258 replies to this topic

[Tesunie]

demoyn, on 16 December 2015 - 01:45 PM, said:

No.



No, he hasn't. You disagreeing with him doesn't make his "points" invalid. Being wrong makes his "points" invalid.




Of course you could, but it would suck. That's kind of the whole point. You can't build total trash and then use it to argue that the game balance is off because you get blown up constantly.




Objection, your honor. Relevance.

Nobody said anything about people having to play the meta. What we're saying is that you can't willfully avoid it and then cry because people trying to actually be good at the game are... *gasp*... better than people not trying to be.




Maybe you're unaware of this, but you can still go up rank in a loss. Even avoiding that, it's painfully easy to maintain the same tier during a loss. All you have to do is not suck.




It has EVERYTHING to do with this thread. The thread is about whether Clan mechs are overpowered or whether Inner Sphere players are just bad. He's living proof that it's probably the latter. Also, odds are that the player who first brought it up cares as much about your respect as I do, so...




We argued his point... over, and over, and over. He chooses to remain willfully ignorant. He made HIMSELF look bad; we're just pointing it out.




We're not implying anything. WE'RE FLAT OUT STATING IT. Clan won because they had better players on average. Why there's even a debate on this is mind boggling. There are threads all over the forums from people who tried every faction, and EVERY. SINGLE. ONE. says that Clan players are just better.

So, did you just tell me to not remain civil? Because, I could get a lot more brutal if I wished, but that would also be against the ToS of the forums.

I've made my statement already on the subject. I feel he's wrong for several reasons. I've already mentioned them, and I have not had to extrapolate on them. I have not had to resort to any farther comments on my opinion, and I have also not had to resort to any snide comments or thinly veiled insults to make my point.

One mans trash is another mans treasure. We could go rounds about this.

Relevance: You said "so if we don't have meta builds then we're just chasing our tails while we laugh at you". You made the whole meta build thing relevant in your statement. I just commented that one does not have to play meta to do well. But, meta is meta for a reason, it has it's strengths.

You need a match score of around 330 to go up in PSR on a loss last I recalled. 250-300 match score just to remain even on a loss. Not something easily done on a loss. I would also like to mention that you always gain more PSR than you lose on a typical match. But, losing streaks do happen, as well as experimenting with new builds (or is experimentation and trying to have fun bad for this game? Oops. It's a game, meant to be played for fun). I'm sure my new Atlas build I'm trying out is doing wonders for my PSR... Also, you may not know this, but if you just entered into the next tier up, and then lose a match or two, you can easily slide back into the tier you were before hand. PS: PSR doesn't actually rank player skill individually. It ranks "randomly generated team's ability to work together for a win" and most every way to gain PSR is dependent upon winning.

You're just being insulting. Attacking the player and not their concept is bad form, even if that player is not listening to you. You can't force someone to understand. The most you can do is present the information, try to help answer questions, and if they still don't want to listen, you stop responding to them. However, I see more condescending remarks, and few attempts to actually counter the information he presented.

I never argued if the Clan side of the engagement had more competitive units/players. They did. The statistics pages clearly tell us that Clans had more units, but fewer players. This leads to more organization. They also had some of the most well known competitive units in the game. However, have you ever asked why the competitive players seem to use mostly Clan tech? Typically not for looks, as a hint.

Now, I said it before, and I'll say it again:
- I'm not arguing if Clans are OP. I feel that the recent balance passes have, as far as I can tell currently, brought Clan mechs to a far more reasonable level of balance.
- Remain civil while discussing anything on the forums. A fellow player deserves, no matter how much you may think otherwise, a modicum of respect.
- If you don't like someone's concept, attack the concept directly. No remark should be directed at the players possible skill. This is AGAINST the CoC. It is REPORTABLE.

BluefireMW, on 16 December 2015 - 02:19 PM, said:

Clans have longer Range? You are kidding, or?

Hence "have/had" in that statement. They had longer range weapons. I wasn't certain how the more recent adjustments affected their ranges yet. As it is, a quick trip to Smurfy, looking at just the ERLL stats, Clans still maintain a long range advantage (excluding quirks that would have to be looked at on a by chassis bias).
ERLL: 675-1,350 effective and max ranges.
CERLL: 740-1,480 effective and max ranges.

I could do this for every weapon to confirm what ones maintain range advantage, but it appears as though they still do have it. Not much, but it's still there.

[Kuritaclan]

Tesunie, on 16 December 2015 - 08:25 PM, said:

Hence "have/had" in that statement. They had longer range weapons. I wasn't certain how the more recent adjustments affected their ranges yet. As it is, a quick trip to Smurfy, looking at just the ERLL stats, Clans still maintain a long range advantage (excluding quirks that would have to be looked at on a by chassis bias).
ERLL: 675-1,350 effective and max ranges.
CERLL: 740-1,480 effective and max ranges.

I could do this for every weapon to confirm what ones maintain range advantage, but it appears as though they still do have it. Not much, but it's still there.

Humm 10% Range Quirk is 675*1.10 = 742,5. Well 2.5 meters more, but saying it is equal just negates the claim that there is an advantage. Now say to me how much IS variants have a 10%+ range quirk on energy weapons? If the awnser may surprise the players who actually look this up, they may change their perception.

Smurfy says to me with the Ctrl-F there are 95 IS Mech variants over a bunch of chassis that have an energy range quirk and all are at least 10%. So to say in the long range department IS is at least up to par with clans.

Edited by Kuritaclan, 16 December 2015 - 08:51 PM.

[Tesunie]

As for the part that seems to have drawn the most "no facts against it, insult the player" remarks:

Adamski, on 15 December 2015 - 12:38 PM, said:

Really?

ACH = SDR
SCR = GRF / SHD / WVR / KTO / etc
EBJ = TDR / JM6
TBR = BL-KNT / OR1
WHK = STK / BLR
DWF = AS7 / KGC

Now that the IIC mechs are released, you have a 35t and a 50t as well. The only mech that doesn't have an easy 1:1 tonnage equivalent is the 45t Blackjack trying to match with a 45t SHC (one is designed as a brawler, the other as a hyper mobile harass)

ACH vs SDR
Same weight, similar styled hit boxes, very agile (with Jump), ECM.
However, the ACH can equip more weapons on it, giving it more threatening edge. Be it CSPL to CERLLs, or CLRMs to C(S)SRMs, right on even into Clan ballistics.
The Spider can run faster, but has far fewer weapon options.
This comparison wants to be done against the Firestarter, not the Spider, which can equal the Cheetah in firepower, speed and agility. However, it lacks the ECM gear and the survivability of the CXL engine, which once again places the edge into the Cheetah's favor.

That's just in one category. I'm not familiar enough with the other mechs to give anything definitive. However, the survivability and durability of the clan XL will give most every clan mech an edge in surviving, provided that it's a side torso that gets damaged and not the CT.

This has recently been countered by the nerfs to CXL engines when they lose a side. This means it's quick to disable/hinder a clan mech now, compared to before. I feel that this has greatly helped balance the discrepancy between Clan and IS tech.

Comparing IS mechs to Clan mechs I feel is still like comparing apples to oranges. This is in part due to the flexibility of omni-pods, the way clan XL engines behave, the manner of their weapons, quirks, etc. Then again, trying to compare two different mechs for the same role isn't always a good thing either, as many times one of the two mechs serves a different role better than it can that role.

[Tesunie]

Kuritaclan, on 16 December 2015 - 08:37 PM, said:

Humm 10% Range Quirk is 675*1.10 = 742,5. Well 2.5 meters more, but saying it is equal just negates the claim that there is an advantage. Now say to me how much IS variants have a 10%+ range quirk on energy weapons? If the awnser may surprise the players who actually look this up, they may change their perception.

Smurfy says to me with the Ctrl-F there are 95 IS Mech variants over a bunch of chassis that have an energy range quirk and all are at least 10%.

But now we would have to look at each mech, it's hardpoint locations, how effectively it can field those lasers, their hit boxes...
Example: A laser range quirk on an Atlas typically wont help it much, as it has to expose so much of it's body to use it's energy hardpoints. Or a laser range quirk on a Centurion (not the AL), would reduce it's effectiveness to two smaller energy weapons, or one longer ranged large energy weapon. The Range quirks on the Locust 1V come to mind, with only a single energy hardpoint in it's CT.

I do get what you are saying. But also remember that some of the balance passes recently are intended to set up for IS mechs to lose or reduce their quirks. Add Infotech into that mix and it's going to change things up a bit more depending upon how that is implemented.

Right now we are at an in between stage. We know more changes are coming, and more balance passes are on their way. For the moment, I'd have to say that IS and Clan tech feel more balanced. I personally need more play time with these new changes before I can determine anything conclusive from my level of play.

So, it's strongly debatable on Clan's range advantage at this moment. However, I don't want to dismiss their inherent base range advantage because some IS mechs have quirks to range. I'm not denying those quirks and their affects on game play. But, clan tech currently still has a longer base range over IS tech.

If anything, this is sounding more like an argument about trying to unquirk IS mechs to maintain a Clan flavor, while hopefully not disrupting the delicate balance between IS and Clan tech power levels...

[eSeifer]

Someone should lock these threads down.

1. Someone makes an outrageous claim.
2. He is told logic and reason.
3. He ignores it and re-words his claim differently meaning the same thing.
4. More people try to help with reason and logic.
5. OP has a stroke due to an overload of truth.

Now shut this gutter thread down.

[Kuritaclan]

Tesunie, on 16 December 2015 - 08:59 PM, said:

But now we would have to look at each mech, it's hardpoint locations, how effectively it can field those lasers, their hit boxes...
Example: A laser range quirk on an Atlas typically wont help it much, as it has to expose so much of it's body to use it's energy hardpoints. Or a laser range quirk on a Centurion (not the AL), would reduce it's effectiveness to two smaller energy weapons, or one longer ranged large energy weapon. The Range quirks on the Locust 1V come to mind, with only a single energy hardpoint in it's CT.

I do get what you are saying. But also remember that some of the balance passes recently are intended to set up for IS mechs to lose or reduce their quirks. Add Infotech into that mix and it's going to change things up a bit more depending upon how that is implemented.

What a walk on a eggshell. Hardpoint location on clan mechs isn't that great either. Last time locked up a WHK his "energy hardpoints were in the height of his balls and this is the case for many others with their low slung gorilla arms ... You know. The Hardpoint argument or the count of Hardpoints say little to nothing.

And your throw-in "the balance passes recently are intended to set up for IS mechs to lose or reduce their quirks" is an adorable complaint They dequirked my [XYZ] we are doomed. Or I will say it in other words. Yes something like the STK-4N got adjustments like a Energy range quirk of 10%, looks like in the meaning of the thread title: "So balance? Tukayyid stats say no!" it could be the case some of the long time complainers just run into a war with old horses and tried to convince themself that the outcome should have been anything else to what just happend, instead of using the new shiny stars brought up by the quirk changes.

Did I mentioned that I didn't saw as much BJs as I would have guessed after the quirk pass. Maybe and only maybe this has something to do with why Tukayyid went out, as it happend.

Tesunie, on 16 December 2015 - 08:59 PM, said:

Right now we are at an in between stage. We know more changes are coming, and more balance passes are on their way. For the moment, I'd have to say that IS and Clan tech feel more balanced.

It will change all time. There is never a time that stops and be called perfect

Tesunie, on 16 December 2015 - 08:59 PM, said:

So, it's strongly debatable on Clan's range advantage at this moment. However, I don't want to dismiss their inherent base range advantage because some IS mechs have quirks to range. I'm not denying those quirks and their affects on game play. But, clan tech currently still has a longer base range over IS tech.

If anything, this is sounding more like an argument about trying to unquirk IS mechs to maintain a Clan flavor, while hopefully not disrupting the delicate balance between IS and Clan tech power levels...

Jeix. Don't know where you wanna go with this. ...

eSeifer, on 16 December 2015 - 08:59 PM, said:

Now shut this gutter thread down.

I like this thread. It is amusing. I mean if you don't wanna read it, JUST don't read it and look into it.

Edited by Kuritaclan, 16 December 2015 - 09:30 PM.

[Night Thastus]

Ooh look! It's another pointless Clan VS IS thread!

I'll get the popcorn. You guys are providing the salt, right?

[Tesunie]

Kuritaclan, on 16 December 2015 - 09:28 PM, said:

What a walk on a eggshell. Hardpoint location on clan mechs isn't that great either. Last time locked up a WHK his "energy hardpoints were in the height of his balls and this is the case for many others with their low slung gorilla arms ... You know. The Hardpoint argument or the count of Hardpoints say little to nothing.

And your throw-in "the balance passes recently are intended to set up for IS mechs to lose or reduce their quirks" is an adorable complaint They dequirked my [XYZ] we are doomed. Or I will say it in other words. Yes something like the STK-4N got adjustments like a Energy range quirk of 10%, looks like in the meaning of the thread title: "So balance? Tukayyid stats say no!" it could be the case some of the long time complainers just run into a war with old horses and tried to convince themself that the outcome should have been anything else to what just happend, instead of using the new shiny stars brought up by the quirk changes.

Did I mentioned that I didn't saw as much BJs as I would have guessed after the quirk pass. Maybe and only maybe this has something to do with why Tukayyid went out, as it happend.


It will change all time. There is never a time that stops and be called perfect


Jeix. Don't know where you wanna go with this. ...

Without dissecting every mech in the game, we can't very well determine that. That is a very broad brush you are painting with. You want to make the claim of lower hard points, well the Arctic Cheetah has high ones, so does the Timberwolf... But then again so does the Stalker.

Now we start having to look at every mech in the game, which no longer is a "is clans/IS OP?" to "Is this specific mech OP?" That starts to lead to too many details for a topic of this nature, as it wouldn't really remain relevant.

Each side has their stars. Each side has those mechs that work best in this specific role. Each side has their advantages.
- Clans have their survivable XL engines.
- Clans have weapons that typically require less crit slots and/or weight.
- Clans have weapons that typically have longer ranges and deals more damage.
- Clan Omnis (specified due to IIC release) has a combination of locked equipment and engines, but more freedom of hard points via Omnipod switching.
- LRMs with no minimum arming range.
- SSRMs of all sizes.
- IS have quirks.
- IS have no locked equipment.
- IS can alter their structure/armor types.
- IS can change engine type and size.
- IS XL engines are destroyed when a side torso is lost.

One of the largest advantages of Clans was their durable engines that came with inherent weight savings. This has since been reduced when damaged. This change seemed to have evened out IS and Clan tech for the moment. Combined with several range reductions to Clan lasers.



To go back onto the topic at hand, I feel that Clans probably did more damage in the event due to spread of their weapons combined with a general presence of more units and more competitive players/units as well. Not to mention the changes that occurred just before the event that people hadn't adjusted to just yet... There are too many possible reasons as to why the Clans could generate more damage than the IS. Tech balance is but one plausible possibility, and probably not even the most relevant and possible reason as to why.

[Spetulhu]

Tesunie, on 16 December 2015 - 09:53 PM, said:

To go back onto the topic at hand, I feel that Clans probably did more damage in the event due to spread of their weapons combined with a general presence of more units and more competitive players/units as well.

One reason I suggested earlier was ejecting from damaged or out-of-ammo mechs. Disorganized PUGs don't usually do it, and running in an IS group there was only a defense scenario where the drop leader actually ordered it for the last wave. The clan units did it a lot in the matches I saw, often to get a fresh mech but in some cases seemingly just to deny someone a kill out of spite. Every ejection is a destroyed mech but in the worst case for the opponent he didn't damage it at all.

[Tesunie]

Spetulhu, on 16 December 2015 - 10:23 PM, said:

One reason I suggested earlier was ejecting from damaged or out-of-ammo mechs. Disorganized PUGs don't usually do it, and running in an IS group there was only a defense scenario where the drop leader actually ordered it for the last wave. The clan units did it a lot in the matches I saw, often to get a fresh mech but in some cases seemingly just to deny someone a kill out of spite. Every ejection is a destroyed mech but in the worst case for the opponent he didn't damage it at all.

I know I had one opponent who ejected just before I could kill him. I strongly suspected it was to deny me the kill, and the rewards that come with it... But I can not confirm that possible intent.

But that's another point to consider as well. So many different possibilities from this little piece of data. Nothing conclusive can be drawn from it.

[STEF_]

Tesunie, on 16 December 2015 - 09:53 PM, said:

- Clans have their survivable XL engines.

From a CW perspective, let's talk about this, above all after the new quirks.

First, IS mechs in the dropdeck for CW can mount standard, except FS9.
Thunder and Battlemaster----> standard, and they can do very well and durable more than clan now.

BJ? BJ now tanks like an heavy or assault thanks to quirks, so, even though it has XL, you must put the double of dmg in one torso if you want to kill it, and this is very similar to "killing a clan mech hitting both torsi".

But guess what?
As previously said, I've been very surprised because I've seen very few BJ than I was expecting.
And virtually no Battlemaster, despite its awesome quirks

I've seen many IS pugs and unit during Tuk2, but I still think they haven't read the quirk list.

[Tesunie]

Stefka Kerensky, on 16 December 2015 - 11:02 PM, said:

From a CW perspective, let's talk about this, above all after the new quirks.

First, IS mechs in the dropdeck for CW can mount standard, except FS9.
Thunder and Battlemaster----> standard, and they can do very well and durable more than clan now.

BJ? BJ now tanks like an heavy or assault thanks to quirks, so, even though it has XL, you must put the double of dmg in one torso if you want to kill it, and this is very similar to "killing a clan mech hitting both torsi".

But guess what?
As previously said, I've been very surprised because I've seen very few BJ than I was expecting.
And virtually no Battlemaster, despite its awesome quirks

I've seen many IS pugs and unit during Tuk2, but I still think they haven't read the quirk list.

(Sorry for the long post...)

CXL engine has half the weight of a Std engine. This means that, your Thunderbolt and Battlemaster comparisons if they could take CXL engines, could end up taking even more weapons moving at the same speed, or they could move at a much faster speed and retain their same loadout (or something in between those extremes).

One of the advantages many players forget when they start looking at quirks is the very speed that many clan mechs move at. The Timberwolf moves at about 80 KPH. A thunderbolt does not tend to move that fast without being either under gunned, or carrying a vulnerable XL engine.

I shall admit, I have not looked at the BJ's quirks, as I don't own any. The Battlemaster 1G (the only one I kept from my Phoenix pack Battlemasters, because I didn't have a choice) did not seem to get favorable quirks. From it's behavior when I tried it in the event (and then changed to an all Crab drop deck and got massively better results), I overheated very quickly from my 6 med lasers, which it use to not do. Did they reduce the quirks on med lasers for that chassis?


The thing is, now it has turned from "what are the advantages of Clans/IS" and back into "what are each individual mech's strengths". You could present a specific mech, then I could present a specific counter mech, and... and...

I'm talking overall strengths. The Blackjack (I haven't confirmed yet, but I wouldn't disbelieve it) may specifically have quirks (and maybe over quirked if that is the case) that mitigate the risks of it's XL engine, but there are no such quirks on my (for example) Vindicator 1R. Thus, we can't say that all IS mechs have quirks that boost their survivial, as not all of them do. Just like we can't say that IS out range Clans. My Crab 27 has range quirks, but the Crab 27B does not.

As an average, I'm looking without any quirks, hard point locations, hit boxes, etc. I'm looking at "an ERLL vs a CERLL has X difference". Once you start to add in quirks, then you have to consider what the quirks are, where those hard points are, how many of said hard points are there, etc.

The Locust 1V, for an example, can maintain it's increase to energy range and cooldown, mostly because it only has the one hardpoint within it's CT. It can't use an ERPPC, and it's hard pressed tonnage wise to even bring anything more than a single LPL. This mitigates the quirks affects, because it can't make it affect many of said weapons. If, as a counter statement to that, a Firestarter ended up having the same quirks... Well... It would be far more impactful.

So, if we are comparing an ERLL vs a CERLL, which quirks are we considering? The best? The average? Or none? Because if we compare that ERLL on a Locust 1V with a base line CERLL, it's going to be a different tale than if it was an ERLL on a Crab 20 (no range quirks) vs a base CERLL.


As a base line: Clan weapons, with no quirks involved, tend to have longer ranges than their IS counterparts.
This statement is not false. It was the only statement I was making at the time. Quirks alter this, and can be taken on a mech by mech basis, but overall (as in, excluding quirks) Clans still maintain some semblance of range advantage.

I'm just summarizing that the Clans may have caused additional damage due to typical longer range envelopes permitting them to deal some splash damage against their targets sooner. This can also be combined with them having more units, and more known competitive units. Snowball that with the IS having more PUGs, smaller and fewer units...

There are too many factors, and not enough data to be conclusive as far as the topic is concerned. I don't believe we can conclude "Clans dealt more damage in the event, so they are still OP" from the information provided as this thread's topic stated. Could it be an indicator? Sure. Among so many other possibilities. This leaves it to remain "inconclusive".

[STEF_]

Tesunie, on 16 December 2015 - 11:40 PM, said:

stuff

About the 1G...that is esactly one of my Battlemaster in CW (the other one is the 1S, of course).

Read the quirks and guess what loadout I use to do this:



For my standards, the 1G works well.

[Rushin Roulette]

Tesunie, on 16 December 2015 - 08:46 PM, said:

As for the part that seems to have drawn the most "no facts against it, insult the player" remarks:



ACH vs SDR
Same weight, similar styled hit boxes, very agile (with Jump), ECM.
However, the ACH can equip more weapons on it, giving it more threatening edge. Be it CSPL to CERLLs, or CLRMs to C(S)SRMs, right on even into Clan ballistics.
The Spider can run faster, but has far fewer weapon options.
This comparison wants to be done against the Firestarter, not the Spider, which can equal the Cheetah in firepower, speed and agility. However, it lacks the ECM gear and the survivability of the CXL engine, which once again places the edge into the Cheetah's favor.

I think the whole point of that list was to compare Clan vs. IS on completely equal tonnage options (ie. building a dropdeck for CW using weight restrictions).

Yes you can compare mechs with similar weapon options, but as you pointed out you will always need to resort to going up one or 2 steps (sometimes even Weight classes like with the Madcat comparing to an IS Assault).

Fact is, if you stick to the same weight, then the clans are 90% always going to be better. Some light mechs and the Shadowcat are very debatable and I could easily accept the Blackjack being better if you dont heavily count the mobility and ECM capabiltiy in favour of the Shadowcat.

If you tried building an Arctic Cheetah with the same weapons and equipment the Spider has, then you will have loads of weight left over at the end. This saved weight will either end up being filled with more weapons or extra heatsinks which both work strongly in favour of the clan mech (either more damage through more weapons, or more damage through not needing to watch heat during a battle).

[Lily from animove]

Adamski, on 16 December 2015 - 07:09 AM, said:

That's a lot of really nice metaphors there, but I really don't care what your mom made you for dinner or what home reno projects you are helping her with.

If you want to claim that the STK hitboxes and hardpoint locations are a counter balance to a WHK increased heat dissipation, then go ahead, and there are arguments to be made for either side.

and thats why no one seems to take you serious anymore, Stubborn IS pilots sticking to their nonsense "arguments" which are not objectively. Good pilots know that the geometry of a mech matters a lot. and the yknow how to use this correctly, all you shny WHK coolant means nothing whent here is not enough time on the target to fire or you watse this additional cooling on long beamduration weapons to the ground or air. Your words sound like those of a non twisting stare warrior contest, in which surely the WHK may be the winner. But this does not reflect any kind of battlefield performance.

hybrid black, on 16 December 2015 - 01:01 PM, said:

or the best players in the game were clan

or the worst were IS.
The stats are an average performance amongtst all skill levels. IS had very good pilots as well, yet not enough in relation to the clans.

Rushin Roulette, on 17 December 2015 - 12:46 AM, said:

I think the whole point of that list was to compare Clan vs. IS on completely equal tonnage options (ie. building a dropdeck for CW using weight restrictions).

Yes you can compare mechs with similar weapon options, but as you pointed out you will always need to resort to going up one or 2 steps (sometimes even Weight classes like with the Madcat comparing to an IS Assault).

Fact is, if you stick to the same weight, then the clans are 90% always going to be better. Some light mechs and the Shadowcat are very debatable and I could easily accept the Blackjack being better if you dont heavily count the mobility and ECM capabiltiy in favour of the Shadowcat.

If you tried building an Arctic Cheetah with the same weapons and equipment the Spider has, then you will have loads of weight left over at the end. This saved weight will either end up being filled with more weapons or extra heatsinks which both work strongly in favour of the clan mech (either more damage through more weapons, or more damage through not needing to watch heat during a battle).

it should not be a clan vs is comparison at all, SPD, vs ACH, vs FS9 reveals just all the issues being on chassis 2 chassis comparison. Would the spider had more hardpoints it could rock similary hard. Yes maybe less DHS, but the IS lasers are more heatefficient, menaing 1 heat transforms into more damage compared to IS mechs. But thats a topic some IS palyers never understood. Yes the clanners just have due to omnipod swapping a higher chance to get the right "hardpoint setups". While the IS has a lower chance that a chassis just gtes such a correct composition. marauder and Rifleman will be very valid and good countermehcs to the clans because they have nice hardpoint setups which the IS lacked.

[Zuesacoatl]

You people really need to understand the term white-knight in context to MWO. It does not mean we support clan tech in an OP state. Those of us who are or were called white-knights were the ones that went against the loud minority islanders back in beta. we defended PGI and stated that they needed more time to make the game as close to what everyone wanted. we were the founders that kept spending money and supporting PGI when the Islanders said not to. This issue has nothing to do with us white-knights. It has to do with people that want balance, and people who do not have skill that do not truly understand what balance is and want more hardcore nerfs. When you say white-knight in this thread, just say troll, because you feel they are trolling you, us white-knights were not and to this day are not trolls. We supported PGI in the dark times, that is all.

[Rushin Roulette]

Lily, there is an extremely valid reason why IS mechs are being compared to Clan mechs. Community Warfare pits these 2 Groups against each other every day (and of course also CvC and ISvIS).

Even if the Spider had more weapon hardpoints, it could still not compete with an Arctic Cheetah because it doesnt have enough weight free to place that many weapons and still be half way decently heat efficient or fast enough. Yes, the Firestarter is able to compete, but that is only because of buffs, and even then it does not have ECM capabilities (Which became slightly less of an issue since the range reduction). But As I said before... comparing clan mechs to IS mechs is nearly only possible if you go up 1 or 2 steps on weight for the IS comparison (The ACH is 30 Tons and the comparable FS9 is 35 Tons).

There are so many more reasons why clans have an advantage over IS apart from only weapon range (Yes I am also aware that some IS mechs are still too strongly quirked, but this is to highlight hard wired clan advantages);

- Weapon weight (Clan weapons are usually lighter than IS weapons of the same category.. and ERSL for example must be compared to the SL just because there is no closer weapon to compare them with)
- Weapon critical slots (Many clan weapons are smaller than comparable IS weapons... C-Gauss is one less critical slot for example.. while also being 3 tons smaller with all other stats being identical)
- Ultra and LBX AC weapons for less weight than regular AC weapons on the IS side (Meaning either more shots or more close up crit chances)
- Similar overall speeds througout the entire mech range (This makes it immensely easier to coordinate team movements if everyone can engage the enemy at roughly the same time)
- XL engines without immediate side torso deaths (IS lights, some Mediums and even some Heavies require XL engines to fully take advantage of all possibilites)

These are all points which still favour the clans and wont/cant be changed by any nerf.

[Lily from animove]

Rushin Roulette, on 17 December 2015 - 05:08 AM, said:

Lily, there is an extremely valid reason why IS mechs are being compared to Clan mechs. Community Warfare pits these 2 Groups against each other every day (and of course also CvC and ISvIS).

And what abou the solo q?: one pilot one mech.

And I just don't like it being a clan vs Is discussion because the interchassis balance is broke even amongst IS mechs or amongst clanmechs. We should the entire time discuss how to balance chassis against each other because this would create balance totally indepenend of the tech behind them. And then it does not care if clanweapons are lighter or IS wepaons are more heat efficient. Because the treatment the CHASSIS gets would include all these differences of the tech. But tech changes have totally different impacts on different chassis.

So sry but you are not right when you say all points favour the clans. These favours sometimes only apply in conjunction with some chassis. ES/FF is to available to all clans even if they would need it. Fixed DHS eat slots that a B build doesn't even needs, which means yes you save slots on the B, and get a pointless DHS or more you never need, wasting the tonnage and slotadvantage beyond the benefit the c-Ballistic has over a fully customizeable iS mech fielding the same Ballistic without nonsnese additional heatsinks. (think about WHK). Ammo placement often is worse than on IS mechs due to ES/FF slots being in fixed locations you can not swap,
Much of what you said is not true on the entire picture. It is just true if you make a 1on1 comparison. But I doubt A Formula 1 egnine will properly work in an High tonnage cargo truck. So comparing just the Horse power these engines have is very invalid. Mechs ar eno 1on1 comparion beause they differ.

And as you say, some things won't an can't be changed. Chassis need quirks and nerfs to reach balance. SCR is still in need of nerfs if you aks me, because it simply outperforms others as a medium.

I just want people stop seeing a clan vs is discussion because this is a point of view that never will work. If we create a proper chassis balance the clan vs is balance will just happen too. Because then the origin of being clan or is does not matter.


Surely a 30t chassis is not a 35t chassis, but they need to be rather much on a equally performing level otherwise. The solo Q will never see the SPD since there is no reason not to use the 30t mech over the 35t mech doing everything better. If MWO would only consist of the CW mode, yes you are right with this not being comparable because tonnage is the ressources it's based on. But MWO is not only CW. And those has to be considered as well.

Solo is one pilot one machine, Cw is One pilot X tonnage. And when chassis balance is created all these two conditions will automatically balance as well.

Edited by Lily from animove, 17 December 2015 - 05:40 AM.

[Rushin Roulette]

Lily from animove, on 17 December 2015 - 05:33 AM, said:

I just want people stop seeing a clan vs is discussion because this is a point of view that never will work. If we create a proper chassis balance the clan vs is balance will just happen too. Because then the origin of being clan or is does not matter.

I get what you mean and I am not saying anything against that point because you are correct in a sense. However only balancing Clan vs, Clan and IS vs. IS will still leave a powergap between the technologies.

As for your point with ES and FF not being balanced. The only thing going against that is the nature of the fixed components for clans. For that they only need half as many slots as teh IS do in counterbalance... and I do not know of any IS build which does not need at least ES to save weight. The lower you go on the weight spectrum, the more builds you will have that require ES and FF locking down 28 instead of 14 slots.

Already the mechs are being balanced on individual variant types, hence the jungle of quirks for each different variant. These still need to be fine tuned. As you said, the Stormcorw still needs a few nerfs, but so do quite a few others (Timberwolf, Arctic Cheatah, a few Thunderbolts, Stalker 4N to name a few others) while other mechs are still in need of further Buffs (Clan lights minus ACH, Gargoyle, Spider and Atlas to name a few) to bring them up to speed vs. the options available with the same weight.

The thing it boils down is if you had the option, would you pick any other light (Clan or IS lights) over an Arctic Cheetah for close range harassing if you did not need the XP on any of the mechs?

Perfect balance is just about impossible to achieve, but the aim should be to get as close as possible to the answer for that question with "sure, Ill take a Spider, or a Jenner or a Kitfox or an Urbie.... Makes absolutely no difference".

[Tesunie]

Stefka Kerensky, on 16 December 2015 - 11:58 PM, said:

About the 1G...that is esactly one of my Battlemaster in CW (the other one is the 1S, of course).

Read the quirks and guess what loadout I use to do this:



For my standards, the 1G works well.

I'll openly admit, I'm not so good in assault mechs. I actually get my best performance from medium mechs, unless I'm bringing some form of LRMs on that assault...

Though I have been enjoying my Atlas S as a brawler as of late. Kinda strange. Haven't been doing too bad, but haven't been doing great either.

My Battlemaster 1G build use to be fun and effective to use. I don't know why but when I tried to bring it into CW for the event, it didn't behave anything like it use to. Of course, meta changes and etc, so it was an older build verse the latest meta. (Which was why I changed my drop deck after that.)

Rushin Roulette, on 17 December 2015 - 05:08 AM, said:

- Ultra and LBX AC weapons for less weight than regular AC weapons on the IS side (Meaning either more shots or more close up crit chances)

I'd like to just point out that burst fire for Clan ACs (non-LBX) tends to counter a lot of their other benefits.

Lily from animove, on 17 December 2015 - 05:33 AM, said:

Ammo placement often is worse than on IS mechs due to ES/FF slots being in fixed locations you can not swap,

I'd also like to mention free CASE, that also stops the explosion right where it is.
As long as you don't place ammo in your CT, you are typically in a decent position for Clan mechs. I just place my ammo when possible in the location with my weapon on my clan mechs.

And I do get what you mean with the locked DHS, but IS mechs have locked hardpoints...


The flexibility of Omni-pods is what will make clans very hard to balance. It doesn't help that every time a change happens, people lament about how clan mechs are suppose to be OP. I agree with you on trying to achieve a chassis by chassis balance, and it will be easier to achieve once the general Clan to IS base line tech are more balanced amongst each other. From there then quirk mechs in need of help or mechs that are too powerful.