154 replies to this topic

[XX Sulla XX]

Sean yes all the new idea for balance are interesting and can be worked out. Except for one huge thing you did not give any emphasis to. There are a few Clan weapons that have to have IS counters.

Its very easy to show look at all of the tier one mechs........


Tier 1 mechs from metamechs.com analysis in relation to balance.

Tier 1 Clan High - All weapons used.
gauss
LPL
ER Medium

Clan Tier One Low - All weapons used.
gauss
LPL
ER Medium
Er Small (Only Arctic Cheata)



Tier 1 IS Low - All weapons used. (There are no Tier 1 High IS mechs.
Large Laser - Stalker 4N -LARGE LASER RANGE: 5.00 % ENERGY RANGE: 5.00 % LARGE LASER COOLDOWN: 7.50 % ENERGY COOLDOWN: 7.50 % LARGE LASER HEAT GENERATION: -7.50 % ENERGY HEAT GENERATION: -7.50 % MISSILE COOLDOWN: 15.00 %

Large laser Wolverine 6K (also has one medium) LARGE LASER RANGE: 12.50 % ENERGY RANGE: 12.50 % ENERGY COOLDOWN: 15.00 % LARGE LASER HEAT GENERATION: -12.50 % ENERGY HEAT GENERATION: -12.50 % LASER DURATION: -15.00 %

-------------------------------------

Results.

If this does not make clear where balance needs to start I do not know what will. IS needs to have a counter to Clan lasers. We need IS ER Small and Mediums. And we need X-Pulse lasers. Or if that for some reason cant happen then Clan lasers need nerfed or IS lasers need buffed.

Also this needs to be fixed before you can give all of the quirks to mechs to make them different and viable etc etc.

Lets fix this basic problem. Short range things are not bad. But the mid range games are played at favors Clans to a huge degree.

Thanks for reading keep up the videos and streaming etc. Tell Russ and Paul there over all idea is good by and large if they fix the basic weapons problems first.

Edited by XX Sulla XX, 13 September 2015 - 10:15 PM.

[Sean Lang]

I get what your saying, but as I pointed out in the video. I think it is important to fix some of the foundations of the issues we see with balance (skill tree values being tuned down is also coming on PTS soon).

So I'd say I don't think introducing new weapons systems is the answer, but if this is done and done correctly, introducing them will be a lot easier (balance wise) in the near future if PGI chooses.

[Mcgral18]

Sean Lang, on 13 September 2015 - 10:26 PM, said:

I get what your saying, but as I pointed out in the video. I think it is important to fix some of the foundations of the issues we see with balance (skill tree values being tuned down is also coming on PTS soon).

So I'd say I don't think introducing new weapons systems is the answer, but if this is done and done correctly, introducing them will be a lot easier (balance wise) in the near future if PGI chooses.

There are some very simple changes to make downright bad weapons acceptable.
.XML edits, without any additional features.



I hope Paul discovers this. And not just to nerf MGs. Again.

[XX Sulla XX]

Sean Lang, on 13 September 2015 - 10:26 PM, said:

I get what your saying, but as I pointed out in the video. I think it is important to fix some of the foundations of the issues we see with balance (skill tree values being tuned down is also coming on PTS soon).

So I'd say I don't think introducing new weapons systems is the answer, but if this is done and done correctly, introducing them will be a lot easier (balance wise) in the near future if PGI chooses.

OK I just do not know how the change ideas as good as some of them are will have any effect on top tier mech balance when weapons systems are so unbalanced. We have IS mechs with all kinds of quirks now. From super tanky mechs like the Highlander to more agile mechs. But the only ones that are tier 1 from IS are the ones with buffs to make them compete with Clan lasers/gauss.

Any way as you say we can agree to not agree. In the end its only a game

[MoonUnitBeta]

Sean Lang, on 13 September 2015 - 10:26 PM, said:

(skill tree values being tuned down is also coming on PTS soon).

Is the pinpoint skill going to get replaced too? I think it would be kinda important to figure out what that waste of 3000xp is going to do before things are balanced around not having it...

[Sean Lang]

MoonUnitBeta, on 13 September 2015 - 10:36 PM, said:

Is the pinpoint skill going to get replaced too? I think it would be kinda important to figure out what that waste of 3000xp is going to do before things are balanced around not having it...

As far as I know yes!

[XX Sulla XX]

MoonUnitBeta, on 13 September 2015 - 10:36 PM, said:

Is the pinpoint skill going to get replaced too? I think it would be kinda important to figure out what that waste of 3000xp is going to do before things are balanced around not having it...

Hopefully you get a refund on any skills that are replaced. I would think they would do this.

[MoonUnitBeta]

Sean Lang, on 13 September 2015 - 10:39 PM, said:

As far as I know yes!

Time for drinks!

[Appogee]

Until we know how Clan vs IS will be balanced, the whole IS Mech dequirking is a moot point.

IS Mechs cannot be competitive with Clan Mechs while Clan Mechs continue to have much longer ranges, pack more weapons due to lower tonnages, and mix and match hardpoints so they can min/max to the full.

No amount of stuffing around with IS sensors, armor and mobility will overcome the sheer competitive advantage of Clans being able to deliver higher damage over longer range.

A whole new rebalancing idea is needed.

(By all means, incorporate differences in sensor and armor capabilities into a new rebalancing approach. It could be a useful part of a broader solution. But it's not the solution all by itself.)

Edited by Appogee, 13 September 2015 - 11:03 PM.

[XX Sulla XX]

Appogee, on 13 September 2015 - 11:00 PM, said:

Until we know how Clan vs IS will be balanced, the whole IS Mech dequirking is a moot point.

IS Mechs cannot be competitive with Clan Mechs while Clan Mechs continue to have much longer ranges, pack more weapons due to lower tonnages, and mix and match hardpoints so they can min/max to the full.

No amount of stuffing around with IS sensors, armor and mobility will overcome the sheer competitive advantage of Clans being able to deliver higher damage over longer range.

A whole new rebalancing idea is needed.

(By all means, incorporate differences in sensor and armor capabilities into a new rebalancing approach. It could be a useful part of a broader solution. But it's not the solution all by itself.)

Exactly right

[Bloody]

You know, i cannot think of a company who for example makes a car, and decides to test if the lights work by throwing away the wheel... just saying, it is pretty incompetent not to have controls in a test environment and expect the testers to know what they are supposed to be testing without notes etc

[TheArisen]

My hope is that this is the beginning of a hopefully great balancing system. Some things are obviously not okay like the Twolf only having -2.5 missile cooldown + bunches of positives.

I agree with Sulla about adding advanced IS tech. We need to decrease the gap between IS & Clan. That'll be much easier to accomplish if the equipment being balanced is closer in quality.

[jss78]

To make an incredibly unhelpful and nonconstructive comment ... I wish we could just play 3025 era MW. It'd fix all of the persistent issues with TTK and balance in one stroke. Would also halve the number of factions for CW (--> quicker games).

But as far as working with the current system, I like all the new aspects for balance that PGI is adding, I just think they'll ultimately need to add something on the weapons side to balance IS-vs-clan, be it weapon spec nerfs and/or boosts or quirks.
A lore-correct and in a way less contrived approach to balance would be to give IS a numbers advantage (e.g. 12-vs-10), and simply accept that clan mechs are better, but that'd be tough to implement especially in solo queue due to the "each man for himself" nature.

I like the idea of tuning down skill tree values, as it'll work as a wholesale nerf to TTK while not causing balance issues. It'll also somewhat ease the new-player experience as it'll reduce the mech capability gap which exists in addition to the inevitable skill gap.

[XX Sulla XX]

jss78, on 13 September 2015 - 11:48 PM, said:

To make an incredibly unhelpful and nonconstructive comment ... I wish we could just play 3025 era MW. It'd fix all of the persistent issues with TTK and balance in one stroke. Would also halve the number of factions for CW (--> quicker games).

But as far as working with the current system, I like all the new aspects for balance that PGI is adding, I just think they'll ultimately need to add something on the weapons side to balance IS-vs-clan, be it weapon spec nerfs and/or boosts or quirks.
A lore-correct and in a way less contrived approach to balance would be to give IS a numbers advantage (e.g. 12-vs-10), and simply accept that clan mechs are better, but that'd be tough to implement especially in solo queue due to the "each man for himself" nature.

I like the idea of tuning down skill tree values, as it'll work as a wholesale nerf to TTK while not causing balance issues. It'll also somewhat ease the new-player experience as it'll reduce the mech capability gap which exists in addition to the inevitable skill gap.

Another lore correct fix is to get IS ER small and ER medium lasers and IS x-pulse lasers.

[Speedy Plysitkos]

Sean Lang, on 13 September 2015 - 10:26 PM, said:

I get what your saying, but as I pointed out in the video. I think it is important to fix some of the foundations of the issues we see with balance (skill tree values being tuned down is also coming on PTS soon). So I'd say I don't think introducing new weapons systems is the answer, but if this is done and done correctly, introducing them will be a lot easier (balance wise) in the near future if PGI chooses.

seems PTR, will be a looooooooooooooooooooong way to go this time.

[Black Ivan]

A good foundation is good, but if the squabells between Clan and IS players should finally come to an end PGI will have not only have to look at quirks, but also at weapons. Otherwise the daily whine o "Cans are OP" or "IS is OP" will com sooner enough after the rebalancing.

Edited by Black Ivan, 14 September 2015 - 12:26 AM.

[kapusta11]

Sean has too much faith in PGI.

[MauttyKoray]

Appogee, on 13 September 2015 - 11:00 PM, said:

Until we know how Clan vs IS will be balanced, the whole IS Mech dequirking is a moot point.

IS Mechs cannot be competitive with Clan Mechs while Clan Mechs continue to have much longer ranges, pack more weapons due to lower tonnages, and mix and match hardpoints so they can min/max to the full.

No amount of stuffing around with IS sensors, armor and mobility will overcome the sheer competitive advantage of Clans being able to deliver higher damage over longer range.

A whole new rebalancing idea is needed.

(By all means, incorporate differences in sensor and armor capabilities into a new rebalancing approach. It could be a useful part of a broader solution. But it's not the solution all by itself.)

Would an Atlas with 2x structure change your mind on that? Thats a lot of damage to soak up with an Atlas... Supposedly one of them had it on the PTS, and it make me giddy.

[Anunknownlurker]

To me, as in so many aspects of life, it's all down to communication; now, this is a two way street, the communicators have to get their points across BUT the communicated to also have to listen. In my view both ends have let themselves down so far with PTS. It wasn't clear what this first pass was about and we as a playerbase reacted poorly.

Next time, let's all work on this, PGI needs to clarify what specific points they are testing and we need to be better at actually listening (reading) what has been said.

To illustrate this: it was made VERY clear that this was a first test, nothing set in stone, and many players reacted as if this was the finished product. The communication was clear but the communicated to didn't listen

A further illustration: it was not made clear that this first pass was, largely, to test the new sensor changes therefore we, as amateur testers, did not really know what we were testing which led to massive confusion. The communication wasn't clear which led to negative reactions.

[XX Sulla XX]

MauttyKoray, on 14 September 2015 - 01:06 AM, said:

Would an Atlas with 2x structure change your mind on that? Thats a lot of damage to soak up with an Atlas... Supposedly one of them had it on the PTS, and it make me giddy.

Problem is you cant give that to every IS mech. And look at what they did to other mechs like say the DDC.

Jimmy DiGriz, on 14 September 2015 - 01:15 AM, said:

To me, as in so many aspects of life, it's all down to communication; now, this is a two way street, the communicators have to get their points across BUT the communicated to also have to listen. In my view both ends have let themselves down so far with PTS. It wasn't clear what this first pass was about and we as a playerbase reacted poorly.

Next time, let's all work on this, PGI needs to clarify what specific points they are testing and we need to be better at actually listening (reading) what has been said.

To illustrate this: it was made VERY clear that this was a first test, nothing set in stone, and many players reacted as if this was the finished product. The communication was clear but the communicated to didn't listen

A further illustration: it was not made clear that this first pass was, largely, to test the new sensor changes therefore we, as amateur testers, did not really know what we were testing which led to massive confusion. The communication wasn't clear which led to negative reactions.

True communication was a big problem.