257 replies to this topic

[SkippyT72]

You also did not pay 3 times the amount for the Thudder and please tell me you think a 50% quirk on anything in the game is right or show me even 1 clan mech that enjoyed that kind of advantage and I might even agree with you.

Once again we want to nerf the clan mechs and make them more fragile when they are already overly hot due to the crap ghost heat and non double HS pgi put out there then PLEASE remove all the quirks from IS mechs and I'm sure I'll go with it, of course removing all quirks would not be a bad thing and we may even see more then the same old 6-8 mechs we always see instead of the what over 40 in the game now?

We have a light mech that can mount ER large lasers stock and it shoots farther out than any clan mech with clan ER large, is that right, no to mention the burn duration stupidity that was placed on the Clan weapons to keep the damage down and allow players with the skill to torso twist to only take partial damage in the area shot. This game has so many quirks and screwed up balancing issue's and I get that, but please don't act like they are all on the clan side of the house. I've been here since closed beta and I've heard all the whining about OP this and OP that, but usually the loudest folks are also the newest or I hate to say it but it's true the weaker players that can't seem to adjust or cope. So please if you can figure out a way to actually balance the game do so, I'll adjust and still play well and my team and friends I play with will continue to win the majority of our drops, so then how will PGI attempt to balance Skill and Teamwork, because I don't see a way as what they have done to the group que and just made it that much worse for the little groups because the groups with teamwork still kick the crap out of them.

Edited by SkippyT72, 27 October 2015 - 05:26 PM.

[MischiefSC]

I have over 1K drops in the Timber Wolf. I bought the original Clan content for cash. It's been like a license to print money, can always hop in that with a meta build and crush wins/kills/cbills. It finances all the IS mechs I buy for cbills. Yes, it's op. It's always been op.

The whole point is eliminating quirks. That's what is already done on the pts. That is the goal, balance without a bunch of quirks.

P2w is not a justification for a refund on Clan packs. It's a justification for refunds on everything else; the promise from pgi 2 years ago was balanced is and Clan tech. It's taken 2 years for them to actually start to deliver.

Edited by MischiefSC, 27 October 2015 - 06:00 PM.

[N0MAD]

Hey Mischief, wana show us the stats for that TW and then your top 3 performing IS mechs without ay edits, trusting you to be honest here.. wana do that?

[MischiefSC]

N0MAD, on 27 October 2015 - 07:01 PM, said:

Hey Mischief, wana show us the stats for that TW and then your top 3 performing IS mechs without ay edits, trusting you to be honest here.. wana do that?

You know, I copied them in and then wrote a big post going over how they relate (for example my win/loss on mechs played in the Elo era are way, way worse than the ones done during PSR) but then realized it's a total non sequitur.

My stats are irrelevant. The only mechs I have that perform as well as the TW are my Wubshee and King Crab - which at 20 and 25 tons heavier obviously should. They're also largely a product of the PSR era where, due to an absence during the bulk of the period where PSR metrics were collected I got to start mid way into T3 and got almost 200 drops at a 1.6+ win/loss and over 3/kdr pretty easily. That's slowed significantly in T2 but it was a way, way easier environment than where I'd gotten myself into with Elo where all my mechs with over 200 drops are about a 1.06 win/loss and at best a 2.0 KDR. Not to mention that until recently I did 90% of my drops in CW.

My stats though mean nothing. It's the telemetry that PGI has collected and the consistent performance in otherwise balanced environments like MRBC that are relevant. Turning this into a dissection of my specific stats has no relevance, unless there's something specific you want to see? Again, I've got no issue posting them. I'm not a big fan of posting Tiers but got talked into it in another thread and, well, whatever.

Are you seriously trying to argue, at this point, that Clan mechs are not OP compared to IS mechs? Is that the debate you want to start?

[Domenoth]

Pihoqahiak, on 27 October 2015 - 03:11 PM, said:

Only 2 of the 4 (not 5 as you wrote) mechs in the Origins Pack have Standard engines, not 5. PGI hasn't said how Clan Battlemech construction rules will work exactly in MW:O yet, so we'll see what will happen with them.

The fact that I said 5 didn't clue you in to the fact I'm talking variants? You couldn't take that one extra step?

Here, I'll spell it out for you:

ENGINE 315 XL 315 XL 315 XL 315 XL
ENGINE 200 XL 200 XL 200 XL 200 XL
ENGINE 300 Standard 300 Standard 300 XL 300 XL
ENGINE 270 Standard 270 Standard 270 Standard 270 XL

Do I have to label them for you or can you at least figure out based on the order I pasted them which chassis each engine set goes with?

Also this.

[NocturnalBeast]

MischiefSC, on 27 October 2015 - 07:35 PM, said:

You know, I copied them in and then wrote a big post going over how they relate (for example my win/loss on mechs played in the Elo era are way, way worse than the ones done during PSR) but then realized it's a total non sequitur.

My stats are irrelevant. The only mechs I have that perform as well as the TW are my Wubshee and King Crab - which at 20 and 25 tons heavier obviously should. They're also largely a product of the PSR era where, due to an absence during the bulk of the period where PSR metrics were collected I got to start mid way into T3 and got almost 200 drops at a 1.6+ win/loss and over 3/kdr pretty easily. That's slowed significantly in T2 but it was a way, way easier environment than where I'd gotten myself into with Elo where all my mechs with over 200 drops are about a 1.06 win/loss and at best a 2.0 KDR. Not to mention that until recently I did 90% of my drops in CW.

My stats though mean nothing. It's the telemetry that PGI has collected and the consistent performance in otherwise balanced environments like MRBC that are relevant. Turning this into a dissection of my specific stats has no relevance, unless there's something specific you want to see? Again, I've got no issue posting them. I'm not a big fan of posting Tiers but got talked into it in another thread and, well, whatever.

Are you seriously trying to argue, at this point, that Clan mechs are not OP compared to IS mechs? Is that the debate you want to start?

Clans are not OP one-on-one, it depends on the pilot. Try it out, dual best out of three games a few times with different Clan and IS pilots, you will not win every time.

[N0MAD]

Mate all i see is excuses, not the stats, you claimed TW was all powerful, yet you wont show the stats for your 3 best IS chassis. didnt think you would, easier to just claim TW is God, considering you are IS this doesnt surprise me..

[NocturnalBeast]

N0MAD, on 27 October 2015 - 09:05 PM, said:

Mate all i see is excuses, not the stats, you claimed TW was all powerful, yet you wont show the stats for your 3 best IS chassis. didnt think you would, easier to just claim TW is God, considering you are IS this doesnt surprise me..

Who are you talking to? You have to quote someone so we know.

[Fire and Salt]

Clan engines would be less OP if they were implemented more similarly to lore...

With one side gone, you should be 1 crit away from death, and you should have a heat penalty...



So, after losing 1 side, apply the following effects:
-10% speed
-5 heat sinks (true doubles from the engine)
-If the remaining CT structure plus side torso structure is less than 75% of their full health total, the mech dies. This simulates that you are 1 crit away from death.


The numbers (5dhs / 10% speed / 75% health) could be tuned... but I think this would more accurately reflect the lore, and as an added bonus, it would also improve balance at the same time.

[Tarl Cabot]

Lugh, on 27 October 2015 - 10:56 AM, said:

Why such arbitrary and nonsensical numbers? There are only three slots in an IS side torso and 2 in a clan ST for XL engines. Even using the magic of engine heat sinks getting to be one slot each, that works out to be 3 DHS for IS and 2 DHS for Clans...

The percentages you quote seem also arbitrary as each has IS(12 crit slots) and Clan (10 Crit slots) so that should be 25% lost of rating for IS and 20% loss of rating for Clan.

At least do the math around the systems in place already please.

I can understand the reaction to Elizander's post, as it does appear excessive for the heat penalty. Just for reference.
1st critical engine hit = 5 heat = 2.5 DHS (true DHS)
2nd critical engine hit = 10 heat = 5 DHS (true DHS)
3rd critical engine hit (either side torso(XL engines) or center torso section) = engine destroyed. (though there are no actual engine crits in MWO or Clan mechs would die faster).

Current MWO penalty for Clan XL losing side torso is 20% HS loss, not 20% heat sinks. Remember, base Heat Scale is 30 + additional HS. 30+ 20 (true DHS in engine)+ 1.4x7(Timberwolf Prime) = 59.8 total heat scale cap. 29.8 (from 17DHS)*0.2=5.96 heat penalty or 3 DHS, which is less than actual engine crits but that is okay, since PGI tends to use percentages instead of whole numbers most of the time.

Since MWO has no engine crits does nothing (crit XL on sides, nothing. The destruction of ST is the trigger) and standard or XL center engine crit hits = nothing.

As for movement penalty, with 10 heat, movement was reduced by 2 movement points. A Timberwolf default is 5/8 (approx 81kph), a 20% reduction in engine, which would reflect speed and agility penalties, the TW would have a 4/6 speed, matching an XL 300 (approx 64 kph)

So her heat penalties are a tad heavy but movement penalty would be approx where it would need to be. Similar but slightly greater penalties would then apply to IS XL engine.

Of course, those against allowing a IS mech to continue w/loss of one side torso w/XL engine saying it is against lore, besides the fact that there are no actual engine crits in MWO, lore-wise IS mechs could be equipped w/Clan tech/engines, never mind the MW games. The MWO flavor, besides improving/modifying the base game which the other games never really attempted, is to keep IS/Clan tech separated, while in some aspects IS mechs would bear a heavier burden while Clan mechs bears its own burdens.

I prefer that PGI continues keeping the tech separated, providing each side its own flavor while making changes to the base rules/lore, to make the game more appropriate for a FPS/PVP game. While many of us have not liked the route PGI initially has taken on several things, but if they had stayed almost completely with the lore/boardgame setup, it would be extremely unbalanced. Do not let the boardgame nor previous titles color your expectations, because we never had a real change to voice our opinions and have a dev team listen to them as they move the product along.

The forums database needs a severe overhaul.. If I could order a DEST team to vaporize the forums just to force them to rebuild it better, I would.

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 27 October 2015 - 11:35 PM.

[MischiefSC]

N0MAD, on 27 October 2015 - 09:05 PM, said:

Mate all i see is excuses, not the stats, you claimed TW was all powerful, yet you wont show the stats for your 3 best IS chassis. didnt think you would, easier to just claim TW is God, considering you are IS this doesnt surprise me..

So you want to compare my TW stats with my best 3 IS chassis? Heavy or Assault? Before or after PSR? So if I put my stats up you're willing to take them as the universal and uncontestable truth on what is and is not balanced in the game?

Which is exactly why I'm not going to let you strawman the argument - which is what you're trying to do. Tell you what - I'll answer the rest of your comments with my response to Ed down below.

Ed Steele, on 27 October 2015 - 08:22 PM, said:

Clans are not OP one-on-one, it depends on the pilot. Try it out, dual best out of three games a few times with different Clan and IS pilots, you will not win every time.

Perfectly reasonable and easy to test. You settle out the player performance metric by picking folks in the top couple of % of performance. That comes as close as possible to eliminating the player skill facet of that metric.

Tell you what - you get the top performing players to play matches with IS vs Clan mechs - the Clan pilot gets to pick his mech and load it out and the IS pilot has to play something within 5 tons of it. See if you can get any to do it, any I've talked to would laugh in your face at the idea because Clan/IS are not balanced and there is no IS mech that's even close in weight to a top performing Clan mech that's a match for it.

I'll take a 95 ton mech vs a Timber Wolf. Sure. How about 4X on a huge map so I can kite him at 1000m+ and ERLL at him for 15 minutes.

Something in the 70-80 ton range? How about 65-85? Not going to happen. Nor would 45-65 vs a Scrow. Or 25-45 vs an ACH. Not with comparable pilots. Get some top performing players who are willing to do that, happy to see it. Given that all the ones I've ever spoken with already have, in fact they do things like that all the time to test mechs and builds and hence in CW they almost universally play Clans because Clans are OP and when they play in contests you're never going to see a IS only drop deck but instead each top team is stacked with TW, HBR, SCRs for a reason that's already been settled.

Go ahead N0mad. You too. Get players from the top 1 or 2% and as such reduce the player skill facet to as small an impact as possible and have them test it for you. In 1v1 or 3v3 or 8v8. An all IS group vs an all Clan group with comparable weight mechs.

Oh, wait. That's already been done a billion times and is exactly why the consensus is that balance is broken. Also there's all the telemetry PGI has on every single match which is why they've decided to do the rebalance.

If I thought my stats were relevant I'd be happy to put them up. My TW out-performs anything even vaguely close to its weight. The stats are irrelevant and skewed though, given that most my best performing IS mechs have almost never been played outside of CW and my Clan mechs never have plus there's a huge gap between pre and post PSR.

However attempting to say my stats are the basis for game balance is goofy to begin with. You've got to know that.

[Karl Marlow]

I don't even understand how this is debatable. Every piece of clan equipment is better than the is counterpart. I own both clan and is Mechs. I tend to grind inner sphere since that is the faction I chose to play but when I get frustrated with the grind I play clan and instantly improve my match scores and fun factor.

I have my favorite inner sphere Mechs but it's a noticable difference going from my stalker to my warhawk. The warhawk is just better in every way. Same with my timber wolf or hellbringer or dire wolf. That isn't to say there aren't wonky clan Mechs but the worst clan Mechs are better than the average inner sphere ones to sa6 nothing of the bad inner sphere Mechs.

Edited by ThomasMarik, 28 October 2015 - 12:44 AM.

[DivineEvil]

Quote

You also did not pay 3 times the amount for the Thudder and please tell me you think a 50% quirk on anything in the game is right or show me even 1 clan mech that enjoyed that kind of advantage and I might even agree with you.

We pay the part of that amount in upgrading internals of these mechs. Then we payanother part by installing an Engine, which fits a somehow working loadout. Then, like you, we pay for additional variants to Master the chassis, and we can't sell them afterwards, unlike you, if we desire to have a level of choice comparable to yours given by the omni-slots.

Nobody is arguing, that 100%+ total quirking is reasonable. The whole point of these quirks were and is to bring IS mechs to somehow acceptable performance level to Clan mechs, which is why only these particular overquirked variants are picked for CW and used for competetive leagues, and all other variants are widely ignored.

Even then, a competetive IS twelve has to wotk their asses out trying to fight Clan 8+4 groups, just because difference in mechs these team are using. My unit were somehow recognized for pillaging less experienced Clan team in CW by direct, close-range onslaught with carefully picked variants most efficient for that particular approach. And as of recently, this is no longer the case - because Clan side have been given Ebon Jaguars, which are lighter and smaller Timberwolfs, and Arctic Cheetahs, which are the ultimate trump-card last pick, that counters anything IS can offer at this point in any CW game-mode. Same is true for competetive leagues, where a possibility to take Clan mechs is never oversighted - any reasonable team will always take a Clan mech in place of an IS mech.

So please, in your turn, don't deny that Clan mechs are in general much better. Aside from huge upfront paycheck and some level of inconvenience with Clan weapons, every aspect of Clan mech's actual in-game performance is stronger. Until IS mechs would get some general tweaks and Clans would get some general nerfs to even them out, there's no point to talk about quirks. Quirks were originally introduced for promoting mechs with worse physical profiles and internal limitations and to differentiate between variants. Ridiculous Clan/IS balance is what demanded the introduction of those bloated positive quirks for IS and almost entirely negative quirks for Clans.

Ghost heat is a general concern, which is not bound to either side. Both Clan and IS suffer from them, they're entirely convoluted and prevents newer players from figuring out the game.

Quote

Clans are not OP one-on-one, it depends on the pilot. Try it out, dual best out of three games a few times with different Clan and IS pilots, you will not win every time.

It is indeed depends on the pilot, because only the seriously terrible pilot can lose to an opponent, who otherwise has all the equipment inferior to one of that pilot. A good pilot on a duel-built Timberwolf can pulverize any IS mechs up to 10 tons heavier, with similarly skilled pilots inside, all day long. Only some super-quirked IS mechs can sometimes defeat him in perfect conditions.

[CainenEX]

I'm actually all for balance.
You pay for the mech because you like the game and want to support the developers.
Lets remember this is a free to play and someone need to pay the bills to keep the lights on.

You also can't get a refund because you agreed to and signed their TOS.

Quote

13. Payment Terms.

2. All fees and other charges are payable in advance and are non-refundable. We may, from time to time and without prior notice, modify, amend, or supplement our fees and billing methods, provided that such changes are made to this Agreement or elsewhere on the Website. All such modifications, amendments or supplements will be effective immediately upon posting to the Website. If any change is unacceptable to you, you may cancel your Account at any time, but we will not refund any fees that may have accrued to your Account before such cancellation, and we will not prorate fees for any charges.

You may find the above information at https://mwomercs.com/terms

If you are truly upset you can always go as far as to file for a lawsuit, but given my limited knowledge on law I can assure you it won't go far.

Props to VXJaeger for bringing up the issue with Russ again!

[ilikerice]

I'm a bit confused, how is losing a side torso on a clan xl equal to losing 1/3 of their engine? Crit wise its more like 1/4 (less actually...) but losing 1/3 woukd result in a 2/3 speed reduction? No, it should be losing 1/3, not dropping down to 1/3.

I think a more realistic number would be 1/4 speed reduction as well as 1/4 engine heatsink destruction (truedubs).

[Domenoth]

ilikerice, on 28 October 2015 - 01:29 PM, said:

I'm a bit confused, how is losing a side torso on a clan xl equal to losing 1/3 of their engine? Crit wise its more like 1/4 (less actually...) but losing 1/3 woukd result in a 2/3 speed reduction? No, it should be losing 1/3, not dropping down to 1/3.

I think a more realistic number would be 1/4 speed reduction as well as 1/4 engine heatsink destruction (truedubs).

They aren't talking "crit-wise" they are talking amount of damage it takes to completely destroy the engine. It takes 3 crits (which is how many IS XL Engines have in their side torsos) to destroy the engine. Clans have 2. So losing a side torso is taking 2 out of 3 required hits to destroy the engine.

EDIT:
The point is, a Clan Mech that loses a side torso is actually barely hanging on because just one more engine crit kills the Mech. That's the rational for 2/3 reduction. The Clan Mech is on death's door so it's performance should reflect that.

Edited by Domenoth, 28 October 2015 - 01:53 PM.

[AC]

ShinVector, on 26 October 2015 - 09:30 PM, said:

Hmmm... These two points kinda contradict each other.... 6PPC Stalker and the Direstar ? Aiyayai !

Oh wait.. Unless you really meant reducing Time to Kill... Then that's absolutely correct.. LOL.

This is why unlimited weapon slot sizes need to go. Not only is balancing between chassis getting harder and harder, balancing the WHOLE GAME is getting to be impossible. Ghost Heat, Gauss Delay, and heck even the current state of ECM is a result of trying to bandaid a broken system that can't be balanced because there is no weapon size restrictions in the mech weapon slots.

[ShinVector]

AC, on 28 October 2015 - 05:01 PM, said:

This is why unlimited weapon slot sizes need to go. Not only is balancing between chassis getting harder and harder, balancing the WHOLE GAME is getting to be impossible. Ghost Heat, Gauss Delay, and heck even the current state of ECM is a result of trying to bandaid a broken system that can't be balanced because there is no weapon size restrictions in the mech weapon slots.

Ermmm... Why ? It flow lore ain't it ? Just that there is no time and cbill costs for customisation that makes it less lore..

[DivineEvil]

AC, on 28 October 2015 - 05:01 PM, said:

This is why unlimited weapon slot sizes need to go. Not only is balancing between chassis getting harder and harder, balancing the WHOLE GAME is getting to be impossible. Ghost Heat, Gauss Delay, and heck even the current state of ECM is a result of trying to bandaid a broken system that can't be balanced because there is no weapon size restrictions in the mech weapon slots.

Not really. Unlimited weapon slot sizes is what allows for good customization.
Ghost Heat is a badly thought-out solution to fix large alpha, where simply cutting heat capacity would work just as good.
Gauss Delay is a valid mechanic to balance out the weapon, that's too good compared to AC/20.
ECM never were a band-aid to anything. It was implemented without prior testing and just happened to be too beneficial, nothing else.

[N0MAD]

MischiefSC, on 27 October 2015 - 11:31 PM, said:

So you want to compare my TW stats with my best 3 IS chassis? Heavy or Assault? Before or after PSR? So if I put my stats up you're willing to take them as the universal and uncontestable truth on what is and is not balanced in the game?

Which is exactly why I'm not going to let you strawman the argument - which is what you're trying to do. Tell you what - I'll answer the rest of your comments with my response to Ed down below.

You stated that if you wanted to make lots of $ (implying winning alot or doing really well) you would take out your TW (implying its OP).
I then asked you to show stats on your best IS chassis to compare them with this all mighty TW as a reference, to show how much more OP the TW is, showing me them would of showed how much beter a TW is compared to IS best performers under one pilot.
You wont and i know why..
Easy to imply things when you wont back them up..