772 replies to this topic

[Bigg Fatt NooB]

(edit before post-this is going to be a long one. I have had a number of concerns about MWO balance issues and decided to put them all in one post. If you have limited time or little patience, I suggest scrolling past.)

I don't see how any rebalancing can work with only taking the tactical level into consideration and not the strategic.

What I mean is that, if you look at the lore and history of the BTU it was never technological parity that gave the IS a fighting chance against Clans, it was changes in overall strategies to take advantage of Clan weaknesses in tactical and strategic inflexibility. Sure IS eventually started catch up, but never really got to an equal level, particularly not in the part of the timeline MWO is set in now.

Let's look at some IS strategies that worked against Clans.

1) Overwhelming numbers: Once the IS figured out that Clanners would bid the LEAST amount of troops they thought was necessary for a battle, the Great Houses would hit them with nearly everything they had because they had learned by then that anything less than 2-1 odds was doomed.

Problem is in MWO I will never be able to field numerical superiority, numbers always being equal Clanners will always out-range and out-alpha me.

2) Artillery (vehicle and mech based): One of the most effective tactics used by the IS was to figure out where the Clans were moving and carpet bomb the area, thus softening up the Omnimechs before primary battle was engaged, thus making Clanners easier to kill up close and personal.

Problem is in MWO is that artillery and air strikes are a joke and largely ineffectual. At least gimme Arrow IV's or thumper cannons so I can get some splash damage in and put a hurt on them before they get in my face and eviscerate me with 12 PULSE LASERS every 2 seconds or some other kind of sky-high alpha.

3) TRAPS: Clanners are not nearly so scary if you blow their legs off before they get to you. Also, surprise attacks from behind are very effective against anybody. Furthermore, defensive emplacements and automated turrets greatly protect me and augment my firepower vs. Clan aggressors.

Problem is in MWO I cannot construct mech bunkers, lay minefields, rig buildings or cliffsides with explosives, place auto-turrets, dig mech punjis, put up hide-blinds, or in any way modify the environment to my advantage. I face Clanners with environmental equality (even he is landing on MY world that I've been on forever on he's never been to before) and he still outranges and out guns me.

4) Logistic warfare: Once the Great Houses realized that their equipment was hopelessly outclassed by Clantech, they had to find ways get around it. One of the best ways they found to do so was to deny Clanners vital war material. Clan ACs are of little use without ammunition. Clan Lasers have no range advantage if their optics are burnt out and they have no replacement. Clan Omnipods are of no use without parts to effect repairs. Clan super-durable engines can't run without fuel.

Problem is in MWO I can't destroy my enemy's supply lines and deny him the ability to make war. Now, I will grant you that this has no bearing on PUG games but IT NEEDS TO BE A THING IN CW. CW is meant to be a persistent campaign and as such the costs of waging war need to be accounted for. As it stands anybody can take part in a CW battle and get mauled or win but suffer catastrophically heavy losses and then do it all again as if having suffered NO losses at all just moments ago. If you are going have a game mode that is meant to simulate long-term campaign warfare, then there needs to be the rewards and consequences of long-term campaign warfare. I'm given to understand PGI may have some of the these considerations in the works, so we'll see how it goes, but right now CW is nothing more than a long winded PUG match.

5) Zellbrigen aka Clan Honor: The thing about the introduction of Clans in the original tabletop was the fact that on a player vs. player/IS vs. Clan basis, superior Clantech was balanced quite bit by their much more rigid rules of engagement. There were things Clanners were prohibited by tradition from doing. If a Clanner violated these traditions, he/she would find themselves stripped of honor, prestige, respect, their bloodname or even the membership in the Clan. This led to much less tactical and strategic flexibility. Drawbacks that Comstar was able to exploit at the actual Battle of Tukkayid. Along with Zellbrigen came the concept of bidding. For those unaware bidding was a Clan tradition of kinda like a reverse auction. Competing Clans would pledge certain amounts of troops to a certain battle and whom ever bid the lowest won the right to go after whatever objective was on the table. Another facet of Zellbrigen was that members of any Clan believed they were superior to everyone else, even other Clans, which led to a marked lack of unity between different Clans. When they fought the Comguard on Tukkayid, they did so individually against a united Comguard. This allowed the Comguard to take on 7 Clans by themselves and win the overall battle. If the Clans had committed all available forces and worked together, even Comstar would have fallen.

Problem is in MWO there is no way on Earth to make Clan drivers act like true Clanners. Clanners in MWO are not going to bid, they are never going to follow Zellbrigen, there is no way to use such concepts to bring balance to MWO like they did in the original source material.

Now, I realize that it may sound like I'm ripping into PGI and Clan players, but I'm really not. I am just trying to illustrate the inescapable fact that trying to balance the game on a mech to mech level isn't going work. You're either going to get mega-buffed IS mechs or uber-nerfed Clan mechs which will result in cheers from us IS guys, Clanners walking away from the game, and new players wondering why they would ever pay so much more c-bills and/or REAL MONEY for Clan Mechs with no demonstrable advantage.

Now this whole sensor quirk thing is kinda pointless in my view. If my enemy can outrange me by a fair margin and has the tech by way of targeting computers and buff modules to put said advantage to effective use, then no amount of sensor quirkery is going to help me. If dude can SEE my RT or LL smoking from all the way across the map, tell all his laser sniper buddies to focus on said component at ranges I can do nothing about, then a fraction of a second's difference in targeting info is really the least of my concerns. But, gimme my Thumper Cannon and I can DO something about him.

This re-balancing thing is being looked at from the wrong angle IMO. I think the mechs we use to play the game are fine as-is. What is needed is more options in strategy and tactics available as to HOW we can play, not this nerf/buff cold war we've contending with. We need new weapon options, new game modes - particularly in CW - and (I know this is a pipe dream) modifiable terrain - again mostly for defensive CW play.

Lastly, and this is just me talking here, I have put over $700 into this game so far, and I made those purchases based on the abilities of mechs in question, both in fitting with my playstyle and the expectation of how much enjoyment I would receive for my investment. If said purchases are to be neutered of the very characteristics that I paid REAL money to enjoy, then that reeks of bait and switch and I want my MC back.

[Josef Koba]

I'm probably in the minority here, but I like weapons quirks. Sure, some (maybe most) needed to be revised down slightly. Some needed to be dramatically revised down. But they gave mechs different flavors. Some people min/maxed the heck out of things, and that's going to be the case with any game (the AD&D 2nd Edition rule books even addressed it, and that was back in the days of pen and paper). I let quirks inform my decisions in mech building, not rule them. But I have no problem facing people on the battlefield that DO let quirks rule their builds. No problem at all. The point is, though, that some mechs were designed a certain way, to use a certain class of weapons and/or be a little tankier and/or be a little bit more maneuverable, and that's kind of cool in my book. I like it, and I hope that weapons quirks aren't wholly removed (which it appears they largely are in the PTS as of now, save a few random one and a few negative ones here and there).

I like the idea of bringing certain flavor, offensively, to the battle. Of course, I'm an offensive-minded player. It'd be neat to have real role warfare in which your lights did other things and etc, etc, things that have been written about on here ad infinitum. The way the quirks are on the PTS, I don't feel like I have any offensive flavor. I feel like I have some maneuverability debuff (some of them are pretty massive) and, for the mechs I pilot most, utterly gimped sensors. A 250% increase in targeting data? And my sensors are worse the closer the enemy is? Good lord. That'll be fun in the PUG queue.

I'd be the first to state a desire to increase TTK, and I like some of the quirks regarding internal structure. The recent changes to armor have been somewhat baffling, when you have some mechs that have more armor than a 100 ton Atlas in some arbitrary effort to make them more survivable. But even the internal structure stuff doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Take the Atlas-D for instance: 334 more internal structure. Sweet. Makes sense since it's geared towards brawling. Wait. Plus 400% short range target scan time? Woah. I guess just shoot center mass. It has some bonuses to acceleration and deceleration and stuff, so that's cool too. The Atlas-D-DC however, has no bonus to internal structure. It also accelerates, decelerates, and turns slower than the D model. It's just weird that we've heard complaints that the current quirk system shoehorns mechs into a certain role/class of weapons, yet the you pretty much don't want to use the D-DC as a brawler, not when you can use the far more sturdy D model. I guess because the D-DC can use ECM, which I hear is going to be nerfed hard, it doesn't need to be as sturdy.

I'm not sure what, exactly, the KGC-000 is supposed to be used for now. Not brawling, I guess, since it's slower to get information at short and medium range. It also doesn't torso twist as fast anymore (-10%), nor as far (-20 degrees). But hey, the KGC-0000 and -000B both get some internal structure.

It's hard to say. I haven't played around with it too much, but it just feels off. Not what I expected at all. Weapons quirks might have painted mechs into a particular build, but this doesn't seem to be doing anything else but painting mechs into particular roles. But from what Paul said, I suppose that's the point. All I know is that I'm never enthused when I pull up my mech and see ten lines of negative quirks. It's certainly a psychological thing. I'm just not sure this is the right answer, and I'd be seriously bummed out if all weapons quirks were removed, rather than just tamed. They won't have any flavor, instead it'll be "Oh, this mech doesn't turn as fast and it's targeting system is terrible," or, "I guess I'll bring out the Atlas Whatever since it's long range targeting is only -150% rather than -400%." M-e-h.

But I'm sure that if this is implemented, we'll all just carry on playing like we always do; we'll get used to the new status quo without much of an effort. I've always maintained that I can pilot anything; that I can adjust my builds and tactics no matter what shift is made on the battlefield. I've generally refrained from complaining about any of the changes. But this is perhaps the first time in almost three years of playing that I've genuinely not liked something, or at least not been all that excited about it. I think they can do better than this. We shall see what the future brings.

[PholkLorr]

Was excited about the rebalance. The first quirkening was a step in the right direction to make some of the obviously rubbish mechs usable.

Nevertheless, even with quirks, i always felt that the clans had the best assault, heavy, medium and lights (just the ACH but thats all that matters). 200% more survivability (due to clan xl), longer range, more damage, half weight missiles, free CASE, superior Gauss rifle. The only thing balanced was the ACs.

When i saw the PTS quirks, i got so pissed i typed a 30 minutes rant into my MWO group chat on whatsapp.

What is the point of playing 1 energy slot Cicada or Spider? With quirks, they were still tier 10 pieces of crap. Now they're tier 100 pieces of crap still.

Also, nerfing the mobility of most IS assaults while buffing clan assault? What?

Paul thought that sensor quirks were worth the weapon quirks that IS had?

Nevertheless, being a winning kind of player, i already had the best mechs (ie. clan mechs). When PGI releases this trash, i'll just stop playing my IS mechs and play only my clans.

Ironic that Paul said that he spent the last few months focusing on CW. Because all his efforts at making it better (IF it really is better) are for naught since there will be no IS for the clanners to fight. Everyone can see that clan is clearly the superior side.

I thought Ghostcrawler in WOW was bad at balance, but Paul easily makes Ghostcrawler look like a GOD of balance. No sheet.

Edited by PholkLorr, 12 September 2015 - 12:49 PM.

[Taufey]

Lord Squeezy Fetladral, on 11 September 2015 - 03:27 PM, said:

How about this for a crazy idea to make info tech relevant and deal with pin point alpha with no lock:
If you have no lock, your weapons don't pin point as well and will drift a little from each other with the effect getting worse the farther you are away from your target. If you want super accurate pinpoint damage at long range, you need a radar lock. ...

Like the idea, and it could also be used to bring the feel of TT range adjustments, and other adjustable factors to individualize chassis and weapons, i.g. sniper mechs get tighter damage grouping than the norm at long range, but suffer greater than norm at close range (that can also be used on the gauss rifle to drop the silly charge mechanic), and give pulse lasers an extended close range to reflect their better chance of scoring a hit in the TT.

Mizeur, on 11 September 2015 - 03:37 PM, said:

This should've started with rebalancing baseline Clan and IS equipment against each other, then balancing chassis and variants.

The entire Clan OP issue goes back to FASA and their belief that role playing is a viable way to balance hard number game mechanics. The TT BV system would allow the IS to field heavier, or more, mechs against the Clans, but their was nothing forcing Clan players to the Clan 1v1 and no physical attacks honor system.
With the weight and space advantage in place, Clan weapons could probably be dropped to IS weapon ranges and dange as a start point, and then work with those and DoT increases if making them better at long range is the goal.

coe7, on 11 September 2015 - 03:38 PM, said:

I honestly assumed, that BV would have worked on high hardpoint vs low hardpoint stuff and balanced weapon values. This game revolves around hardpoint locations, weapon values and mobility(mobility decides available tonnage). Everything else in unimportant.

Any mech with primary high hardpoint layout would have gotten a 25% HP nerf.

Any mech with primary low hardpoint layout would have gotten a 35% HP boost and better weapon quirks than those mechs that only expose 1/4th of their profile....

Agreed that hard point mounting elevation needs to be considered. It wasn't a factor in TT, but it is in MWO.

MechWarrior James, on 11 September 2015 - 03:40 PM, said:

As a trueborn warrior and loyalist of Clan Smoke Jaguar, I am disheartened and frustrated by PGI's insistence on "game balance" between IS battlemechs and Clan omnimechs, as well as the constant nerfing of our omnimechs to achieve it.

I have supported this game financially over the past year through the purchase of individual omnimech chassis (via mech credits and a la carte), the Clan Wave 3 package, and Faction content items, but am deeply dissatisfied at seeing the omnimechs I have bought with real money not being allowed to operate at their full potential. Paul's above indication that there are more nerfs to come to bring the omnimechs down ever further below some wholly subjective 70% OP rate is troubling in the extreme, and leaves me questioning whether or not I should continue to support this game any further.

Let me be clear...I do not expect "god mechs," but I do expect omni technology to be utilized as it is in the lore, or else there is no real point in playing in a Clan faction if my weapons and support systems are going to be neutered in such a fashion. The heat spikes are maddening enough on chassis that were designed to carry multiple weapons of the same types. I love the look and feel of the game, but the nerfs have to stop if I am going to continue playing and supporting it financially.

Seyla.

More on this in another post.

Peiper, on 12 September 2015 - 04:24 AM, said:

Think of World War II late war tanks. You have the Sherman and T-34/85 (IS mechs) and the Panthers and Tigers (Clan mechs). Could the allied tanks beat the German tanks 1 v 1? Yes, but only if the crew was top-notch and the German tanks were piloted by monkeys. THEY ARE NOT EQUAL TECH. They aren't even in the same league. Giving the allied tanks the ability to move faster, turn their torsos faster, and adding a bunch of ghost armor is STUPID.

To beat the clans, the inner sphere had to use every trick in the book. Okay, fine, so we don't have armor, mine fields, artillery, infantry, fast hovercraft, cardboard decoy mechs, etc... But the clans don't have elementals and warships either. Still, we can use battle value to approximate an even shot between IS and Clan.

Just as the allies had to sacrifice a couple shermans or more to knock out a tiger (the oft-spoken of - what if 5 shermans met a tiger on an open plane? scenario), it might take more tonnage for the IS to knock out the clan mechs. And it should.

Obviously we can't port battle value from tabletop into MWO, but we can create our own mech value, the same way they did for the quirk system. But instead of quirking mechs so they are equal, leave the mechs the way they are naturally, and publish the values for all the mechs. Then use those values in place of tonnage. Here is an explanation of how it could work.

http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__4683938

Now, if that means we'll see Stormcrows vs. Victors and Timberwolves vs. King Crabs, good. That is appropriate. I also would consider allowing uneven teams. If a binary (ten Clanners) want to fight a dozen IS pilots, they could take better mechs to fill up their collective team drop decks. However, from my experience in private lobbies, one extra guy on a team even with a mech like a cicada, tips the odds of winning WAY in the favor of those who have another pilot and mech to shoot at before you and your buddies are killed. However, mech values could allow for those scenarios. (It's also why I gave all mechs a base 200 battle value in my example. because having another mech and pilot of ANY kind on the field is AT LEAST as valuable as any mech. So, if the best of the best mechs are mech value of 400, it is still only half due to the mech type.

kka, on 12 September 2015 - 06:04 AM, said:

To some people here: Why complain why IS and clan are not balanced in PTS?

For now, you should be testing whether the variants of the same chassis are balanced.

TorinZ, on 12 September 2015 - 07:23 AM, said:

I don't really mind the removal of the weapon quirks, ...
What they should do though is take some of those weapon quirks they had developed and turn them into weapon modules. That would make them all a standard ##% boost for all, and provide a player of more choices in how to tweak their given mech. And then the player has to decide when building their mech what modules to take with the limited weapon slots they have. Do you take the range and cool down module for your UAC5, or do you swap one of those with a reduced jam module for example.
Frankly what made bad mechs "bad" was how easy it may be to kill them, not that the weapons didn't work. Dragon CT was why people stayed away from them. Awesome's torsos were barn shaped. So the quirks for structure/armor will help them. They didn't really need weapon quirks to make them better. And don't argue that the Awesome 8Q needed the quirks to be viable to use it's PPC's, that is a PPC heat issue not a Mech issue. Some of the older MWO mechs probably need more slot inflation from the stock builds to allow for more options compared to newer mech slot options possibly.
...

I liked the idea of using weapon quirks as a prod for getting players to keep at least some elements of the stock build. Steiner T-bolt variants mounted a PPC in place of the large laser. So a slight quirk for a PPC mounted in the right arm would be a good carrot to keep that stock weapon system in place. With the quirk applied to every energy hard point, it doesn't give the incentive to play a stock T-bolt. It gives the player the incentice to play a baby Awesome. As implemented, weapon quirks encouraged weapon boating, which was a rare thing to see on IS mechs in the lore.
Agree on what made most 'bad' IS mechs bad to begin with. The only reason the Stalker was popular in the beginning was that it was the first 85ton mech in the game, and a cpoule of the variants were sold as soon as they were leveled, because why would you keep a mech that was identical except for fewer weapon hardpoints. Then game already had torso twist rates and arc, acceleration rates, max engine size, jump jets, ECM, etc. to balance the variants against each other without weapon quirks.

Jaeger Gonzo, on 12 September 2015 - 07:26 AM, said:

As much I would prefer the straight 10v16 formula.
Even 12v12 can be fixed to asymmetrical flavor, giving IS just more respawns.

Or adjust number, toughness, attack power of the turrets in CW play.

Yokaiko, on 12 September 2015 - 07:27 AM, said:

That is a MWO issue, and its systemic, the(stock) -8Q wasn't a hot mech in TT, but when you have PPC firing at 2.5 times the rate against the same 10 second heat cycle, AND nerfed DHS, yeah reach an un-tenable level of heat generation, this is actually worse on the clan side.

Our laser vommit Timber in MWO would be HEAT NEUTRAL in TT, this is a mech that shuts down on the third alpha.

The issue arises because the TT game was designed to not allow gameplay get bogged them down with paper work. It ignores a weapon's fire rate. The Solaris VII system added rate of fire and the extra heat from it, but it didn't catch on because of the extra paper work.

Rodo, on 12 September 2015 - 08:02 AM, said:

This game is missing:
...
Coolant: Better performance without paying MC for it.
...

Unlocking the 9by9 pilot efficiency gives you MC coolshot ability for c-bills.

[Almeras]

please consider;

Dynamically BV mech values and a reward multiplier based on real time chassis and weapon popularity in the queue. Both would encourage players out of meta yet still allow people to play how they wish.

pin point damage cap (be it hard or soft) from a single source.
It'll will fix all the time to die problems with out some mathematical puzzle or horrid xbox cone
bonus it's concept many gamers are familiar with.
Easily tweaked.

[IraqiWalker]

Peiper, on 12 September 2015 - 01:33 AM, said:

Regarding my statement and IraqiWalker's reaction: OP HERE
Quirks should simply make crappy mechs playable, not make them equal.

Mech Value should replace tonnage in matchmaking and especially CW.



Sigh....

Is mech value that much different to calculate than tonnage? It is easy to calculate for community warfare, because there's no matchmaking: here's an example.

1. Every mech has a value of 200 - 400. Every drop deck is set at 800-1200. So, you could take two 400 value mechs and 2 crappy mechs, or you could take 4 average mechs. Is that really different from what we have now? This could also be used to de-segregate clan and inner sphere mechs for future factions like the Rasalhague Dominion and Nova Cat infested Draconis Combine - as well as allow for multi-tech groups like the Kell Hounds and Wolfs Dragoons.

2. In the case of lone wolf public matches, you're looking at a similar situation, but you add a value for the player's tier. So, make each tier worth 20 points. So, a top tier timberwolf would be worth 500 points, or the lowest tier commando would be 220 points. If you have 24 lone wolves it becomes easy to sort out who drops where. (You could do a two-part segregation if you have a big enough pool of players too. First, tier determines which bucket(s) you're eligible for, then mech value determines which team in that bucket you drop with. THIS IS NO DIFFERENT than what we have now, only tonnage determines a mechs value rather than the value of the mech itself.

3. The case of team queued public matches becomes muddier. Teams will have a totaled team mech value + pilot skill rating. Match them up with other teams so that to total ratings for both sides are roughly similar. Isn't that kind of what we do now?

RE: crappy mechs in public queues:

Now, if you want to encourage people to play crappy mechs in the public queues, simply adjust rewards accordingly. If you pilot a 400 rated Timber Wolf you get CBills at a .50 rate. If you pilot a 200 rated Commando, you get paid at a 1.5 rate. If you pilot a 300 rated Dragon, you'd get paid at a 1.0 rate. So, the Commando pilot would make 150% of their total C-bills at the end of the match, and the Timber Wolf pilot would get 50% of the normal total. The dead-center average mech - calling it a Dragon for now, debate all you want - would make 100% standard C-Bill reward rates. This is all before premium and hero mech bonuses, of course.

IraqiWalker, you're thinking IN the box. The box is not your friend, get outside!

Do you even play games?

Don't put "sigh" in there like you're exacerbated about a point that should be obvious to see is smart, when in fact it's not.

Simply put, no one will play if they know they are destined to lose. Adjusting rewards does diddly, if the team is fated to losing every time. The ONLY place where "losing is Fun" is Dwarf Fortress, and last I checked, this is not a game full of Dorfs.

So no, quirks should make mechs on equal footing. Not just "playable" because unless we want the game to be only 2 mechs, quirks should give mechs equal footing. Quirks actually remove "crappy" from the mechs. Making them viable, and not crappy. Thus giving us a bigger pool of mechs to use guilt free, while still contributing to the team, without dooming it to certain loss.

How is this even an argument? Here, play the game, and keep losing, we'll give you a few more C-Bills if you keep losing so the others can have fun. Which part of that seems logical to you?


Also, last I checked, quirks would be factored into BV, even in Tabletop. So I don't understand why you want BV, and only terrible quirks.

and again, you seem to not realize that if you use your system, lopsided matches are more frequent, and common, because not everyone is going to be running tier 1 mechs. Hell, even then, not all tier 1 mechs are on equal footing. Instead, have a full quirk system that makes terrible mechs equal to good mechs, and suddenly, BV is easier to use. Even though it's still a flawed system.

I worked on a possible BV system for MW:O, one that doesn't miss the fact that pilots get assigned a BV as well, and if we remove the 3x3x3x3 restriction, theoretically, we'll have fairer matches, realistically, we'll end up with more stomps. Unless we have some other restriction, because PSR with the 2 tiers up 2 tiers down restriction could work.

By the way. "Equal footing" doesn't mean "the same"

Yokaiko, on 12 September 2015 - 03:56 AM, said:

Do you understand that traditionally whatever makes it to the Test Server goes live?

Where is the tradition with this one? Name the last time we had a test like this one?

First, we have no set end date.

Second, we have an entire section in the forums, created specifically for this test.

Third, PGI stated that none of this is final, and is all subject to change

Fourth, in the previous cases that don't match this one, whatever made it to live play, ended up getting changed to address player feedback, anyways. Remember the mech select screen, and the latest UI update?

Jaeger Gonzo, on 12 September 2015 - 07:26 AM, said:

As much I would prefer the straight 10v16 formula.
Even 12v12 can be fixed to asymmetrical flavor, giving IS just more respawns.

Last week IS got a surprise 20 ton increase in the drop deck for a surprise CW test. Half the clan pilots on the forums threatened to quit the game. With children like that, do you really think giving the IS EXTRA spawns, will go fine, when they couldn't handle a 20 ton increase, while still winning?

RoboFrog, on 12 September 2015 - 09:29 AM, said:

I dont know whats going on but something is going to be done about the gauss rifle right? If this doesn't get adjusted then this is madness.

What about it? The Gauss Rifle is in a perfect place right now. Unless you're talking about Clan Guass being hands down the best GR in the game.

Edited by IraqiWalker, 12 September 2015 - 01:44 PM.

[MechWarrior3671771]

"Information warfare is completely useless and will be ignored by the people who know what they are doing." - Commander Maurice Gamelin, Maginot Line, May 5th 1940.

[Taufey]

Ascheriit Davion, on 12 September 2015 - 12:06 PM, said:

... Through out the lore (novels), both side CAN use each other weapon (they trade and salvage each other like crazy) ....

It wasn't just weapons, but also engines and sensors. With battlefield salvage, it was the sensible thing to do, and PGI could probably allow IS mechs to mount clan weapons through the module system, the speed at which entire IS units got clan tech in the novels was merely a band aid to the poor balancing FASA did at the beginning in the TT.

Players can be nudged some to play by Clan honor with awards, but at the end of the day, the Clan weapons need to be dialed back for fair and fun gameplay for everybody.

I am happy to hear that mech balance is being readdressed, but there are some core issues that still need to be dealt with.

The first is in how standard and omni mechs are handled in game. This isn't an IS vs Clan issue; Clans are getting standard mechs, and the IS will get ominis in time. Their issue isn't in the match but in mech lab. Omnimechs have major tactical and strategic advantage over the standard mech, and that is in their ability to quickly change weapon load outs. Actually, not just quickly, but to do it at all. It should not be possible to change out standar mech load outs with the ease that we can in MWO. Using computers for an analogy, an omnimech is a motherboard that can have its processor, memory, and graphix card simpled be plugged in and out. On a standard mech, all that stuff is soldiered in place. You can still remove and replace stuff, but it takes longer, and requires more tools and talent.

Standard mechs should have some cost whenever changes beyond armor and ammo amounts are made. Wether c-bill or time the mech is locked for use is for another discussions.

But part of the fun of Battletech, TT or on the computer, is designing mechs. An easier to implement and accept change would be to take the 25% Omnimech multiplier off the cost of the mech. The current Clan mechs aren't expensive because they are clan, but because they are omnimechs.

The real issue that needs to be addressed though is pinpoint damage. Fix that, and other balance issues become easier, i.g. ghost heat goes away because weapons that are balanced as a single unit are now balanced when fired in groups.

Infotech needs to be addressed, but it is of limited use when we only have variations of bashing the snot out of each other for matches. Using random start locations on the larger maps would be a start, but it really needs true recon and objective raid type matches to matter.

[Amerante]

I'm not sure about if it was mentioned already, but what if information warfare would have something to do with the pinpoint accuracy?

Like your weapons would have cone of fire unless you are actually _facing_ your target ( maybe it should be in 30° in front of you) AND you _locked_ it AND have _gathered targeting data_. In this case if you cannot lock your target because he is out of your range, or have to wait gather all the information before you can fire with pinpoint accuracy suddenly infotech has much more impact. And then relaying info to other mechs would help in this too, so if someone already has a lock on the target, every mech could gain targeting info much faster and fire accurately.

Edited by Amerante, 12 September 2015 - 01:39 PM.

[Veev]

Fenrisulvyn, on 12 September 2015 - 01:27 PM, said:

"Information warfare is completely useless and will be ignored by the people who know what they are doing." - Commander Maurice Gamelin, Maginot Line, May 5th 1940.

Information is always useful, just wish it was more useful in this game. Would I rather have 100% increase in the number of critical points per section of mech or have a 50% increase on my ballistics? I would take the ballistics hand down since the structure slots dont stop them from critting the weapons when they get through.

Is it better to have a mech that is still alive due to quirks without weapons or an enemy mech that is dead before they can take it that far?

On a side note, why all the buffing love for Clan mechs and solid nerfs for IS? I skimmed the quirks and I have got to say it is kind of sad.

[IraqiWalker]

Fenrisulvyn, on 12 September 2015 - 01:27 PM, said:

"Information warfare is completely useless and will be ignored by the people who know what they are doing." - Commander Maurice Gamelin, Maginot Line, May 5th 1940.

It didn't turn out well for him. However, unless this game gets bigger maps, with multiple critical objectives, Information Warfare is going to be near useless to us in this game.

[Dollar Bill]

Khobai, on 11 September 2015 - 05:52 PM, said:

IS mechs wont have a chance if this patch goes live lol

if this patch goes live I suspect a lot of people will outright quit the game. its that bad.

What else needs to be said? It's nice that Paul does know (and doesn't care) that some players (paying customers) will not like the "re-balance". And I know what we see on the PTS is not the final version. But ANY version of this will kill the game for a lot more players than what Paul/PGI thinks. I think it addresses a non-issue and removes a lot of fun. I myself have given PGI lots of my real money for a mech, IS and Clan, only to see the reason for buying that mech taken or nerfed away. Mostly because of ECM, my playing style does not care so much about IW. If I see a mech with red or nothing at all...I shoot it. Firepower and DPS are the most important, and fun, things about this game. PGI, the IS querks gave some of your paying customers a reason to buy, and now you are taking that reason away to replace it with something that's near worthless. There's no way I would have ever spent my money on the "Hunchback GI", and a few other IS mechs, if they were the way they are on the public test server now.

I have always been a fan of Mechwarrior. Played the tabletop back in the day too. But I'm getting tired of feeling like a sucker for giving PGI my hard earned money and then getting the bait-and-switch. And I hope for PGI's sake that I'm in the minority.

Oh well...I see "World of Warships" is in open beta now.

Edited by Dollar Bill, 12 September 2015 - 02:23 PM.

[Wesxander]

There is an old saying don't pee on my leg and try to say it is raining. Sort of like the PGI and their supporters saying 12 IS mechs can evenly match 12 clan mechs without quirks. If the nerfs are bad as the data suggests you will lose what few IS hardcore players there are left. Then you can toss your plans for CW into the toilet. The quirk system gives most mechs the flavor of the technical readouts from 3025 and 3050 .

Why don't PGI show us IS players how it is done. Get off your redesign to favor clans and put together a 12 man team. Then inentionally seek out average to good 12 man clan units and show us you can win with your quirk redesign. Post the results of the matches so we can see how your tactics overcome their superior speed, weapons, and weight. Want remove quirks then put clans to10 to 12 like they supposed to be. Otherwise show us how you can beat clan 12 mans in IS mech with your new quirk system. No ringers allowed either.

Want kill the game keep listening to the obvious pro clan elements in your design team.

[Foxfire kadrpg]

... will players value the infotech? At my tier, I see countless players not even bothering to press R once, whom I assume would be even less attracted to a mech that was 'weaker' but could detect the enemy better.

Comp players, I imagine, will think it's useful to have one sensor mech in their deathball, but information is largely spread via mouth and directions, and like as not, they will favor the high firepower output mechs just as an other player.

Either way, good luck. You are obviously trying something new, and I'm interested to see it pan out.

[Koshirou]

You know, if I didn't know better I'd think that PGI's plan was actually to simply shut up complaints about the current balancing... by introducing the Damocles sword of a much, much worse system, which they can then reluctantly agree not to implement "for the time being".

[Kaptain]

Could not get it to work yesterday. Was able to log into the client today and nearly every one of my mechs was "invalid" without the ability to save due to some failure. Ran the repair tool, fixed errors. Can't log in again, networking error.

While I was able to log in I looked at several Mechs. What an absolute mess. Arbitrary quirks with seemingly no rhyme or reason behind them.

I had so much hope... so much optimism
Maybe they would un-nerf IS lasers (to prevent further nerfing of clan tech)
Perhaps we were finally going to see different numbers on each team (IS vs Clan)
Perhaps IS was going to get some kind of weight advantage metric.
Perhaps each mech was going to get a Battle value based off of its size, engine, hardpoints, hardpoint location, geometry, weapons and upgrades
Perhaps some kind of true heat scale was to be added to the game
Perhaps Clan Mechs were going to be more harshly penalized for loosing a side torso
Perhaps IS LBX, ER, and Ultra upgrades were to be added to the game
Perhaps Lite engines were to be added to the IS side to better balance against clan XL technology
Perhaps convergence was to be added back into the game

Nope. None of that. They paid absolutely no attention to the great ideas suggested by this community. Instead, they are electing to remove one arbitrary quirk system with another completely arbitrary quirk system.

[Sezneg]

Kaptain, on 12 September 2015 - 04:19 PM, said:

Could not get it to work yesterday. Was able to log into the client today and nearly every one of my mechs was "invalid" without the ability to save due to some failure. Ran the repair tool, fixed errors. Can't log in again, networking error.

While I was able to log in I looked at several Mechs. What an absolute mess. Arbitrary quirks with seemingly no rhyme or reason behind them.

I had so much hope... so much optimism
Maybe they would un-nerf IS lasers (to prevent further nerfing of clan tech)
Perhaps we were finally going to see different numbers on each team (IS vs Clan)
Perhaps IS was going to get some kind of weight advantage metric.
Perhaps each mech was going to get a Battle value based off of its size, engine, hardpoints, hardpoint location, geometry, weapons and upgrades
Perhaps some kind of true heat scale was to be added to the game
Perhaps Clan Mechs were going to be more harshly penalized for loosing a side torso
Perhaps IS LBX, ER, and Ultra upgrades were to be added to the game
Perhaps Lite engines were to be added to the IS side to better balance against clan XL technology
Perhaps convergence was to be added back into the game

Nope. None of that. They paid absolutely no attention to the great ideas suggested by this community. Instead, they are electing to remove one arbitrary quirk system with another completely arbitrary quirk system.

The reason you can't save the mechs is that they changed module loadout. Take off the modules, you'll be good.

[Krivvan]

chiXu, on 12 September 2015 - 06:06 AM, said:

PGI is trying to use formulae, based on stats and numbers, to balance the game. By not talking with the people at the top of the game, the ones that know the weapon systems and 'mechs and how they actually perform rather than how they appear on paper, PGI is opening up the pandora's box of balancing fails and setting themselves up for a fallout similar to 3rd person, or something to that degree.
I know this is early days in the BV thing but regarding promising starts, this is not one of those.

A big example of this are the Urbanmech quirks.

Without taking quirks into consideration, the R60L is the best, followed very far by the R60 then the R63.

The R60L and the R63 both got the same quirks, that is to say essentially nothing.

The R60 got the same quirks as the other two, except with a whole bunch of extra structure quirks.

Why? The balancing algorithm thought the R60 would be better because it had one more Energy hardpoint than the R63. Except its energy hardpoints are spread between the arms and torso.

The one main advantage of the Urbanmech is that it has very, very well placed arm hardpoints that let it both side and hill poke safely. This makes having 2 energy hardpoints in an arm much more useful than 1 energy hardpoint in an arm and 2 in a torso.

And the problem between the Urbanmech variants is endemic in all the other IS chassis on the PTS.

[Lucky Noob]

Okay, besides that Missles are Crap and mostly not used anyway, on PTS its an new Dept reached.

Before my Awesome coud get an Lock at 750 Meters, with Sensors 1000 Meters.
Now i have 500 +250, very funny.

Before my Awesome had some Quicks to make Missles a bit faster and heat lower etc. still not Competive but at least.
Now i have no Quicks
Ah yes i can hold an Lock a bit longer......ECM anyone ?

i had high Hopes and even Installed the Testclient. But to see that they simply got rid of all Balancing efforts they did for so long and make IS Mechs bad as they where before Quirks is just ........ you get it.

And that Info Stuff, i mean come on Guys, it took the Comunity not even 2 Hours to see its useless Why did PGI not got that ?

Why not doing Stuff like WOT, if something isnt in you Sensor Range, it doesnt get rendered. its simple easy and works great. at lest at WOT Scouting realy does something.

If WOt can copy an Game Mode from MWO ( Respawn etc.) then i am sure its okay to cope the Sensor Mechanic.

For the Clan OP ....... Why not doing an mechanic where an Clan Player says by Click.. this is my Target and no other Clanner can then Shoot at that target ? Easy Way and simply for Balancing.

[Davegt27]

I can give how to troubleshoot the module error problem

But I can’t give feedback on the rest because

1) I can’t figure out how the current one works (get 9 kills in one Mech one day then spend the next 5 days not getting anything)

2) Can’t get a match on the PTS

I did do some testing on the training grounds but that’s it

I think it would take a few weeks to really test out the new system