65 replies to this topic

[MischiefSC]

Aresye Kerensky, on 27 November 2015 - 01:41 PM, said:

Don't forget pretty much all Clan lasers (including the CERML) are getting their max ranges nerfed as well.

My problem with quirks is that those, "1 situations," do end up being game breaking in terms of balance when they do come up, and that's a problem.

For example, about a month ago my Clan was playing in NBT. We were defending against a planetary assault, and the attacking force chose Alpine Peaks as their LZ.

We had a bunch of meta Clan mechs including EBJs, HBRs, and TBRs, in addition to a few salvaged IS mechs, mostly Firestarters and Wolverines.

The enemy team brought 4 TDR-5SS and 4 RVN-4X, all with ERLL.

There was NOTHING we could do. Both the TDR-5SS and RVN-4X outranged our CERLLs by at least a couple hundred meters, even with the range 5 modules and a targeting computer.

First game we tried to play range. They scratched us down to our internals before any of them were red. Second game we used cover and maneuvered to the closest we could get before pushing to get into our meta range of 600-900m. We were cored by the time we got into range. Third game we took some of our salvaged IS mechs to prevent losing more of our better Clan mechs, including the SHD-2K. Lo and behold, the SHD-2K ranges with its ERLL still couldn't come close to what the TDR-5SS and RVN-4X could do.

All 3 games 0-8. Both teams were of similar skilled players, in which we've beaten them many times before, and they've beaten us many times as well.

Yet that's not 'balance'. Counting on random chance to create that situation where suddenly you've got the advantage isn't 'tactical gameplay'. It's a byproduct of POOR GAME BALANCE.

Quirks are ****. They have always been ****, they will always be ****. They are a **** method of balancing a game and they need taken out back and shot in the back of the head, then left in an unmarked grave.

I'd love for Clan/IS mechs and gear to be way better balanced so that Clans can unlock engines and structure stuff, I wouldn't mind quirks (almost exclusively to structure/armor/mobility) being used to make poorly designed (i.e. low hardpoints or bad hitboxes) robbits have a good presence near better built robbits.

Then you can build strategy over more than 'I need to create this one situation where my poorly implemented quirks give me this one sort of advantage' or, more generally 'this particular setup is the overall top performer, we'll all take that, stick together and focus fire'.

The simple reality is that it will require MORE mechanics to make that happen - not less. Ideally something to replace ghost heat but otherwise more complexity, not less, to do that. Reducing data points just creates more either/or situations. Quirks are, at a fundamental level, a binary. A situational binary.

This is why I refunded my beloved Maddy and Whammy. I have absolutely no faith that PGI will really fix them. They will just try to juggle broken mechanics so that sometimes, when the stars align, they are all broken in opposite directions at the same time and it creates a sort of balance sorta thing. That's absolute and total **** and has no way to NOT fail.

I don't want to spend hundreds of dollars on a game that plays like a $7.99 early access steam game. No more spending money on what I *hope* MW:O will be or seems like it COULD be.

[MischiefSC]

Dave warrior2, on 27 November 2015 - 07:54 PM, said:

what a bad mood
MischiefSC

QFT

Would that I was on the island by myself but I'm actually finding it pretty crowded. Good luck though. If there's one thing you can say about people from Steam, they're hugely forgiving of issues with games. I have no doubt it will go swimmingly.

[adamts01]

MischiefSC, on 27 November 2015 - 03:16 PM, said:

Quirks are ****. They have always been ****, they will always be ****. They are a **** method of balancing a game and they need taken out back and shot in the back of the head, then left in an unmarked grave.

The problem is all the chassis taken from lore and TT and stuff. With crap hardpoints and locations they need some reason to be used. And some mechs with terribly goofy designs, like the dragon and jenner, need a little extra armor or structure to be usable. Really, what other solution is there to fix a Locust with 1 energy, 1 ballistic and 1 missile hardpoint besides giving it a little help in the quirk department? I started with jenners, I forget the model names. but there's one with 4e and 1m and another with 4e and 2m. there was zero reason to take the former. It needed a little something.

[DerMaulwurf]

adamts01, on 27 November 2015 - 10:30 PM, said:

The problem is all the chassis taken from lore and TT and stuff. With crap hardpoints and locations they need some reason to be used. And some mechs with terribly goofy designs, like the dragon and jenner, need a little extra armor or structure to be usable. Really, what other solution is there to fix a Locust with 1 energy, 1 ballistic and 1 missile hardpoint besides giving it a little help in the quirk department? I started with jenners, I forget the model names. but there's one with 4e and 1m and another with 4e and 2m. there was zero reason to take the former. It needed a little something.

I agree that quirks might be the only way to do certain pieces of internal balance. Like balancing the D-DC against the other Atlases or the Summoner against the Timber Wolf.

The problems come when the system is commandeered to paper over other cracks. I won't open the can of worms that is clan tech vs. IS tech. But just look at all those PPC quirks with which they try to entice people to use them on traditional PPC mechs. Instead of, you know, making PPCs a viable alternative to lasers in general.

Quirks have a role. The problem is that they are being used outside of that role.

[MischiefSC]

DerMaulwurf, on 28 November 2015 - 03:01 AM, said:

I agree that quirks might be the only way to do certain pieces of internal balance. Like balancing the D-DC against the other Atlases or the Summoner against the Timber Wolf.

The problems come when the system is commandeered to paper over other cracks. I won't open the can of worms that is clan tech vs. IS tech. But just look at all those PPC quirks with which they try to entice people to use them on traditional PPC mechs. Instead of, you know, making PPCs a viable alternative to lasers in general.

Quirks have a role. The problem is that they are being used outside of that role.

Exactly. Like I said, I'm all for quirks to help disadvantaged robbits get a leg up in the world. However those quirks need to be largely based around armor/mobility sort of stuff, not so much weapons.

Weapons and survivability needs balanced on its own both within each tech and compared to other tech.

Trying to use quirks to hide the horrible game balance otherwise is just exacerbating broken mechanics. Saying 'on these couple of mechs with these specific loadouts these weapons that are otherwise flat out inferior are actually alright' is not the same as saying 'these weapons are balanced overall, though in some situations one is better than the other'.

Currently, quirks need killed with fire and the game needs balanced. Once that is done you can quirk up sub-standard outliers but keep those quirks to mobility and survival. Weapons are the core of the game - gank > tank. You quirk weapons on a mech and you make those weapons the best possible loadout - unless the weapon itself is so terribad that even with quirks it's a bad choice. Like LB10X.

Meh. MEH I SAY. Add to this the chorus of people cheering broken mechanics and you see why the impending Steam release does not fill me with excitement and joy. The longer you leave broken mechanics in, the harder they are to fix. PGI successfully ignored broken weapon balance so long that I'm not sure there really can be a fix now. It's like a textbook example of how NOT to make a good, balanced game.

[adamts01]

MischiefSC, on 28 November 2015 - 04:37 AM, said:

Exactly. Like I said, I'm all for quirks to help disadvantaged robbits get a leg up in the world. However those quirks need to be largely based around armor/mobility sort of stuff, not so much weapons.
Weapons and survivability needs balanced on its own both within each tech and compared to other tech.
Trying to use quirks to hide the horrible game balance otherwise is just exacerbating broken mechanics. Saying 'on these couple of mechs with these specific loadouts these weapons that are otherwise flat out inferior are actually alright' is not the same as saying 'these weapons are balanced overall, though in some situations one is better than the other'.

Currently, quirks need killed with fire and the game needs balanced. Once that is done you can quirk up sub-standard outliers but keep those quirks to mobility and survival. Weapons are the core of the game - gank > tank. You quirk weapons on a mech and you make those weapons the best possible loadout - unless the weapon itself is so terribad that even with quirks it's a bad choice. Like LB10X.

The PPC quirks are because the weapon sucks balls. That's just wrong, that weapon is not close to balanced. But, take that same crap hardpoint locust, I don't want pure mobility and structure quirks to make it impossible to kill. Give it average surivability and average weaponry, for a tiny light that is.