170 replies to this topic

[Jaeger Gonzo]

Whats the point in the Clans at all then?

[MischiefSC]

So make is IS vs IS or Clan vs Clan. The problem is that weapon imbalance > all other balance factors, making meaningful review of mobility or sensor quirks largely irrelevant.

With the IS/Clan balance issues in place you can't reasonably review other issues.

That's the problem.

[L3mming2]

gloowa, on 12 September 2015 - 12:14 PM, said:

And i have no problem doing 400+ damage on average in a public drop with a jenner whic loadout doesn't benefit from weapon quirks. (no, it's not a erll sniper). Granted, vs strong teams that primary gauss, it gets rekd superfast, but weapon quirks wouldn't help you there, would they?

yep big feat in your jenner F ... now go and try it in a locust 1V... 1 lasor and 4 mgs...
and thats anecdotal evidence i have a screenshot of a pug match where i break a 1000 damage in a locust, thats not relevant here

[Mystere]

Dimento Graven, on 12 September 2015 - 11:49 AM, said:

I would be fine with this in CW, IF, CW matches that were IS vs. Clan were limited to a 12v10, 260 ton vs 240 ton, drop deck.

The Clan should have superior tech, BUT, the IS should be able to bring superior numbers.

I think it's about time this aspect is seriously reconsidered.

[gloowa]

L3mming2, on 12 September 2015 - 12:19 PM, said:

yep big feat in your jenner F ... now go and try it in a locust 1V... 1 lasor and 4 mgs...
and thats anecdotal evidence i have a screenshot of a pug match where i break a 1000 damage in a locust, thats not relevant here

Actually, i didn't use that jenner for a long, long time. i run D and O. But that's not the point i'm making, please read my edited post.

[Krivvan]

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.

Historically whenever community feedback is asked for specifically balance stuff, the same old guard of inside club squirrels (many of whom don't actually play anymore) get truly listened to along with Phil/Sean Lang, and the rest of the community is ignored. Top tier players were initially consulted before quirks and supposedly they made the tier list, but many of their suggestions for how to balance within the tier list presumably ended up ignored (instead of quirking like crazy off the bat, buffing SRMs and making brawling more viable before messing with quirks was suggested).

The fact that Paul's PTS post seems to almost blame these comp players for giving advice, I don't have much confidence that they'll listen to any of the negative community feedback.

I mean how many of us that were informed were giving feedback saying that the Arctic Cheetah would not need really much of any quirks to be competitive whereas the Shadow Cat would need a lot of help? Instead, they listened to weird feedback/their own musing that gave the Arctic Cheetah quirks larger than the Firestarter and gave the Shadow Cat pretty much nothing. Then when it came time to rebalance the Arctic Cheetah, we were saying that it mainly needed its leg structure quirks toned down, but then they removed all the quirks except the leg structure quirks. And the Shadow Cat still gets nothing.

When your feedback is consistently ignored, it's hard to placate people by telling them that they'll listen to their feedback.

Edited by Krivvan, 12 September 2015 - 12:36 PM.

[MechaBattler]

gloowa, on 12 September 2015 - 12:03 PM, said:

Ok, let's assume for a second that we decided to make IS and clan weapons identical. Would you agree now, that giving is mechs hp and agility buffs would be enough to offset clan XL and bigger flexibility in loadouts due to omnis?

Yeah I guess it would. But then it all hinges on them balancing the two sets of weapons. And they did try that for a few months. And pretty much stopped around that pass where they made the Clan lasers have a really long duration, then scaled it back down a bit. Then quirks came. Even before clan weapons, there were so many months of imbalance.

It's not just about that though. Without quirks. Some mechs would be redundant and not all of them would live up the performance of the others. Weapon quirks gave mechs a unique flavor. Before the quirks there was a lot sentiment of mechs just being a handful of hard points. With maybe one hard point to differentiate some builds. The quirks changed that.

I guess we'll see after this pass what they intend to do.

[Koniks]

You can't make chassis and variants equal without first balancing baseline weapon values. You can't make chassis and variants equal without first quirking them for weapons.

[L3mming2]

gloowa, on 12 September 2015 - 12:24 PM, said:

Actually, i didn't use that jenner for a long, long time. i run D and O. But that's not the point i'm making, please read my edited post.

i'v read it, and as for now (and the forceable future) this is not going to happen, i would like to see lights being balanced by;
giving them better agility (turning speed/acceleration/deceleration/jj quirks) size (if they are to fragile make them smaler (and maby buff there armor and structure a litle but not a load) and in extreme cases example only 2 hardpoints ore only 1 e and 4 mg's.. give them ore/and more hardpoints, weapon quirks. there can be a added heat disapation quirk too

on top of this (thats a step in a good direction btw) you can argument there usability with sensor quirks...

with all of the above tools it should be more then posible to get every light to a viable status, even without reverting to -50% cd quirks and such

[Dimento Graven]

gloowa, on 12 September 2015 - 11:51 AM, said:

you didn't bother to read my post did you. there is an entire paragraph that clearly states that rather than giving is stupid weapon quirks, just change the weapons to bring them closer together.

Actually I was trying to elaborate more on that particular point, and to add a broader perspective.

Again, as I stated further down my "complete" perspective on the whole balance issue is as follows:

Quote

The Clan should have superior tech, BUT, the IS should be able to bring superior numbers.

If we can't do that, then we have to balance NOT just weapons but maybe even more importantly the survivability factor, where Clan 'mechs have always far outshined the IS.

With Clan 'mechs the fact XL's that don't die due to ST loss remove the speed vs firepower vs survivability calculations that ALL IS pilots have to suffer through when building out a 'mech.

With IS, if you want SPEED and FIREPOWER you have to give up on SURVIVABILITY.

If you want SURVIVABILITY, you have to give up either SPEED or FIREPOWER and in most cases, BOTH.

This fact has been the biggest gap in balance, bar none.

Clan 'mech design strategy has been simplified to min/maxing the alphas to the maximum damage output possible baring heat considerations.

This balance pass the min/maxing will include working towards the least number of detrimental quirks and maximum amount of positive quirks, PLUS, maximizing the alpha, where as the IS is going to be stuck with which chassis isn't so crippled by negative quirks and no weapon buffs that I'll at least be able to 'shoot my weight' before I'm dead...

Anyway, again, I'd be fine with ALL of this IF in CW:

Quote

The Clan should have superior tech, BUT, the IS should be able to bring superior numbers.

[Dimento Graven]

Mystere, on 12 September 2015 - 12:20 PM, said:

I think it's about time this aspect is seriously reconsidered.

Yeah, exactly it SHOULD be: "Balance schmalance when it comes to IS v Clan technology, the 'balance' is that IS brings MORE 'mechs and weapons..."

Oh yeah, and a heat affects table, we really need a REAL heat affects table too.

[Mystere]

Dimento Graven, on 12 September 2015 - 12:43 PM, said:

Oh yeah, and a heat affects table, we really need a REAL heat affects table too.

Why are you whispering?

[Galorin]

Now, I am not a very good player. I'm on the wrong side of the bell curve, but still have fun and a good grasp of the mechanics. I know the theory well, but practical application of that theory, not so good there. I've thrown together mechs for this PTS that play well with the removal of weapon quirks and the like. Did the Timber that got buffed, stormcrow, ilya, a couple others before I stopped being able to find matches. Still trying to get in with the AS7-D to test a theory on that.

Here's what I have picked up. After isolating the effect of loss of quirks, the role and info warfare is actually a lot more interesting than I think people are giving credit for. Rounding a corner in the Bog in my Stormcrow, to see an enemy Thunderbolt. I'm the only one that has spotted him, and it takes what feels like 3 seconds before I can target him. By that time, I've had to take a guess at where he was weak. No smoke coming off him, so I have to shoot for what's probably going to hurt him most, right below his cockpit. I had to fire then duck behind cover and curse my cat for chewing on my microphone cable. Someone else on my team cussed me out for not committing to my push, but they were in a mech that could immediately target the enemy. That info from them was then relayed to the rest of the team and the enemy T-bolt found itself under concentrated fire.

I've had a few 1v1 brawls and medium-range pokey-pokey fights where I haven't been able to target due to buildings, twisting,, and other things that break LoS. Not having that paper doll really makes it harder to operate as a mediocre pilot. You hot shots can probably do without, but me... I kinda need that target info, and I would rather be in a mech that didn't have a targeting penalty. Maybe when I get gud, but after being with it since R&R was a thing, I don't think that's going to happen for me.

[Gas Guzzler]

Galorin, on 12 September 2015 - 01:06 PM, said:

Now, I am not a very good player. I'm on the wrong side of the bell curve, but still have fun and a good grasp of the mechanics. I know the theory well, but practical application of that theory, not so good there. I've thrown together mechs for this PTS that play well with the removal of weapon quirks and the like. Did the Timber that got buffed, stormcrow, ilya, a couple others before I stopped being able to find matches. Still trying to get in with the AS7-D to test a theory on that.

Here's what I have picked up. After isolating the effect of loss of quirks, the role and info warfare is actually a lot more interesting than I think people are giving credit for. Rounding a corner in the Bog in my Stormcrow, to see an enemy Thunderbolt. I'm the only one that has spotted him, and it takes what feels like 3 seconds before I can target him. By that time, I've had to take a guess at where he was weak. No smoke coming off him, so I have to shoot for what's probably going to hurt him most, right below his cockpit. I had to fire then duck behind cover and curse my cat for chewing on my microphone cable. Someone else on my team cussed me out for not committing to my push, but they were in a mech that could immediately target the enemy. That info from them was then relayed to the rest of the team and the enemy T-bolt found itself under concentrated fire.

I've had a few 1v1 brawls and medium-range pokey-pokey fights where I haven't been able to target due to buildings, twisting,, and other things that break LoS. Not having that paper doll really makes it harder to operate as a mediocre pilot. You hot shots can probably do without, but me... I kinda need that target info, and I would rather be in a mech that didn't have a targeting penalty. Maybe when I get gud, but after being with it since R&R was a thing, I don't think that's going to happen for me.

To be honest, I think the sensor stuff is cool, if a bit convoluted and hard to follow.

I just don't think its worth the loss in firepower, nor is the gain in durability worth the loss in firepower. The Grasshoppers that had the modest 12.5% heat gen quirk are sad right now. Run hotter than a Timber Wolf with less range, slower, and IS XL engine. I shudder to even think about the Black Knight that has low hardpoints and no Jump Jets.

I just think the IS mechs need some firepower quirks to help them a bit. I'm not advocating 20%+ quirks, but something along the lines of 10% in heat gen, laser duration, velocity, range, etc (some but not all on every mech of course) is not going to have a huge impact on TTK, but will help some IS mechs compete.

[Dimento Graven]

Prime example of WHY this 'balance pass' fails right from the get go:

King Crabs After Balance Pass:

Spoiler

A sample Direwolf, After Balance Pass, with a half-assed attempt at quirk min/maxing:

Spoiler

Keeping in mind that regardless of the engine loaded it's still pretty much impossible to make the King Crab have a matching alpha of a Direwolf, this pass STILL does absolutely F all to increase King Crab survivability while using an XL, and does ZERO to bring the King Crab's weapon range into line with the Direwolf, nor any of the ancillary things like the Clans smaller, lighter and harder hitting weapons.

Seriously PGI this balance pass is ass-backwards...

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

[Dimento Graven]

Mystere, on 12 September 2015 - 12:46 PM, said:

Why are you whispering?

Didn't really want to derail the current thread, just emphasize this point through repetition.

Edited by Dimento Graven, 12 September 2015 - 01:49 PM.

[gloowa]

Dimento Graven, on 12 September 2015 - 12:40 PM, said:

Actually I was trying to elaborate more on that particular point, and to add a broader perspective.

Again, as I stated further down my "complete" perspective on the whole balance issue is as follows:

If we can't do that, then we have to balance NOT just weapons but maybe even more importantly the survivability factor, where Clan 'mechs have always far outshined the IS.

With Clan 'mechs the fact XL's that don't die due to ST loss remove the speed vs firepower vs survivability calculations that ALL IS pilots have to suffer through when building out a 'mech.

With IS, if you want SPEED and FIREPOWER you have to give up on SURVIVABILITY.

If you want SURVIVABILITY, you have to give up either SPEED or FIREPOWER and in most cases, BOTH.

This fact has been the biggest gap in balance, bar none.
(...)

So, let me get this straight. You say that survivability was the big difference, look at the quirk pass where 75% of IS mechs get survivability quirks that no longer make it necessary to sacrifice both speed and firepower,

and complain that this is the wrong step? wat? Sorry, i'm really trying to follow what you are saying, but i can't.

Mizeur, on 12 September 2015 - 12:34 PM, said:

You can't make chassis and variants equal without first balancing baseline weapon values. You can't make chassis and variants equal without first quirking them for weapons.

I beg to differ. Just imagine there are only IS weapons. There, you can balance all IS chassii and all Clan chassi separately and then adjust to make them on more equal footing with respect to each other.

Dimento Graven, on 12 September 2015 - 01:36 PM, said:

Prime example of WHY this 'balance pass' fails right from the get go:

<snip>

Keeping in mind that regardless of the engine loaded it's still pretty much impossible to make the King Crab have a matching alpha of a Direwolf, this pass STILL does absolutely F all to increase King Crab survivability while using an XL,

That's NOT what we are trying to achieve with that passs right now. Rea the first @#$!%! paraghraph of my OP. This is exactly why this while discussion is pointless right now. At this stage we are not balancing Crab vs Dire or Atlas vs Dire. At this point we are balancing all IS 100tonners as a goup A and all Clan 100 tonners as goup B. Only after all mechs in goup A are more or less of same value, and all mechs of group B are of same value, we make changes that bring group A and B into balance. God damn it, read the goddamn post.

Dimento Graven, on 12 September 2015 - 01:36 PM, said:

and does ZERO to bring the King Crab's weapon range into line with the Direwolf, nor any of the ancillary things like the Clans smaller, lighter and harder hitting weapons.

So the weapons need to change. Great. we agree. Let's not change weapons by adding quirks to every single IS mech. Just change the weapons instead. What's the point of giving all IS mechs energy quirks instead of just applying that change to the weapon itself. and again, this is 2nd paragraph of my OP. READ IT.

Dimento Graven, on 12 September 2015 - 01:36 PM, said:

Seriously PGI this balance pass is ass-backwards...

I beg to differ, and if you read the OP, you would know that i do, and why i do, and we could talk about that, instead of repeating all the facepalm stuff that made me create this thread in the first place.

Gas Guzzler, on 12 September 2015 - 01:15 PM, said:

To be honest, I think the sensor stuff is cool, if a bit convoluted and hard to follow.

I just don't think its worth the loss in firepower, nor is the gain in durability worth the loss in firepower. The Grasshoppers that had the modest 12.5% heat gen quirk are sad right now. Run hotter than a Timber Wolf with less range, slower, and IS XL engine. I shudder to even think about the Black Knight that has low hardpoints and no Jump Jets.

I just think the IS mechs need some firepower quirks to help them a bit. I'm not advocating 20%+ quirks, but something along the lines of 10% in heat gen, laser duration, velocity, range, etc (some but not all on every mech of course) is not going to have a huge impact on TTK, but will help some IS mechs compete.

I agree on the sensor stuff. But then, again, discussion goes to Clan vs IS. Again and again and again. I could write response here but that would just be repetition of what was written in this very post just above.


I don't get it. Despite first paragraph of this thread. It still is Clan vs IS in EVERY SINGLE CRITICAL argument. And that's why it makes me a sad panda. It's like this: "Yes you are right. Water is wet, but right now we are trying to get the broken pipe from flooding the apartment". "Yes, you are, BUT THE WATER IS WET!". <sigh> yes. yes it is.

[Gas Guzzler]

gloowa, on 12 September 2015 - 09:45 PM, said:

I agree on the sensor stuff. But then, again, discussion goes to Clan vs IS. Again and again and again. I could write response here but that would just be repetition of what was written in this very post just above.


I don't get it. Despite first paragraph of this thread. It still is Clan vs IS in EVERY SINGLE CRITICAL argument. And that's why it makes me a sad panda. It's like this: "Yes you are right. Water is wet, but right now we are trying to get the broken pipe from flooding the apartment". "Yes, you are, BUT THE WATER IS WET!". <sigh> yes. yes it is.

Well its tough to critique the state of balance if the whole story isn't there, so what's the point?

But that isn't all, the IS vs IS and Clan v Clan isn't right either. There are Mist Lynxes with nerfs and Dire Wolves with significant buffs. There are some IS variants that are straight up less effective than other variants, and chassis that are straight up less effective than other chassis.

The IS vs Clan thing is the most obvious issue, if they are really gonna take more action to address that then that is fine, but people are judging what they see on the PTS, not what they may or may not see in the future.

[Pale Jackal]

They really need to do weapon quirks with all other quirks, as you can't tell how a 'mech plays from mobility, structure, etc. quirks alone.

It would also vastly decrease the number of player complaints - because I'm a big fan of quirks, I am OK with the concept of ghost heat - but when I saw the ridiculous torso twist quirks on Clan 'mechs I seriously questioned the wisdom of the team at that point.

Edited by Pale Jackal, 12 September 2015 - 10:47 PM.

[Dimento Graven]

gloowa, on 12 September 2015 - 09:45 PM, said:

So, let me get this straight. You say that survivability was the big difference, look at the quirk pass where 75% of IS mechs get survivability quirks that no longer make it necessary to sacrifice both speed and firepower,

and complain that this is the wrong step? wat? Sorry, i'm really trying to follow what you are saying, but i can't.

If you're talking about the current quirk pass, please share what you're smoking. The fact that ALL weapon quirks were removed, HARDLY makes up for a few extra points of torso structure, ESPECIALLY when equipping an IS XL engine means you're STILL just as dead once you've lost the side torso, and ALSO given the fact that the amount given to the torso structures is still LESS THAN HALF the average Clan alpha makes it an extremely NEGLIGABLE fact, AND IN FACT, a negative trade off.

SO F'ING WHAT if an IS 'mech can survive one more HALF of a Clan alpha IF that IS 'mech loses any range and/or ROF/DPS quirks.

As it stands right now, the clans are back to well over "70% OP", ESPECIALLY given that any half-assed min/maxing of Omni pods can give a Clan 'mech a very large net positive when it comes to the quirks.

Quote

That's NOT what we are trying to achieve with that passs right now. Rea the first @#$!%! paraghraph of my OP. This is exactly why this while discussion is pointless right now. At this stage we are not balancing Crab vs Dire or Atlas vs Dire. At this point we are balancing all IS 100tonners as a goup A and all Clan 100 tonners as goup B. Only after all mechs in goup A are more or less of same value, and all mechs of group B are of same value, we make changes that bring group A and B into balance. God damn it, read the goddamn post.

I read your f'ing post, and I read Paul's and I listened to the last Town Hall, and unless I'm missing something, there's nothing stating that this particular 'balance pass' won't make to the live servers, BEFORE, they balance the rest.

This is PGI we're talking about after all, just how many abortive "-ageddons" do we have to suffer through before we learn we have to shout, and loudly and repetitively, when we see a serious misstep being made?

IF PGI promises to NOT release this pass into the live server without completing weapons and IS vs Clan balancing, I'd be fine, but I've yet to see that, and again, we've seen them pull some pretty bone headed things in the past, so forgive me while I do my due diligence and make sure it's on record that THIS **** as it stands right now, AIN'T NO WHERE NEARS BALANCED...

Quote

So the weapons need to change. Great. we agree. Let's not change weapons by adding quirks to every single IS mech. Just change the weapons instead. What's the point of giving all IS mechs energy quirks instead of just applying that change to the weapon itself. and again, this is 2nd paragraph of my OP. READ IT.

First of let me state, in general, I agree with that concept. HOWEVER, there's plusses and minuses to this strategy. The current live quirks, as they stand right now, aren't that bad. Yes, they've set up an IS meta that if we don't bring that meta to CW, or to competitive play (when IS is required for competitive play) we're handicapping ourselves.

However, I can't seriously nor realistically conceive of a scenario where EVERY 'mech is as viable as EVERY OTHER 'mech in CW and competition. We will ALWAYS min/max, and the individual quirk passes made for some pretty cool and distinctive builds

My thoughts on 'weapon balance' however, are more to the CORE of the original BattleTech design, namely this game lacks a true heat affects table. The heat affects table is THE MOST important table in BattleTech and has been for the past 30 years, and was a part of every computer version of this game since 1988. It was printed on EVERY official 'mech sheet and the heat affects table is what determined how many of your weapons could be fired and how often.

We lack this.

Add a fully defined heat affects table and the issues with large alphas, TTK, heck, even PP damage can be significantly mitigated, without even touching the current weapon values. Then you could quirk 'mechs based off heat capacity and/or heat dissipation, so that weapon specific quirks might not be all that necessary for either Clan or IS.

Quote

I beg to differ, and if you read the OP, you would know that i do, and why i do, and we could talk about that, instead of repeating all the facepalm stuff that made me create this thread in the first place.

I read your OP and again, our opinions are in conflict.

Quote

...

It still is Clan vs IS in EVERY SINGLE CRITICAL argument. And that's why it makes me a sad panda.

...

Mainly because in this implementation most of the 'negative' quirks for Clans are more or less meaningless as omnipod manipulation can eliminate, or significantly curtail most, if not all, negative quirks.

Again, I refer you to my very first half-assed attempt with the Direwolf's quirks:

As you can see from the CT, where most Clan 'mechs get their negative affects from, it "looks" pretty brutally negatively quirked. However, once I choose my omnipods, most negative effects are eliminated or so completely reversed they're now positively quirked.

The IS equivalent 'mech, the King Crab:

Here we see the IS negative quirks and as far as the IS is concerned there is ZERO option to modify the quirks. The quirks are what they are, that's it period.

NOW, I GET THAT THIS IS A "CLASS VS. CLASS" BALANCING ACT, HOWEVER, YOU CAN'T JUST ASSUME THIS SIGNIFICANT ISSUE GOES AWAY AT SOME LATER POINT.

If PGI were to leave this as is, toss in a weapon rebalance and call it a day telling us that everything is now balanced, what we'll see is that the Clans are have, in general, gained a significant net positive benefit.

This is why I think it's ass backwards to try and balance clan 'mech chassis independent of the IS vs Clan factor. Once they've completed this, they're going to have to change all the numbers anyway to get Clan vs. IS balance.

Scan time IS vs. Clan in the above examples is in at least one case the clan has a 600% advantage in Target Scan.

That's HUGE, and OBVIOUSLY will have to be changed so why even START there?!?!