257 replies to this topic

[NocturnalBeast]

CoffiNail, on 02 November 2015 - 03:34 AM, said:

Pgi is putting shielding on a tie fighter to balance it out with rebel x wings...

I played the crap out of Xwing vs Tiefighter ages ago and I did pretty well in the Tie Advanced.

[Mr Hunter]

Why is this discussion being had? So PGI has decided to ruin clan mechs so bratty kids on steam can't whine on the forums, correct? To be fair these forums would be ruined if that was the case.
Really though this makes me sad. How about we focus on say.. the scalpel light mechs? Or designing a system that encourages diverse multi-purpose builds?

[Void Angel]

No, that's not correct. They've chosen to balance Clan 'mechs in order to have a game that works for non-Clanners. That's not "ruining" anything, really. However, your choice to use that pejorative - and to characterize any new player who would find overpowered Clan 'mechs (whose initial entry costs look higher) frustrating to fight as being a "bratty kid," - exemplifies the kind of blind spot which is exactly why this conversation is being had. Like the guy on the first page that threatened to demand a refund for his pre-purchased content because "Inner Sphere gets new tech that balances them later in the timeline."

On your other points, though, this kind of is about lights - they can't really nerf certain Lights' combat power without giving players another reason to play a 'mech besides combat. I'd like to see a broader range of viable weapons, too. However, in order to enforce generalist builds as the status quo, you'd have to massively redesign the heat system - which would require a total rework of weapon balance. With so many irons in the fire for now and the foreseeable future, I'd be stunned if that were to happen.

[NocturnalBeast]

This argument is worse than arguing about religion! I guess by trying to please everyone MWO will end up pleasing no one.

[CoffiNail]

Ed Steele, on 02 November 2015 - 03:57 PM, said:

This argument is worse than arguing about religion! I guess by trying to please everyone MWO will end up pleasing no one.

Yep... why they should have just stuck to lore, figured it out and tried to please the core fans, the thousands that have loved past MW titles and leagues... not the masses. Few games that try to cater to the masses wins out.

[CoffiNail]

Ed Steele, on 02 November 2015 - 01:57 PM, said:

I played the crap out of Xwing vs Tiefighter ages ago and I did pretty well in the Tie Advanced.

Yeah, but that is a Tie Advanced. I am talking Tie Interceptor.

[NocturnalBeast]

CoffiNail, on 02 November 2015 - 04:56 PM, said:

Yeah, but that is a Tie Advanced. I am talking Tie Interceptor.

Ok, I think the advanced had shields. :-)

[Knight2416]

Only two fair ways to fix the balance. Refunds for Clan mechs would be bad for business.

Match maker way to balance this is Clan mechs only group with clan (no mixed IS Clan drops) and clan has 2 stars ( or maybe go to 2/2/2/2 for 2 lance's) or IS has 4 lances (re-enforced company 4/4/4/4) to get the less clan to more IS mechs.

Time line way to Balance This move to MW4 time frame so IS can run clan weapons and omi points(enjoy the heat that you get with range).

That begin said I will take IS vs a clan as you can remove parts that you do not want (JJ, heatsinks etc) and I put my Stalker 5M (Death Stalker) armed with 5xSRM6 5xsm pulse, both range mod, 5 ton ammo, max armour, Endo, and engine about 310 STD. you can alpha 85+ damage x2 to 80% heat which kills or cores even Dire wolfs. More with cool shot as chain fire SRM6 is just mean at this point. average 2 kills 600 damage a match unless sniperfess as max range for all weapons to fire is 260ish meters (365 meters for SRM).

[Maverick3]

11 pages and you are still rambling about balance ? guys realy ? I'm with the IS beating claners in CW on a regular basis. then comes the next shift where claners beat the hell out of some IS PUGs.
How do you think it's possible ? it's about team play guys.
Currently the Mechs are balanced on a 1v1 base.
Lore side the Clan mechs are about 200 Years ahead if IS Mechs along with a Genetic Pilot building programm. This made the Claners field 1mech for like 3 IS Mechs in 3048-3051.
At Tukyaid the Comguards fielded Better Technology with proven Combines arms tactics along with Veteran Pilots and they still lost 3 Mechs for 2 Clanners. Yet they won by fielding more Mechs than the Clans.
By 3055 the IS Mechs have moved up on Technology to make the IS competable with the Claners.
By 3060 the IS adopted all the fielded Clan tech and adopted the Technology of the Clans.
in 3063 the Clans brought out new tech which in turn was adoped by IS in 3065

In the Year 3067 the Inner Sphere has caught up to the Clans on the Weapons race and the Mechs of both sides are on eual Levels both technological and Pilot Skill wise.

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

That's what the Franchise is telling PGI.
What is your aproach?
- no Techdifferance CoD style in 3067 ?
- minimal Techdifferance in 3063
- Give Claners new Weapons to make em feel differant 3060 ?
- ........ you name the Year

The balancing between Clans and InnerSphere is about the toughest question in the Battletech Universe and has been discussed for 20 years without a solid solution and you expect PGI to have it in 2 years ?

This is a living universe. There are always rambling script kiddies who just spend money and expect to receive a god mode. There are always Hardliners who don't want any change since the closed Beta and say "Everything was better in the old days"
YOU are living in this universe and should do your best to SUPPORT PGI at modeling the living universe that is MechWarriorOnline.

It's ok to criticise what Russ is doing but make it CONSTRUCTIVE. Tell em in long eucated Posts what you excpet them to change to what balance and accept that there are other players who like to think their own way too.

Maverick3
Long time Fan of Battletech

P.S. English is not my native tounge. you can keep all typos and gramar errors you find.

[Pax Bellum]

PGI should nerf Teamwork. Seriously Teamwork is way OP.

[NocturnalBeast]

Pax Bellum, on 02 November 2015 - 07:03 PM, said:

PGI should nerf Teamwork. Seriously Teamwork is way OP.

Well they are talking about PVE and Co-op mode for people who can't handle playing humans who use teamwork, so that should make people happy. I am sure the AI will range from standing still (testing grounds) to fairly difficult.

[MischiefSC]

CoffiNail, on 02 November 2015 - 04:52 PM, said:

Yep... why they should have just stuck to lore, figured it out and tried to please the core fans, the thousands that have loved past MW titles and leagues... not the masses. Few games that try to cater to the masses wins out.

You do understand that FASA and the original developers of Battletech said that the balance on IS vs Clans was terrible, their introduction was badly done and to fix it they created the WoB storyline to literally nuke everything and start over with balanced IS and Clan tech? They even recreated the whole Kerensky leaves and will come back later thing. I mean they restarted the whole story and plot line to re-do it in a way that wasn't terrible for anything but PvE. Because not having that was a bad mistake for the game and an error in the lore only fixed by terrible plot armor and deus ex machina machinations?

So we're skipping the worst mistakes in the games development. Sure, it would be better if PGI ditched 99% of their existing assets and started over in Dark Ages but that's not going to happen. So we're getting Dark Ages balance with the existing tech we have. Balanced, mech for mech, just with a bit of a different feel whenever and however possible.

[Prussian Havoc]

MischiefSC, on 03 November 2015 - 01:26 AM, said:

You do understand that FASA and the original developers of Battletech said that the balance on IS vs Clans was terrible, their introduction was badly done and to fix it they created the WoB storyline to literally nuke everything and start over with balanced IS and Clan tech? They even recreated the whole Kerensky leaves and will come back later thing. I mean they restarted the whole story and plot line to re-do it in a way that wasn't terrible for anything but PvE. Because not having that was a bad mistake for the game and an error in the lore only fixed by terrible plot armor and deus ex machina machinations?

So we're skipping the worst mistakes in the games development. Sure, it would be better if PGI ditched 99% of their existing assets and started over in Dark Ages but that's not going to happen. So we're getting Dark Ages balance with the existing tech we have. Balanced, mech for mech, just with a bit of a different feel whenever and however possible.

You are right of course... I also tend to view the FASA BattleTech glory days of the late 1980's and early 1990's as having done no wrong but just as you describe balance has always been a central issue for our game.

[KahnWongFuChung]

Why is this discussion being had? So PGI has decided to ruin clan mechs so bratty kids on steam can't whine on the forums, correct? To be fair these forums would be ruined if that was the case.
Really though this makes me sad. How about we focus on say.. the scalpel light mechs? Or designing a system that encourages diverse multi-purpose builds?
=========================================================================================
Those bratty kids are what is going to save or sink MWO for good. MWO to most new players is almost unplayable with the high alphas and short longevity per mech most kids are like why play this game in a mech that lasts 30 seconds to 2 minutes with all the heavy focus fire per battle when I can play BattleField ,COD or games where I can sneak around and live longer?

Plus the fact MC prices are ridicules and 50% to high for all items kids wont pay it when they can GO TO CHEAPER GAMES THAT THEY CAN GET ITEMS AT REASONABLE COSTS

[MischiefSC]

Prussian Havoc, on 03 November 2015 - 06:33 AM, said:

You are right of course... I also tend to view the FASA BattleTech glory days of the late 1980's and early 1990's as having done no wrong but just as you describe balance has always been a central issue for our game.

Balance was always a struggle. The Clans worked in the early mw computer games because they were made for pve.

Also 5 v 12 worked when everyone was playing several mechs on one side (clpls were still broke as ****. You could reasonably call shots as accurately as IS lasers made rng shots at the same range) but is in no way viable in a fps moba.

If a fps moba isn't balanced 1 for 1 it's a horrible idea doomed to failure. If anyone wants broken clan balance matches let them put events together and see how many people show. Then run them every day and see who keeps showing up.

I'd play one off games of locusts vs dire wolves and such but if that was the only game mode it's terrible. It wouldn't full enough matches regularly to populate the game.

Battletech has been fighting with balance issues for over 30 years. It would be stupid of us not to learn from their mistakes and attempt to emulate what they did that worked instead of what failed.

Edited by MischiefSC, 03 November 2015 - 12:35 PM.

[NocturnalBeast]

MischiefSC, on 03 November 2015 - 12:34 PM, said:

Balance was always a struggle. The Clans worked in the early mw computer games because they were made for pve.

Also 5 v 12 worked when everyone was playing several mechs on one side (clpls were still broke as ****. You could reasonably call shots as accurately as IS lasers made rng shots at the same range) but is in no way viable in a fps moba.

If a fps moba isn't balanced 1 for 1 it's a horrible idea doomed to failure. If anyone wants broken clan balance matches let them put events together and see how many people show. Then run them every day and see who keeps showing up.

I'd play one off games of locusts vs dire wolves and such but if that was the only game mode it's terrible. It wouldn't full enough matches regularly to populate the game.

Battletech has been fighting with balance issues for over 30 years. It would be stupid of us not to learn from their mistakes and attempt to emulate what they did that worked instead of what failed.

Well, I am done with this argument! BATTLETECH is fully funded and beyond and now that I know that there willl be a real BATTLETECH game in the near future, I am not so concerned about what PGI does with the Clans. I will continue to play MWO though, and I do not consider any of the money I have spent on MWO a waste, since at the very least, some great looking mechs have come out of MWO which will be used in BATTLETECH.

[AztecD]

Don't nerf the Clan XL engines, just introduce the HEAT Effects, i mean a normal mech running at 80% Heat still runs line a normal cool mech and that is not right.

Targeting, running, jumping, ammo explosions all are related to the HEAT Effects on your mech, its incredible that they don't exsist here. Heat effects will balance 'l33t' lights, it will balance when you loose a torso on your clan mech by generating more heat

i mean why has this never been introuduced?

[Chagatay]

Just release LFE and be done with it. It is out of time table but who cares. That and with small penalties to side torso loss on both these and clan versions, I'd say we are in good shape.

Edited by Chagatay, 03 November 2015 - 01:32 PM.

[Phelan Ward-Kell]

Not going to get into any crazy flames on the topic, so all I'm saying on the matter is that IF they nerf my Clan mechs to basically be IS mechs in any capacity I will be asking for the difference to be refunded.

I bought Clan mechs that cost more money because functionally they behave in different ways, and YES that includes being marginally better in some capacities (Pre-quirk application).

I didn't buy Clan mechs to have OP-As-****-ROFLSTOMPING-PAY2WIN mechs, so I understanding balancing. But I don't accept being nerfed into the ground to appease people who can't comprehend that practice will improve their skill, and that teamwork is what is OP, not the mech.

[Void Angel]

CoffiNail, on 02 November 2015 - 04:52 PM, said:

Yep... why they should have just stuck to lore, figured it out and tried to please the core fans, the thousands that have loved past MW titles and leagues... not the masses. Few games that try to cater to the masses wins out.

hy·poc·ri·sy

həˈpäkrəsē/

noun
noun: hypocrisy; plural noun: hypocrisies

• 
  
  

  
  enjoying the benefits of a well-funded game while snidely deriding the major source of that funding as "the masses."
  synonyms: dissimulation, false virtue, cant, posturing, affectation, speciousness, empty talk, insincerity, falseness, deceit, dishonesty, mendacity, pretense, duplicity; More
  
  
  sanctimoniousness, sanctimony, pietism, piousness;
  informalphoniness, fraud
  
  "must politics be the perennial benchmark of hypocrisy?"
  antonyms: sincerity

Origin
Middle English: from Old French ypocrisie, via ecclesiastical Latin, from Greek hupokrisis ‘acting of a theatrical part,’ from hupokrinesthai ‘play a part, pretend,’ from hupo ‘under’ + krinein ‘decide, judge.’


See also: elitism, arrogance, asininity