254 replies to this topic

[Kaeb Odellas]

Basing balance entirely on CW would basically break the public queues. This is no good since CW isn't even finished yet. I suspect the vast majority of players still play mostly the public queues (myself included) for this very reason. Sometimes I'd rather have a quick 10 minute match than a half hour slog.

If you balance the mechs for the public queues, you probably get pretty close to balancing the game for CW as well.

[Tombstoner]

Mystere, on 08 December 2015 - 02:44 PM, said:

My greatest fear is harmonization, and we are slowly heading in that direction.




I suspect that is the real reason.



Has everyone already forgotten about their "minimally viable product" goal?

yup... it would have been great if PGI designed clans this way to begin with.

What would i have done.... given clan DD better range and better damage drop off such that clan damage drop off starts when the IS equivalent is at 50% reduced damage and keep the slopes unchanged This is not a trivial advantage. It's in line with lore. clans hit harder and at a longer range.

The extra damage was not needed in mwo and should have been implemented in a better way. what was released was an early access huge advantage(p2w) strategy. I think by design.

[Tombstoner]

Mystere, on 08 December 2015 - 02:36 PM, said:

Make CW the central feature as it's supposed to be and significantly de-emphasize the public queues. Make the latter part of the "training" component of MWO.

The public que is already the training component. CW sucks. forcing people to play the "real" game is clearly not what people. you cant inventivise CW more that is it.... it would need to be more fun then the pug world.

All pgi need to do is create some game mods that lets players drop with more than one mech. let players work the way up too CW. The very presence of drop tonnage i think is a bad thing for CW. if your given one mech your going to play very differently. more mechs should be for the pugs.

it's would lead to more low stress mech smashing fun.

Edited by Tombstoner, 08 December 2015 - 03:26 PM.

[Archalieus]

There's two problem with IS engines right now, weight and survivability. While Clan XL engines prevent mechs from running around full zombie mode, the lowered weight also allows them to carry more weaponry. IS XLs have that sudden death feature, which makes the risky, if not completely unviable with heavier mechs. Consequently, the Nascar meta is a side effect of these engines. Larger engine size gives you better acceleration and turn speed, which can mean life or death up close.

So two ways to tackle this problem: either balance out the weight disparity, or make XLs less dangerous to use.

Disclaimer: I've never played a Battletech game in my life, so I have absolutely no idea about what is "canonically" correct or not. All my thoughts on this are purely for game balance.


Some ideas:
1. Make IS XLs the same as Clan XLs.
Pros: Damn simple solution.
Cons: Makes standard engines less viable.
Easiest solution possible, make IS XL engines require both torsos to be removed. This might work out too well for some torso-only mechs (Grasshopper or Top Dog come to mind). The downside is that it pushes XL's superiority over standard engines. With XLs being less volatile, standard engines almost become filler.

2. Adjust Standard and XL engine weights. Standard engines get lighter, XLs get heavier.
Pros: Closes the weight disparity between Clans and IS mechs.
Cons: Indirectly nerfs Light mechs, and buffs heavier mechs.
Instead of having a 10-ton difference between the engine types, decrease the weight of Standards to make the more viable, while increasing the weight of XLs to compensate. Do you want swap to an XL for that extra AC2? Or just stick with a Standard engine for just a bit less firepower? This weight scaling might do strange things to light mechs, however, where XL engines may be the standard.

3. IS XLs have more critical slots.
Pros: Somewhat reduced volatility. Internal organization is more difficult to compensate.
Cons: Difficult to implement. Contradictory to the "canon".
This one is a bit out there. IS XLs still require 3 critical slots in each side torso. In addition, IS XLs also require 2 critical slots in each leg (thus filling up each leg). A mech dies if it loses more than two sets of critical slots. Lose a torso, then your leg? Dead. Lose both torsos? Dead. This also makes ammo storage in the legs impossible, making the rest of your mech somewhat more volatile. XL engines now also make it more difficult to fit more weaponry, as the engine requires 4 additional slots.

4. IS XLs now deals CT damage when destroyed, instead of instantly killing the mech.
Pros: Reduced volatility. Rewards good marksmanship on behalf of the opponent.
Cons: Possibly difficult to implement?
Whenever a mech with a XL engine loses a torso, the CT (or even the other torso) takes percent based damage. This means that if the mech is already damaged by other means, a side torso snipe can kill the mech. But this also means that you don't instantly blow up if a Direwolf alphas you with double Gauss/PPC and takes out just your side torso.

[Aiden Skye]

[TWIAFU]

Mcgral18, on 08 December 2015 - 01:17 PM, said:

Man, why do these noobs know nothing about Lore?

Excited about Steam yet?

[Brandarr Gunnarson]

I've posted about this a number of times in the PTS section.

First things first: Forget about TT rules. Also, lore is a guide, but balance in the game itself is much more important for its fun and viability as a business vehicle.

Now, the only real solution is quite simple. Make IS and Clan XLs function the same.

This particular feature cannot be different if you want to create even an appearance of balance. It places IS at too great of a disadvantage. All the mobility nerfs to Clans and structure buffs to IS in the world won't create balance.

On the contrary, they create further imbalance.

Some additional notes and items to explain further below.

The mobility penalties Clans have post-rebalance are good. -20% is a perfect number. I currently only have Clan 'Mechs and I like it! If I lose 20% of my engine, I should slow down; it feels right!

IS XL engines should be treated in turn:
ST loss = -30% movement.

Both should suffer heat penalties of
-(X/3) heatsinks; where "X" is the number of heatsinks in the engine.

Standard engines should add +10-20% structure to the CT. This to ensure that choosing XL is not a "no brainer" choice.

While on this point, standard structure and armor should also be +10-20% more durable.

We do not and will never need LFEs. They are redundant tech and choices. Ultimately, they were TT apologies for cXL being too good as the game evolved to allow players more access to Clantech.

This access, or lack of restriction to it, is a key reason why Clan and IS XLs should function the same.

Moreover, this game needs to approximate 1:1 balance in a fight. Why? Because no one really wants to be on the inferior side. So, 10v12 solutions are out; by definition they require that the IS techline be inferior.

This solution is the simplest and most viable, no matter which way you look at it: game systems, fun, balance, business. Other solutions are fraught with difficulties and unforeseen consequences; maybe blowback.

[AEgg]

Brandarr Gunnarson, on 08 December 2015 - 05:07 PM, said:

I've posted about this a number of times in the PTS section.

First things first: Forget about TT rules. Also, lore is a guide, but balance in the game itself is much more important for its fun and viability as a business vehicle.

Now, the only real solution is quite simple. Make IS and Clan XLs function the same.
-snip-

That's not a solution. That's giving the IS an advantage (because they have two choices, and the clans only have one).

It also makes the decision between STD and XL meaningless. If the drawback to XL is small enough to make it viable on every mech locked into it, then it's too small to make using a STD worth it.

The only real solution is not to make IS XL and Clan XL equal, it's to give IS XL something that Clan XL doesn't get, so that IS XL is better than Clan XL at something in exchange for a bigger drawback.

[Brandarr Gunnarson]

It actually is a solution that effectively solves the problem. That you don't agree with it is another thing entirely.

Perhaps you missed the part where IS XLs would get -30% movement on ST destruction? Or the part where STD gets +10-20% durability?

Moreover, the fact that they are locked on Clans actually goes to show what a reasonable XL should look like to make it viable.

That is, if the penalty for losing XL ST destruction is too great, they are not a viable choice at all. This is the current situation with IS XLs.

I believe that further durability for STD (as opposed to every IS chassis) is a better way to go. This coupled with the a stiff but reasonable movement penalty for XL ST loss enhances player choice.

Take Endo-Steel, for example. It's a no brainer for almost every 'Mech. Why? Because it offers clear advantage whereas Standard effectively offers none. Now, make Standard more durable and people will rethink that tonnage.

These suggestions are solid, safe and effective.
_______________

Addressing your idea:

Giving something to IS that Clans don't get is a difficult proposition and highly dependent. I foresee 3 problems.

1) What would you give? This is a problem of balance as well as consensus.
2) It has a distinct possibility of creating further imbalance, depending on what it is and how it is implemented.
3) This concept is precisely the reason we have imbalance between Clans and IS now. Clans have what IS doesn't, reversing this creates a cycle of imbalance.

Furthermore, it does not implement a system-based approach to problem solving; instead relying on arbitrary decision making.

[AEgg]

Brandarr Gunnarson, on 08 December 2015 - 05:50 PM, said:

-trimmed for relevance-

Perhaps you missed the part where IS XLs would get -30% movement on ST destruction? Or the part where STD gets +10-20% durability?


Giving something to IS that Clans don't get is a difficult proposition and highly dependent. I foresee 3 problems.

Furthermore, it does not implement a system-based approach to problem solving; instead relying on arbitrary decision making.

It doesn't matter how you change XLs. If you make locked and unlocked XL behave the same way, you'll never have balance because not all locked mechs will choose correctly. If you have to go back and quirk half the mechs afterwards your solution isn't really solving anything.

If you don't, then IS either has a clear advantage (the choice to choose the same engine as clans or a STD), or you made the choice between STD and XL meaningless, thus indirectly buffing the clans (since part of clan/IS balance overall is that IS gets more customization than clans)

Your solution also gives IS something that clans don't have: The choice between XL and STD engines.

Making both sides equal is systemic, but it's EXACTLY what we want to avoid. There's no reason to even have two factions if we're going to balance them by pushing them closer to one another. It's also arbitrary decision making to just say we want X to be the same but not Y.

Sure, giving IS XL a buff is something to work out. But I don't see any other viable option. We can't make them equivalent for the above reasons. So IS XL has to have some downside and some upside (otherwise it'd be equivalent). Currently it has no upside.

[Brandarr Gunnarson]

The above proposal doesn't give IS any advantage over Clans. It gives all Battlemechs a choice between XL and STD engines. With the release of IIC 'Mechs, Clans will have Battlemechs with that choice. But, their XLs will still be markedly better.

Omnimechs, on the other hand, function differently than Battlemechs. Omnimechs do not allow for the changing of engines and equipment, but allow for the changing of the component pieces and thus the hardpoints. When IS Omnimechs are (inevitably) released, they should function the same. If they don't that's a further problem.

So the consideration of choice in each Techline is a non-issue.

I'm also confused why you suggest that making IS and Clan XLs function the same will result in Quirk buffs. Currently, the IS durability buffs (of which there are still many) are directly in response to the fact that IS XL ST = death and STD is slow.

Making IS XLs function the same (or similarly, considering a stiffer ST destruction penalty) would remove the reason and need for the IS durability buffs.

I don't suggest making them equal. Values can be different inside of systems; that is differentiation. Applying a system normally is, by definition, non-arbitrary.

Further, it isn't really true that IS XL has no upside. It depends upon the comparison. Against STD it has a huge upside: tonnage. Against cXL: it is definitively fragile. This leaves IS Battlemechs with the choice of "bad" or "just as bad".

That's not a good situation for a game.

Returning to the release of IIC 'Mechs. This issue will be compounded. Thus we should start considering this topic as 1st) Battlemech/Omnimech and 2nd) IS/Clan.

When put into this context, it's clear the simple and system based approach is much more viable.

[MauttyKoray]

Kaeb Odellas, on 08 December 2015 - 12:00 PM, said:

I'm sure many here would agree that the biggest source of imbalance between Clan and IS mechs is the Clan XL engine. However, I don't think anyone would accept hitting the Clans with further speed and cooling nerfs on ST loss would be the best move here. So why not improve IS engines in some way?

Here's my idea:

-Instead of instant death on ST loss for IS XL mechs, delay the mech's death for a short time. The stricken mech starts slowly taking internal damage to its CT and remaining ST over time. The mech takes no movement or heat penalties, but it will eventually die, giving the pilot a short amount of time to get a few hits in before going down in a blaze of glory.

-Equipping a Standard engine boosts a mech's side torso internals by 50%, or make them equivalent in strength to the mech's CT. Say that installing an XL engine requires techs to remove structural support in the side torsos or whatever.


What do you guys think?

No... None of you, any of the ones that propose any of this ****, even know what balance seems to mean.

Clan XL engines are the ONLY CLAN ENGINE in the game. No one seems to get that. There is no alternative. EVERY clan mech has a Clan XL engine and therefore ALWAYS takes a penalty when they lose a side torso, there is no standard engine to make up for this.
As for IS, the trade off for taking an XL is more free tonnage at the risk of a death on ST loss. You can take a standard and not die from ST loss and give up the extra tonnage. THAT is a balance, meanwhile the IS will eventually get the Light Fusion Engine (or LFE) as well as IS Omnimechs.

For now Clan XLs were balanced with a penalty, which they didn't originally have. So far that penalty does in fact create an impact on any mech that loses an ST, and significant enough to minimize the advantage of a Clan XL over that of an IS XL enough to make it less of a pure advantage and more of a flavor trade off.

Again, I HAVE to iterate here, Clans DO NOT HAVE A CHOICE of their engine. Even the IS Battlemechs will only have Clan XL engines and their space limited by the mandatory XL.

[Mcgral18]

MauttyKoray, on 08 December 2015 - 07:51 PM, said:

Again, I HAVE to iterate here, Clans DO NOT HAVE A CHOICE of their engine. Even the IS Battlemechs will only have Clan XL engines and their space limited by the mandatory XL.

Do you mean Clam Battlemech, or IS Omni?

Because the isOmni get isXL, and the Clam BM get STD +cXL.


7 days, and the Clams get the option for an STD.
You know who's going to take it? Trolling Dual Gauss Orions.

Edited by Mcgral18, 08 December 2015 - 08:03 PM.

[El Bandito]

Kaeb Odellas, on 08 December 2015 - 12:00 PM, said:

Here's my idea:

-Instead of instant death on ST loss for IS XL mechs, delay the mech's death for a short time. The stricken mech starts slowly taking internal damage to its CT and remaining ST over time. The mech takes no movement or heat penalties, but it will eventually die, giving the pilot a short amount of time to get a few hits in before going down in a blaze of glory.

Hey, I came up with the idea before you!

El Bandito, on 05 July 2015 - 05:59 AM, said:

How about making IS XL mechs explode after 30-45 seconds when the ST is blown instead of dying instantly? Imagine the XL engine slowly failing due to extensive damage, and just gives up. Well, guys?

[MauttyKoray]

Mcgral18, on 08 December 2015 - 08:02 PM, said:

Do you mean Clam Battlemech, or IS Omni?

Because the isOmni get isXL, and the Clam BM get STD +cXL.


7 days, and the Clams get the option for an STD.
You know who's going to take it? Trolling Dual Gauss Orions.

Where was that written? I never saw an announcement that clans will get STD engines, just that Clan Battlemechs will have the option to swap their engines. Given that a clan STD engine doesn't exist, this leaves me to conclude that they're only referring to being able to swap between ratings of the current CXL.

Unless I missed something?

Also, the very first IS Omni did indeed have an XL, but without looking up every single IS Omni, I believe which engine they will have will be determined by their engine used, not a generic XL everything. Plus different Variants of IS Omnis of the same Battlemech could even have different engines (STD/XL) if its how the variants are designed.

Forgive my lack of knowledge but I'm not a BT junkie like some people, I know fairly general lore and have enjoyed from of the books, that's about it.

[Mcgral18]

MauttyKoray, on 08 December 2015 - 08:46 PM, said:

Where was that written? I never saw an announcement that clans will get STD engines, just that Clan Battlemechs will have the option to swap their engines. Given that a clan STD engine doesn't exist, this leaves me to conclude that they're only referring to being able to swap between ratings of the current CXL.

Unless I missed something?

Also, the very first IS Omni did indeed have an XL, but without looking up every single IS Omni, I believe which engine they will have will be determined by their engine used, not a generic XL everything. Plus different Variants of IS Omnis of the same Battlemech could even have different engines (STD/XL) if its how the variants are designed.

Forgive my lack of knowledge but I'm not a BT junkie like some people, I know fairly general lore and have enjoyed from of the books, that's about it.

True, some isOmnis are STD, just as some Clam Omnis are STD. KingFisher and Stooping Hawk.

The Orion and HGN both come stock with STDs in some variants (the non-special ones). 3 XLs to 5 STDs
https://mwomercs.com/origins

Edited by Mcgral18, 08 December 2015 - 08:49 PM.

[MauttyKoray]

Mcgral18, on 08 December 2015 - 08:49 PM, said:

True, some isOmnis are STD, just as some Clam Omnis are STD. KingFisher and Stooping Hawk.

The Orion and HGN both come stock with STDs in some variants (the non-special ones). 3 XLs to 5 STDs
https://mwomercs.com/origins

Well call me sally...

Anyways, there is no advantage of a Clan STD over an IS STD as far as I know? Now the problem is balance Clan XL vs STD.

[Mcgral18]

MauttyKoray, on 08 December 2015 - 08:56 PM, said:

Well call me sally...

Anyways, there is no advantage of a Clan STD over an IS STD as far as I know? Now the problem is balance Clan XL vs STD.

Which is why I support normalizing XLs and blanket buffing STDs.


More durability (to a semi-significant amount) VS more guns. Guns will almost always win, but for those who choose +30 CT structure, with +20 ST structure, they can do that.

Maybe a small dissipation boost, something that WOULD make it a choice over a cXL.

[MauttyKoray]

Mcgral18, on 08 December 2015 - 09:00 PM, said:

Which is why I support normalizing XLs and blanket buffing STDs.


More durability (to a semi-significant amount) VS more guns. Guns will almost always win, but for those who choose +30 CT structure, with +20 ST structure, they can do that.

Maybe a small dissipation boost, something that WOULD make it a choice over a cXL.

Hm, something I saw someone post was to give CTs a buff to internals or something that use STD. You could give lights +10, Mediums +15, etc? (or a different amount, maybe a solid blanket number.)

[Brandarr Gunnarson]

Yes, it is true that Clans are about to have Battlemechs.

Yes, those Battlemechs can choose and swap both STD and cXL engines. (As far as I know.)

Yes, that means that the argument about IS getting to swap and Clans being locked is invalid.

Yes, this is a further exasperation of the IS XL fragility problem.

Yes, the best way to fix this is to make IS and Clan XL function the same! (With different values, of course; and only then for "flavor" and not too different.)