170 replies to this topic

[gloowa]

[UPDATE]
Everthing i said, confirmed.

Everything.



Clan vs IS not right now - confirmed.
Weapons rebalance only after having clean slate of weapon-unquirked mechs - confirmed.
Balancing variants, then models, then tonnage class - confirmed.
This not going to production - confirmed.
People being unreasonable and raging, insulting and threatining devs - did not need confirmation, it was obvious.

[edit]
PGI not being clear/poorly communicating what they want to achieve - confirmed.
[/UPDATE]

----------------------------------------------
[ORIGINAL POST]

For the last 6h i'm looking at what people write here, and don't know, weather to laugh or cry. No longer than few days ago, Russ said (during town hall) that they are not doing IS vs Clan balance right off the bat here. First they want to make all variants more or less equal, then make the same tonnage mechs more or less equal and only then balance IS vs Clan.

Everyone is raging about Clan vs IS balance.

It was (and is) stated that this is supposed to make chassi more balanced, not the goddamn weapons.

Everyone is raging about Clan vs IS weapons.

People want weapon quirks. What exactly is the point of giving every IS same quirk? just change the weapons already. Preferably by lowering the damage output of best performing weapons, rather than upping damage output of everything else to that level. TTK is low enough, and removing weapon quirks is a good first step to raise it.



Not to mention plain insults flying all over the place. Good way to ensure nothing will be done ever. Why bother to do anything when even best intentioned PROPOSAL will be met with "This-and-That are <random insult about being incompetent ****** made by a person that couldn't write hello world application code if their life depended on it>".


The only thing i can agree on, is overemphasis of infotech. It's not as important as all those quirks would make it, and nerfs to radar will just make lrms and ssrms less useful (as if that was possible with lrms). That's why we need active/passive already. Passive would be basically what we have now, with reduced range (to around 300~500m), and active being able to lock on up to 800~900m, even through cover, but enemy running active would show on everyone sensors up to 1200m, making turning them on a guaranteed lermrain. Only then infotech would gain enought significance to make any quirks in that area relevant. (for example, a quirk that would reduce the range on which active radar mech would show up for enemy)

Having said that, i can say that i am not certain about perticular quirks on particular mechs. Some of them probably are wrong. All i know is that getting rid of weapon quirks is a GOOD thing. If weapons is underperforming, the weapon needs changes. If chassis is underperforming, the chassis needs changes, not the weapon on it.

Edited by gloowa, 15 September 2015 - 05:51 AM.

[Dunereaper]

I 100% endorse this post

[Yokaiko]

No really the stronger clan mechs are relatively untouoched, if not UN-nerfed


So load the PTS, look through the various chassis and see if you get any feel of "balance" even between variants of the same chassis.

.....much less Clan vs IS.

[Appogee]

Did Russ really say that?

I really hope this new quirk approach doesn't get anywhere near the production server in its current form.

Forget about the individual quirk values, the whole approach is fundamentally deficient. No amount of tweaking of values will make IS competitive vs Clan if they merely tweak what on the PTS.

[Dunereaper]

As long as they do all, and I mean ALL, of the balancing in whatever phases on test then cool. leave live server be until test balance is good.

[Yokaiko]

Dunereaper, on 12 September 2015 - 06:52 AM, said:

As long as they do all, and I mean ALL, of the balancing in whatever phases on test then cool. leave live server be until test balance is good.

That has never been how they have done it, that is what everyone is up in arms about.

[Lily from animove]

gloowa, on 12 September 2015 - 06:24 AM, said:

For the last 6h i'm looking at what people write here, and don't know, weather to laugh or cry. No longer than few days ago, Russ said (during town hall) that they are not doing IS vs Clan balance right off the bat here. First they want to make all variants more or less equal, then make the same tonnage mechs more or less equal and only then balance IS vs Clan.

Everyone is raging about Clan vs IS balance.

It was (and is) stated that this is supposed to make chassi more balanced, not the goddamn weapons.

Everyone is raging about Clan vs IS weapons.

People want weapon quirks. What exactly is the point of giving every IS same quirk? just change the weapons already. Preferably by lowering the damage output of best performing weapons, rather than upping damage output of everything else to that level. TTK is low enough, and removing weapon quirks is a good first step to raise it.



Not to mention plain insults flying all over the place. Good way to ensure nothing will be done ever. Why bother to do anything when even best intentioned PROPOSAL will be met with "This-and-That are <random insult about being incompetent ****** made by a person that couldn't write hello world application code if their life depended on it>".


The only thing i can agree on, is overemphasis of infotech. It's not as important as all those quirks would make it, and nerfs to radar will just make lrms and ssrms less useful (as if that was possible with lrms). That's why we need active/passive already. Passive would be basically what we have now, with reduced range (to around 300~500m), and active being able to lock on up to 800~900m, even through cover, but enemy running active would show on everyone sensors up to 1200m, making turning them on a guaranteed lermrain. Only then infotech would gain enought significance to make any quirks in that area relevant. (for example, a quirk that would reduce the range on which active radar mech would show up for enemy)

Having said that, i can say that i am not certain about perticular quirks on particular mechs. Some of them probably are wrong. All i know is that getting rid of weapon quirks is a GOOD thing. If weapons is underperforming, the weapon needs changes. If chassis is underperforming, the chassis needs changes, not the weapon on it.

No one, not even the chassis are balanced to ach other. And not are the pods on the Omnimechs. How should this even ever lead to IS vs clanbalance? and also, interchassis balance (no matter of clan or not) is so off, its more off than before. Which means no matter how they balance IS vs Clan, you will mostlikely see the same superior chassis on each side.

Weapon quirks are needed otherwise a locust will never properly be a decision or a Hugin to others of its class or weight.

[Mechsniper]

This rebalancing looks terrible. Everything assault/heavy worth playing gets a nerf bat into left field??? that's not balance!!!! That's a cop out to make everything play like crap so new players or those without a brain can survive a little longer. IF this is your idea of rebalance turn the lights off to MWO on the way out the door. The AWS and Atlas have been seriously struggling vs the clan 3 package arctic cheater and everlasting jager, yet you nerf the crud out of them???? WHO THOUGHT THAT HELPED BALANCE?? FIRE THEM! They can't have even played the game or read the forums.

[Siviiliuhri]

It is simple. The rebalancing can't enter live stage before the IS vs Clan weapon balance is ready... No IS player will have any point playing the role of a victim to clantech for unspecified time...

[L3mming2]

gloowa, on 12 September 2015 - 06:24 AM, said:

For the last 6h i'm looking at what people write here, and don't know, weather to laugh or cry. No longer than few days ago, Russ said (during town hall) that they are not doing IS vs Clan balance right off the bat here. First they want to make all variants more or less equal, then make the same tonnage mechs more or less equal and only then balance IS vs Clan.

Everyone is raging about Clan vs IS balance.

It was (and is) stated that this is supposed to make chassi more balanced, not the goddamn weapons.

Everyone is raging about Clan vs IS weapons.

People want weapon quirks. What exactly is the point of giving every IS same quirk? just change the weapons already. Preferably by lowering the damage output of best performing weapons, rather than upping damage output of everything else to that level. TTK is low enough, and removing weapon quirks is a good first step to raise it.



Not to mention plain insults flying all over the place. Good way to ensure nothing will be done ever. Why bother to do anything when even best intentioned PROPOSAL will be met with "This-and-That are <random insult about being incompetent ****** made by a person that couldn't write hello world application code if their life depended on it>".


The only thing i can agree on, is overemphasis of infotech. It's not as important as all those quirks would make it, and nerfs to radar will just make lrms and ssrms less useful (as if that was possible with lrms). That's why we need active/passive already. Passive would be basically what we have now, with reduced range (to around 300~500m), and active being able to lock on up to 800~900m, even through cover, but enemy running active would show on everyone sensors up to 1200m, making turning them on a guaranteed lermrain. Only then infotech would gain enought significance to make any quirks in that area relevant. (for example, a quirk that would reduce the range on which active radar mech would show up for enemy)

Having said that, i can say that i am not certain about perticular quirks on particular mechs. Some of them probably are wrong. All i know is that getting rid of weapon quirks is a GOOD thing. If weapons is underperforming, the weapon needs changes. If chassis is underperforming, the chassis needs changes, not the weapon on it.

if u put it like that, ok but inter class balance is way of and ballistics get the shaft..

[gloowa]

Lily from animove, on 12 September 2015 - 06:58 AM, said:

No one, not even the chassis are balanced to ach other. And not are the pods on the Omnimechs. How should this even ever lead to IS vs clanbalance?

<sigh>
by making chassi equally valuable and therefore only requiring to change weapons in bulk? you know, like i described in my post?

Lily from animove, on 12 September 2015 - 06:58 AM, said:

and also, interchassis balance (no matter of clan or not) is so off, its more off than before.

Which is why Russ said that this will take several iterations on PTS and will be subject fot community approval before final version goes live.

Lily from animove, on 12 September 2015 - 06:58 AM, said:

Weapon quirks are needed otherwise a locust will never properly be a decision or a Hugin to others of its class or weight.

Except of course, Locust is the only 20t mech that is in game. And really? you gonna take the lighter mech in the game, which technical entry readout is "the Locust was designed exclusively for reconnaissance and quick strike missions, using its then-phenomenal speed to outrun most enemies. In a situation where it was unable to outrun its enemies, the 'Mech did have a light array of weapons with which to defend itself, but the Locust lacked the firepower or staying power to be a true front-line combatant" and complain that it cannot run around the battlefield killing mech after mech? There are limits to what is reasonable.[/color]

Mechsniper, on 12 September 2015 - 07:03 AM, said:

This rebalancing looks terrible. Everything assault/heavy worth playing gets a nerf bat into left field??? that's not balance!!!! That's a cop out to make everything play like crap so new players or those without a brain can survive a little longer. IF this is your idea of rebalance turn the lights off to MWO on the way out the door. The AWS and Atlas have been seriously struggling vs the clan 3 package arctic cheater and everlasting jager, yet you nerf the crud out of them????

You call +50% hitpoint boost a nerf? nice. way to be completely out of touch with reality. did you even look at the quirks, or did you just see some red text there and decided to go balistic?

Mechsniper, on 12 September 2015 - 07:03 AM, said:

WHO THOUGHT THAT HELPED BALANCE?? FIRE THEM! They can't have even played the game or read the forums.

And there we go back to raging on devs. priceless. keep on proving me right. why don't YOU make your own, better, perfectly balanced mechwarrior game, huh? apparently it's so easy so i'm waiting. you have 2 weeks. makie it 3, i'm feeling generous today.

[edit]
omg. and this is comming from CI member? i think i'm gonna call certain Admiral, someone needs some serious spanking.

Siviiliuhri, on 12 September 2015 - 07:11 AM, said:

It is simple. The rebalancing can't enter live stage before the IS vs Clan weapon balance is ready... No IS player will have any point playing the role of a victim to clantech for unspecified time...

agreed.

Edited by gloowa, 12 September 2015 - 07:31 AM.

[FluffehBunneh]

Mechsniper, on 12 September 2015 - 07:03 AM, said:

WHO THOUGHT THAT HELPED BALANCE?? FIRE THEM! They can't have even played the game or read the forums.

[Mystere]

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

Which is why Russ said that this will take several iterations on PTS and will be subject fot community approval before final version goes live.

I say go for the former but ditch the latter. Seek community approval? They're not going to get much of that, if at all, due to the wide disparity of opinions.

[gloowa]

L3mming2, on 12 September 2015 - 07:21 AM, said:

if u put it like that, ok but inter class balance is way of and ballistics get the shaft.

That why it's on test. To test. not to preview. to test. and change accordingly.

Weapons are completely different discussion and separate from chasii balance.

[L3mming2]

gloowa, on 12 September 2015 - 07:29 AM, said:

That why it's on test. To test. not to preview. to test. and change accordingly.

Weapons are completely different discussion and separate from chasii balance.

that might be thru but, they do get influenced by it and i think this is the place and the time to voice your concerns/opinions about it. as it is indead the test, as in now they still can adress those concerns..

[East Indy]

Heck, Paul wrote it in his post.

Doesn't matter. I think leaving that until the end is like giving a man with a broken arm a manicure first.

I like Paul, too. Always seemed like a good guy. But he/his team always edges around the problem instead of addressing it.

[Mystere]

L3mming2, on 12 September 2015 - 07:35 AM, said:

that might be thru but, they do get influenced by it and i think this is the place and the time to voice your concerns/opinions about it. as it is indead the test, as in now they still can adress those concerns..

There is a hell of a difference between voicing concern/opinion and crying that everything is #!!&@!!$#!!%. Unfortunately, I am seeing a lot of the latter. And getting personal by hurling insults at the devs just isn't helping at all.

Edited by Mystere, 12 September 2015 - 07:41 AM.

[gloowa]

L3mming2, on 12 September 2015 - 07:35 AM, said:

that might be thru but, they do get influenced by it and i think this is the place and the time to voice your concerns/opinions about it. as it is indead the test, as in now they still can adress those concerns..

Agreed. But it seems most people missed the point of this excercise (granted, it was not put into one concise paragraph for people who are scared of reading more than one meme-picture caption at a time, but the info is there) and some resorted to just insults and stupid pictures, which do not help.

I urge everyone to think like this: "imagine there are only is weapons and clan mechs equip them as well (but other clan equipiment remains)". Now evaluate mechs based on how good and useful given variant is. Compare to same-tonnage mechs, not same-class mechs.

[MechaBattler]

gloowa, on 12 September 2015 - 07:29 AM, said:

That why it's on test. To test. not to preview. to test. and change accordingly.

Weapons are completely different discussion and separate from chasii balance.

Paul showed 4 specific points to balance the chassis. But decided to leave out Firepower as a balancing item. Are structure quirks, performance quirks, and sensor quirks, supposed to make up for a mech's low slung weapons or lack of hard points? How about mechs that are redundant?

A weapon balance pass will help the IS and Clan balance. But some mechs will simply be able to bring more firepower. And firepower counts for a hell of a lot in this game. Choosing to leave out the most important chassis factor is idiotic.

Edited by MechaBattler, 12 September 2015 - 07:48 AM.

[gloowa]

MechaBattler, on 12 September 2015 - 07:47 AM, said:

Paul showed 4 specific points to balance the chassis. But decided to leave out Firepower as a balancing item. Are structure quirks, performance quirks, and sensor quirks, supposed to make up for a mech's low slung weapons or lack of hard points? How about mechs that are redundant?

A weapon balance pass will help the IS and Clan balance. But some mechs will simply be able to bring more firepower. And firepower counts for a hell of a lot in this game. Choosing to leave out the most important chassis factor is idiotic.

In your opinion.

I do not agree with that. The discrepencies between same-tonnage mechs are usually not that big to make firepower quirks obligatory. and those can still be added once those that are in need of them, are identified. In my experience, (with the exception of assaults and heavier heavies) you are more constrained by tonnage than by weapon hardpoints, making the armor/structure quirks perfect to level things out (+X armor quirk means X armor than can be shaven off to increase firepower by adding additional weapon / heatsink / whatever)