for dummies up in here if some people think a clan er medium is equal to an IS medium.....

I mean 3 IS Large Lasers do 27 damage for 21 heat @ 450m and weigh in at a whopping 15 tons. 4 Clan ER Mediums do 28 damage for 24 heat @ 405m and only weight 4 tons. Yeah FOUR.

[Jack Shayu Walker]

Lugh, on 19 August 2015 - 12:57 PM, said:

You can have that heat level as long as the Clan Lasers get the 5 heat the ER ML is supposed to have as well, now mind you that's 5 heat over a 10 second firing window...

I'm not arguing that they get their lower heat back because of core rules from TT, I'm arguing they should get it back because that is how their lasers were originally in this game, and their (SL-ML) lasers are currently weaker than our (SL-ML) lasers. Relative to their IS counterparts, there is nothing wrong with our armaments at this point, other than maybe our LURMS.

[Deathlike]

So, we're still in the "IS laser heat wave" of 2013 (or 2012 even?) that was started before the Great Mech Depression?

Heat neutrality with 2 ML... apparently still OP.

[Gas Guzzler]

LookUpGaming, on 19 August 2015 - 01:19 PM, said:

Lol. Need to get some math for dummies up in here if some people think a clan er medium is equal to an IS medium.....

I mean 3 IS Large Lasers do 27 damage for 21 heat @ 450m and weigh in at a whopping 15 tons. 4 Clan ER Mediums do 28 damage for 24 heat @ 405m and only weight 4 tons. Yeah FOUR.

The argument is that the 0.15 second longer cERML duration is a huge disadvantage. Not saying I agree with it, but yeah.

[Jack Shayu Walker]

Dimento Graven, on 19 August 2015 - 01:14 PM, said:

AND YET, that is ACTUALLY how IS and Clans were balanced...

You can't escape it, you can't give ONE side superior technology, and the SAME numbers as the other side, and sit there claim that you've achieved "balanced".

The amount of BS that attitude is rivals Herford, TX's yearly output...

Which is why we need to balance clan and IS tech so they are actually different but equal. Just because they aren't now doesn't mean they can't be with some smart balancing. PGI has stated that they can't do 10 vs. 12; we just need to move on and focus on how the weapon systems can be balanced.

[Iqfish]

Rhaythe, on 19 August 2015 - 12:19 PM, said:

There's a lot in this game that isn't exactly on par with Sarna and BattleTech in general.

[Dimento Graven]

Lord Scarlett Johan, on 19 August 2015 - 01:17 PM, said:

It works fine in strategy/tactical games. For FPS'? Hardly.

They should've either stuck no later than the War of 3039 (where there is no Clan-tech) or gone full Post-Jihad (where the IS is almost on par).

In strategy and tactical games you have some balance, one way or the other.

They COULD actually implement 10v12 in CW (which is where things are supposed to eventually really count, right?), but for whatever reason, PGI has refused to do so.

I get that in the public queues, you can't do it, I get that, and it is what it is, however, in CW where wins and losses result in long term affects, you have GOT to find some methodology of providing REAL balance between the sides, or what is the f'ing point of even trying?

As it is now, if BOTH sides play equally well, the Clans will win more often than not JUST BECAUSE of their range, speed, and durability advantages. If IS and Clans score the SAME amount of damage, MORE IS 'MECHS have died, because it takes less damage to kill an IS 'mech than it does to kill the equivalent clanner.

[Dimento Graven]

Jack Shayu Walker, on 19 August 2015 - 01:25 PM, said:

...
PGI has stated that they can't do 10 vs. 12; we just need to move on and focus on how the weapon systems can be balanced.

First I call bullsheets on PGI's declaration of "can't do it" for CW, that is an absolute bald face lie.

They could do it, they just refuse to.

NOW, you can't BALANCE on weapons now because the moment IS gets near to par with Clans, the Clanners start an unending pogrom of forum bitching and threats to leave and take their money with them...

HOW, the hell are we going to get "balance" yet SOMEHOW have the Clans still be 'technologically superior'?

The answer is you can't. You can't have one thing and it's exact opposite coexisting side by side. You can't have balance, yet have ONE SIDE be superior, the definitions of "balance" and "superior" exclude each other, definitively.

[Jack Shayu Walker]

Dimento Graven, on 19 August 2015 - 01:26 PM, said:

In strategy and tactical games you have some balance, one way or the other.

They COULD actually implement 10v12 in CW (which is where things are supposed to eventually really count, right?), but for whatever reason, PGI has refused to do so.

I get that in the public queues, you can't do it, I get that, and it is what it is, however, in CW where wins and losses result in long term affects, you have GOT to find some methodology of providing REAL balance between the sides, or what is the f'ing point of even trying?

As it is now, if BOTH sides play equally well, the Clans will win more often than not JUST BECAUSE of their range, speed, and durability advantages. If IS and Clans score the SAME amount of damage, MORE IS 'MECHS have died, because it takes less damage to kill an IS 'mech than it does to kill the equivalent clanner.

Sooooo... let's talk about balancing weapons, not whining for a feature that isn't going to come.

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

Dimento Graven, on 19 August 2015 - 01:26 PM, said:

In strategy and tactical games you have some balance, one way or the other.

They COULD actually implement 10v12 in CW (which is where things are supposed to eventually really count, right?), but for whatever reason, PGI has refused to do so.

I get that in the public queues, you can't do it, I get that, and it is what it is, however, in CW where wins and losses result in long term affects, you have GOT to find some methodology of providing REAL balance between the sides, or what is the f'ing point of even trying?

As it is now, if BOTH sides play equally well, the Clans will win more often than not JUST BECAUSE of their range, speed, and durability advantages. If IS and Clans score the SAME amount of damage, MORE IS 'MECHS have died, because it takes less damage to kill an IS 'mech than it does to kill the equivalent clanner.

Oh I know... There really are quite a few routes they could take to bring parity between the tech bases. They just seem to refuse to even try it (although there is this mythical huge balance pass in the works).

Hell in MW4, the IS weapons weren't always strictly inferior like the missiles. IS missile weapons, while twice as heavy had twice the DPS as their clan counterpart.

I've never understood why they never do things like that, or other small true quirks.

[Dimento Graven]

Jack Shayu Walker, on 19 August 2015 - 01:30 PM, said:

Sooooo... let's talk about balancing weapons, not whining for a feature that isn't going to come.

If you're going to talk about 'balancing weapons' then the following HAS to take place as well:

1. Absolutely all Clanners must give up on the notion of 'Technological Superiority'. If the weapon systems and 'mech systems are to be balanced, you CAN NOT have one side be 'superior' to another. That's not balance.
2. Durability also needs to be addressed. IS 'mechs are no where near as durable as clans if they load XL's, and the only way to get close to matching Clan speed and alpha potential is to load an XL. If they load "standard" engines, then they either have to give up significant speed, or potential alpha power (or more probably BOTH) to match to durability of clan 'mechs.

Without those two things on the table, we can't realistically discuss anything.