9 replies to this topic

[Drunk Canuck]

As a fairly lengthy MWO player, having played since the launch of open beta, I'd have to say that this is probably one of the few times where I have felt like the devs decided to take a broad brush to making changes, many of which didn't need to be changed.

On armor values:

Current live armor values are acceptable, double the original TT values is fine to compensate for the ability to customize and pack on more weapons than normal. What we saw on the PTS was a bit crazy at times, and really didn't address the overall issue. You can keep adding torso armor and structure buffs, but as a die hard Clan player, that means I will just leg every target I can because the weapons I carry do enough damage to rip through most armor in an alpha or two, not to mention on bigger Mech's are just as easy to hit.

On damage values:

I feel like this is the crux of our problem with balance, and I want to take the opportunity to pitch some ideas here that I posted on Reddit the other day that might bring Clans more in line with IS Mech's.

As it currently stands, there are two school's of thought on how we could balance Clans vs IS more effectively, and one of them I obviously prefer over the other, but either is functional despite one having a skill handicap.

Option 1: Keep the high alpha damage, increase heat generation on laser weapons and increase the cool down of Clan weapons across the board but remove the negative weapons quirks from all Clan Mech's. This means less time firing, more time cooling down overall, but you have to make every shot count, and in a brawl you would be overheating and having a difficult time dealing damage, especially on hot maps.

Option 2: Lower damage on a variety of the problem Clan weapons, most notably the Clan Large Pulse Laser with it's 13 damage, the Small Pulse Laser is currently 6 damage and the ER Medium Laser is 7. Since these three seem to be what many would deem as the problem Clan weapons, with the ER PPC lacking viability in most builds due to how difficult it is to run because of the large heat output it creates while most ballistic weapons aren't very lethal unless boated and still require lots of face time to deal maximum damage. Two of the 3 Clan energy weapons have significantly higher than normal damage values compared to table top, while the ER ML is arguably the best ton for ton weapon in the game bar none, 7 damage at 450 meters for 1 ton is crazy. In TT, the LPL has a damage value of 10, while the SPL is 3 (same as IS). The ER Small Laser should be preferential for lights, but due to it's inferior damage over the Small Pulse Laser in MWO, it isn't the preferred weapon.

I propose that the ER ML retain all of it's current range stats while seeing it's damage drop to 5 (same as the IS ER ML down the road) and heat reduced a slight bit.

The Large Pulse Laser should deal at maximum 10 damage, while the Clan Small Pulse either needs to trade it's damage for less heat or range, make it 4 damage like the IS Small Pulse is in MWO (which means it is still a viable weapon), and reduce the heat generation it creates. These are pretty easy changes to make, rather than sweeping a broad brush over IS Mech's and taking away the fun and great quirks that many of them have that make them pretty good right now.

In my perfect world, Clan Mech's would have better heat management and less upfront damage then they do now, because that is really one of many reasons why Clan tech is so much better. And I think if you reduce the damage on Clan energy weapons, chassis like the Nova might actually be useful if they can pack more ER ML without getting melted from all the heat

I feel like the balance with Clans is in so many ways similar to the poptart meta of days gone by, and now that you can't poptart in IS Mech's due to all the nerfs that IS weapons and Mech's alike have seen all in the name of "balance", you don't really have a play style that can duke it out with the Clans very well, and jump sniping would have been good against them.

[Lily from animove]

Not entirely, if you lower damage on the CERML you gimp the light emchs beign shafted more then mechs like the TBR. because TBR can compensate, those lights can not. So if taking down damage, also take down heat.

But generally clanmechs themselves are a big issue, because the clanners have the worst and best chassis. and the onimech constructionrules are the cause why the bad chassis can not escape "being bad"

I sometimes wonder if getting rid of those would make balance amongst clanners better, because TBR; SCR and HBR or DWF they all have already the optimal chosen engine sizes. And by this I do't think removing the construction rules would buff them.

Then if this is set free, some IS vs clantech could be adjusted. But ith the clan baddies being trapped in their situation the gap of losers would just open more.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

The problem with all mechs is that our Dissipation is way too low for generated HPS, and the Heat Capacity is able to get too high. So I'd like to see boosts to base Dissipation and some reductions to Capacity. And I'd be fine with having different sets of values between Clans and IS.

and I have no problem reducing damage on various weapons

---

I've been thinking about an alternative, about adjusting base beam durations and assigning a relationship between damage per hitscan tic and also look at damage per projectile and velocity.




This way a IS Tech has better beam durations, but shorter ranges on average. While allowing for future tech to better fit in once they become available for MWO.

So the IS ML is 5 damage, maybe 3 Heat with its current 0.90 Duration
Where the Clan ER ML is 7 damage, maybe 5 Heat, but a 1.26 Duration

I'd also restore Damage and Heat Values, since durations would be directly tied to Damage. And I would likely have duration quirks only be present on very few mechs, where if necessary cooldown and Heat Gen quirks might be fine.

And the other thing in the Lore, the reason LB-X had longer range was due to increased velocities in relation to Ultras and Regular ACs, so I'd consider creating a relationship between damage per projectile and velocity or instead tie Velocity to Effective Range (the other thing is to reduce the number of pellets on Cluster Shot and have them deal two damage each Pellet, so the LB-X 5s would bump up to 6 damage, but also have a longer cooldown to keep to its current DPS).


Lastly, Gauss could stay hypersonic, but I'd rather see how it might work if PPCs were the fastest projectiles.

[Drunk Canuck]

Lily from animove, on 15 September 2015 - 01:59 PM, said:

Not entirely, if you lower damage on the CERML you gimp the light emchs beign shafted more then mechs like the TBR. because TBR can compensate, those lights can not. So if taking down damage, also take down heat.

But generally clanmechs themselves are a big issue, because the clanners have the worst and best chassis. and the onimech constructionrules are the cause why the bad chassis can not escape "being bad"

I sometimes wonder if getting rid of those would make balance amongst clanners better, because TBR; SCR and HBR or DWF they all have already the optimal chosen engine sizes. And by this I do't think removing the construction rules would buff them.

Then if this is set free, some IS vs clantech could be adjusted. But ith the clan baddies being trapped in their situation the gap of losers would just open more.

Any Clan light worth their salt isn't running ER ML unless they are in an Adder or Kit Fox. Both the ACH and MLX are insufficient at running the ER ML due to lack of tonnage for heat sinks.

I am fine with there being under performing and even mediocre Clan Mech's, it is inherited as part of the overall design of the chassis themselves both from a lore and table top perspective. Inner Sphere Mech's should have their share of viable and somewhat stronger chassis though, which is really what we don't have. Aside from a few DPS heavy variants and Mech's like the Thunderbolt, they just don't have a whole lot to fight against the stronger Clan Mech's anyway. I think if you wind up toning down the big threats among the Clans by nerfing weapons, using quirks to give some parity to the weaker Clan chassis might be more ideal than having just this massive power gap that we currently see. When you go from having heavies running alphas in the high 50's whereas an IS heavy is around the mid 30's, you obviously have a significant enough power gap that there is reason for changes to be made.

I don't really like the thought of making IS Mech's stronger than they currently are due to it creating more power creep, when we need to reverse the power creep a fair bit.

[Pjwned]

Adjusting damage on weapons in any way, buffing or nerfing, is generally a pretty bad idea unless it's clearly needed.

Edited by Pjwned, 15 September 2015 - 03:00 PM.

[Chagear]

I don't post much because I don't see a point, but if the Devs are listening, then speaking is a good thing right? So here goes:

This game is an equal numbers per team FPS and must be treated as such. it is not the Table Top game and If IS tech is to be used, then Clan and IS MUST be balance to each other.

The problem with the current balance of the game is that Clan tech has to many advantages over IS tech without paying for them. This core balance problem is why pitting Clan Vs IS at this point in MWO is just bad, and trying to balance the mechs overall using quirks does little to help.

Quirks are a "front end" band aid. As long at the game is 12 v 12 (or any even numbers) that can be Clan vs IS, the core problem exists. Note - I like quirks and think that they are a great way to add character to a mech, but not as an overall balance tool.

To solve the core problem you have to balance the 2 techs in a way that still keeps the feel of clan tech and IS tech different, but balanced.

-Clan Tech pays nothing for many times a 30% buff to equipment base over IS tech. I could go into detail, but let us be honest and admit it, it is a LOT to type.
The "payment" for these upgrades is the inability to change engine size and a few locked slots? That for some reason some Clan Chassis do not have Clan FF or ES, and can't get it ( <- This should really change!)
Anyone seen an IS mech getting to customize their number and type of hardpoints, or getting to add ECM and/or JJ to an ENTIRE chassis, not just one variant. Seems that "payment" for Clan tech was not really a payment at all at this point.
Over quirking IS mechs is not a real solution to this inequity in baseline stats.

The point here is that the 2 techs are not balanced to each other in a game that the teams are balanced to each other.

There have been many ideas on how to balance the 2 techs to each other, and every time some one brings it up, another person comes in with "well that is not how it is in the Lore" or some such. The imbalance between Clan and IS is a design "back end" problem created by people who don't want to admit that the FPS is not the TT, and that if MWO where designed like the TT Battletech it might be a mech simulator, but not the currently fun game it is, or even number teams.

Then there is the match maker... tonnage limits on teams to make taking non-max ton chassis for weight class a thing.

TLDR; Balance Clan tech to IS tech, then add quirks to each and every chassis to flavor them.

[Andi Nagasia]

the last PTS didnt address Tech Balance because thats not what they were testing,
they were testing Sensors(Target Acquisition Delay, Target Retention Time, and Target Scan Time),
as well as the Balance Matrix, seeing if it was Weighing Mechs Properly,
which it wasnt so they have to change some of its values,

[Goombah]

This patch doesn't address any of the underlying issues with the game, and simply creates new ones.
I know this is the first wave of many updates, but I doubt this is going anywhere good.

This game is stagnantly based around the death ball and 12 v 12 meta. Until that changes, the only thing a mech is good for is alpha strikes and taking a few hits. If dynamic objective based gameplay isn't introduced, the only thing that will ever be important is alpha strikes. Different mechs can't be quirked moving supply crates or racing to moving objectives or destroying convoys or capturing bases or suppressing infantry if none of these things exist in the game.

Good mechs have lots of hardpoints in good locations (the atmosphere) bad mechs have fewer hardpoints, low to the ground.
Good mechs have good hitboxes, undersized for their weight.

This is what the game revolves around. More spreadsheet tweaking will not make the 1 energy cicada a good mech.

Every underperforming mech needs hardpoint revision to get on the level of the stalker, blackjack, timber, dire, banshee, firestarter. Until everyone is on board with good hardpoint locations, in good places, and aren't overscaled monsters like the quickdraw, treb and catapult, there will be no balance.

I know the general outcry will be "but if every mech had 8 - 12 hardpoints they would all feel the same"
It's not true. The mauler is a perfect example of 4 chassis that are all DISTINCTLY MAULERS yet at the same time DEFINITELY NOT AN ATLAS.

If hardpoints are not normalized for all mechs in the game, the only other recourse for balance is absurd offensive quirks that make pint sized robots hit harder and dps faster than assaults, or massive +200 +300 bonus armor nearly across the board for under performers, or scaling under performers down until they're tiny for their weight class.

It has to come out in the wash somewhere. Compromise has to be made somewhere. Everything has to be a trade off to achieve balance. Many mechs get nonsensical hardpoints that drag the ground, and are given absolutely nothing in return. A cicada with 1 energy and 4 ballistic and a spider with 2 energy should not exist in this game. There is no substantial reason currently that either one of those mechs don't have 8 hardpoints like the firestarter. There is no reason, no recompense.

FIX THE REAL PROBLEMS. HARDPOINTS, SCALING, HIT BOXES.

[Kmieciu]

Pjwned, on 15 September 2015 - 02:51 PM, said:

Adjusting damage on weapons in any way, buffing or nerfing, is generally a pretty bad idea unless it's clearly needed.

I own a Kit Fox, Adder, Nova, Stormcrow, Timber Wolf and the Hellbringer and I can attest that ERML and C-LPL are over-performing by a huge margin.

The only variation right now is how many LPLs and ERMLs should a clanner mount, end if it's even worth to add Gauss to the mix.
Kit Fox: LPL+2xERML 15DHS
Adder: 5xERML 19 DHS
Nova: 5-8 ERML 22-24 DHS
Hellbringer: 6 ERML 30 DHS
Stormcrow: LPL+ 5ERML 21 DHS
Timber Wolf: 2xLPL+3-5 ERML (up to 24 DHS)

It's all the same boring laser vomit meta. Fire your 1-2 alphas from 464 meters (module+TC1), then hide to cool off. It's the easiest way to play MWO. It's so much easier than using LRMs.

In solo queue, there are no viable counters. You are safe from LRMs and Streaks (radar derp), IS ERLL is hot, easy to roll damage. Only highly quirked IS mechs can counter it with mass LLs or LPLs .

Praetor Knight, on 15 September 2015 - 02:32 PM, said:

This is great. I like the scientific approach to balancing. More damage and range = longer beam duration.
Recycle should also be adjusted, so that the DPS is the same. IS ML should fire more often than Clan ERML.

The other glaring issue right now is that Clan ERSL has comparable beam duration to IS ML (1s vs 0.9) but for 1 tonne, you get 3.08 DPS 3,34 DPH (Clan) or 1.28 DPS 1.25 DPH (IS).
That wasn't a problem since Clan lights could not boat energy weapons, but right now we've got a ACH with 6 ERSL that have better DPS/DPH than 6xIS ML, despite half the weight.

Edited by Kmieciu, 16 September 2015 - 02:04 AM.

[Widowmaker1981]

Lily from animove, on 15 September 2015 - 01:59 PM, said:

Not entirely, if you lower damage on the CERML you gimp the light emchs beign shafted more then mechs like the TBR. because TBR can compensate, those lights can not. So if taking down damage, also take down heat.

But generally clanmechs themselves are a big issue, because the clanners have the worst and best chassis. and the onimech constructionrules are the cause why the bad chassis can not escape "being bad"

I sometimes wonder if getting rid of those would make balance amongst clanners better, because TBR; SCR and HBR or DWF they all have already the optimal chosen engine sizes. And by this I do't think removing the construction rules would buff them.

Then if this is set free, some IS vs clantech could be adjusted. But ith the clan baddies being trapped in their situation the gap of losers would just open more.

You are literally insane if you dont think that allowing Dires and Timbers to change engine sizes would be a buff.

Yes i will defintely be happy to run an XL350 - XL400 Dire wolf. Ill still have a metric crapton of firepower (in fact you only lose 1.5 tons if you upgrade to an XL350 and add endo steel to compensate) but it will lose the only thing that keeps it in check, its absurd slow, sluggish nature.

Dire Wolves with changeable engines will make this game into Dire Wolf online.