1 reply to this topic

[LordeEmp]

In games like this I always see a list of nerfs as long as my arm. So while its nothing new, I would like to point out that the pricing on light mechs is a far cry from Assault. Also Clan mechs cost more than IS. So I have something simple for the developers to think about.

Why not make all of the vehicles cost the same.

That would truly speak to balance.

This said I kinda feel like balancing clan with inner sphere was something that didn't need to be done. Clan and IS could have had separate quick plays and maybe a 3rd free for all. The planet matches could have been based on weight like in the game aka 100% clan weight would give less exp for the clan group if they win and a bonus to the IS team 75% would give even exp for both sides if they win 50% clan weight would give the clan a boost and IS a small loss of exp

so in essence there could be 3 queue lines to get into and also maybe speed up the match making process.

Another simple thing you may want to add sooner than later is load out saves. Maybe one extra for free then buy more like mech bays.

Also a market system for unwanted mechs and weapons might be nice.

Then I figure last but not least would be a PVE mission system.

[Mister Bob Dobalina]

LordeEmp, on 23 January 2018 - 02:32 PM, said:

...
Why not make all of the vehicles cost the same.
...

I get it where you come from and to paraphrase a german proverb: "You are kicking in already open doors" regarding balance and the constant shifting of Mechs with quirks and nerfs. More than once I had to basically give up playing a beloved Mech chassis, because it felt pretty much crippeled by a nerf or completely spoiled by quirks and yes, this can happen. There's even a german word for that: "verschlimmbessern", very loosly translates to "fix something to death". I always considered quirks and nerfs tools to accentuate different chassis from each other to emphasize their particular role, design or lore history. More and more is it used in an attempt to oppose basic gameplay imbalances. And I don't like that too much either.
Regarding your arguments, here some thoughts from the clueless potato mind of mine:

I assume we are talking mainly CBills? To have one price for all Mechs would create a situation where, wherever that price comes to be, a Light becomes more expensive and an Assault would be dirt cheap as I reckon the price would land smack dab in the middle of the current price range least to most expensive. In the end, people want maximum bang for the buck. The game became an orgy of Alpha Strikegasms and Dakkafetish already, pulling pilots to even more Heavies and Assaults for their hangers won't make it much better. You are asking for balance in matches, between IS and Clan. Yet this will create imbalance by favouring buying anything above this average pricetag for sheer economical reasons to start with.

Another thing: Say I'll buy the Mech XY. The Mech XY has, depending on the build, more or less equippement and weaponry installed. These parts have prices as well. A HGauss is significantly mor e expensive than e.g. a Small Laser. If I buy a Locust I have pretty much nothing to gut and sell from it as, for example, if I would buy an Annihilator or Kodiak for the same price and scrap it for parts. So unless you adjust or flatten down the price structure of the weapons and equipement as well, averaging the Mech prices would only be half consistent. And when basically everything costs the same anyway, why even bother having to pay for it in the first place. The minimal economy of earning (aka grinding) money to buy more and better stuff would be on very weak feet if not borderline superfluous.

Maybe it could be interesting to see how it would turn out, if PGI would sell pure naked chassis, and the players would have to buy the equippement. On the basis of that the chassis prices could be way closer together since you would have to spend a lot of cheddar to equipp an assault compared to what it needs to equip light.

LordeEmp, on 23 January 2018 - 02:32 PM, said:

...
so in essence there could be 3 queue lines to get into and also maybe speed up the match making process
...

Seeing how the matchmaker is already struggling with having 2 queues (Single and Group), 3 lanes assumably won't make it better. Emphasized by the lacking Tier system and the, quite frankly not monumentaly huge player base, it is now already having a hard time "matching" properly . PGI has made the matchmaker finding players for balanced matches a bit faster by opening the Tier gap. At certain times (depending on what timezone comes online) that means way more stomp matches. I get it, it's always nice to wipe out an enemy team 12-0 to 12-4. Not so fun being stomped though. Calling stomps like that "balanced matches" would IMHO be a bit of a stretch, wouldn't it? Would most likely end up making it even harder for the matchmaker to pull that off for three lanes. But I reckon this won't be properly resolved without a complete overhaul of the Tier System. That's the real pickle there.

LordeEmp, on 23 January 2018 - 02:32 PM, said:

...
Another simple thing you may want to add sooner than later is load out saves. Maybe one extra for free then buy more like mech bays.
...

I would be all in on that one, or at least slots for full camo/sticker sets for Mechs that you can flip in the Lobby.

LordeEmp, on 23 January 2018 - 02:32 PM, said:

...
Also a market system for unwanted mechs and weapons might be nice.

...

I think PGI will not very supportive to that one as it would undermine their effort to sell you something to further finance their services and developement. Nevertheless I would make a counterproposal because I like the idea of sharing between players.
How about the possibility for units to buy Mechs that could be used by team members and put in their dropdecks? Maybe just stock variants, maybe customisable (don't know how, but still) or maybe that unit members could give one of their Mechs into the pool. Just an idea though.

LordeEmp, on 23 January 2018 - 02:32 PM, said:

...

Then I figure last but not least would be a PVE mission system.
...

If I understand PVE (player versus environment) correctly it needs one important ingredient: AI enemies. If the behaviour of the VIP in Escort Mode is any indication, there isn't much intelligence avaliable at that point. Don't know how the AI players in MW5 are, but since it's a completely different game engine I don't believe PGI would adapt back from MW5 into MWO. I would love to see map based obstacles that affect gameplay more than just crumbling houses that didn't have any effect in the first place. Imagine Canyon where the bridges would crumble after a certain abuse or could be destroyed by weapons fire. What if those crumbling bridges would cause fall damage for Mechs walking on them when they break. Or the rubble creating heavy obstacles afterwards? Or go HPG and have those plattforms rise and sink randomly or the doors to the underground area close and open at random.

Anyway, however you turn it, there is much to do in MWO.

Edited by Thomster, 24 January 2018 - 06:50 AM.