115 replies to this topic

[Nightmare1]

Volts, on 25 January 2016 - 09:33 AM, said:

I'm not sure I accept that there aren't avenues in the terrain to mitigate sniping (lets ignore alpine, maybe parts of tourmaline).

You need to close to what, 650m for cLPL?

I'm about 50/50. Personally, I dislike the long burn time of CERLLs and feel they're an inferior weapon most of the time. However, I do recognize the range advantage. On maps like Polar or Alpine, it would be a good selection, but on maps such as Tourmaline, there should be enough cover to close the distance without needing to use CERLLs. I would question the group tactics on cover-rich maps when CERLL was the weapon of choice.

That being said, I doubt it would have made much difference other than to net a couple of extra kills. The IS would still have trounced them.

[Volts]

Nightmare1, on 25 January 2016 - 10:16 AM, said:

I'm about 50/50. Personally, I dislike the long burn time of CERLLs and feel they're an inferior weapon most of the time. However, I do recognize the range advantage. On maps like Polar or Alpine, it would be a good selection, but on maps such as Tourmaline, there should be enough cover to close the distance without needing to use CERLLs. I would question the group tactics on cover-rich maps when CERLL was the weapon of choice.

That being said, I doubt it would have made much difference other than to net a couple of extra kills. The IS would still have trounced them.

I completely agree, I just feel things would have been closer than the curb stomp we saw.

I was interested to know the rationale behind the build decisions is all. Looks like they lost the fight in the mech lab anyhow.

[Mcgral18]

pwnface, on 25 January 2016 - 12:17 AM, said:

This might be true, but that isn't what was tested during this event. I'd certainly like to see C-LPLs in a more accurate test.

There could always be a re-do.

One with tonnage based restrictions, to avoid Clam Lights and Assaults.


Also BJs everywhere.

Edited by Mcgral18, 25 January 2016 - 02:13 PM.

[Gas Guzzler]

Mcgral18, on 25 January 2016 - 02:13 PM, said:

Also BJs everywhere.

Most reasonable people agree that BJ's need to be taken down a notch.

[Nightmare1]

Gas Guzzler, on 25 January 2016 - 02:21 PM, said:

Most reasonable people agree that BJ's need to be taken down a notch.

Yeah, their quirks are rather silly.

[Mcgral18]

Gas Guzzler, on 25 January 2016 - 02:21 PM, said:

Most reasonable people agree that BJ's need to be taken down a notch.

Revert Weapon quirks to good, reduce Structure.
Give Armour quirks to the Vindi equal to the current doubled structure. (it cannot pack guns, unlike the BJ).

A tough, and a deadly, 45 tonner.

Do something similar to the Fridge and SadCat. Smaller quirks, of course, but duration to SadCat, I favour 20% (which some BJs have) and Armour to the Fridge. Amounts to be tested.

[Gas Guzzler]

Nightmare1, on 25 January 2016 - 02:24 PM, said:

Yeah, their quirks are rather silly.

Personally, I think halving their structure bonuses is a good place to start, and adding the removed structure onto both the Vindicator and the Shadow Cat.

Mcgral18, on 25 January 2016 - 02:24 PM, said:

Revert Weapon quirks to good, reduce Structure.
Give Armour quirks to the Vindi equal to the current doubled structure. (it cannot pack guns, unlike the BJ).

A tough, and a deadly, 45 tonner.

Do something similar to the Fridge and SadCat. Smaller quirks, of course, but duration to SadCat, I favour 20% (which some BJs have) and Armour to the Fridge. Amounts to be tested.

Heat gen for the Sad Cat as well! Heat gen and duration might make the 3 ER LL Scat pretty deadly.

Don't get your hopes up though. MASC buff coming in February so I doubt they will change anything else on the Scat at the same time.

[Nightmare1]

Gas Guzzler, on 25 January 2016 - 02:26 PM, said:

Personally, I think halving their structure bonuses is a good place to start, and adding the removed structure onto both the Vindicator and the Shadow Cat.

Not a bad idea, lol.

All I know, is that the BJs tank way too hard for a Medium. My HBKs and CN9s are very, very jealous.

[B0oN]

Well, I understand the desire of clanplayers to be able to trade at extreme ranges, but I was implicating that you guys knew better and played more to the mobility advantage of the clans and either force yourselves upon the enemy or force the enemy into a bad position .

So, to be clear, no dissing of anyone was intended from my side, I just really thought you guys ALL knew that clans right now have barely any chance at extreme ranges, even when using ERPPC´s or ERL´s with massive TC´s .

I ´m still extremely looking forward to the next field testing session like this and the LRM testing before, because "for science" and maybe someone at PGI perking up because of this.

Thanks for all your time and effort invested, lads ´n lasses (if there were any^^)

[Cyborx]

i don´t give a .... about the general balance. Its good that not everything is the same. Differences make the game interesting.
its just a pity that there still isn´t a game mode that makes bad mechs useful/viable. This could be a CW with economics.
I´d love to run ****** mechs like commandos and ice ferrets and dragons.All u need is a limiting factor like a market,or limitations by owned factory planets.
then everything would be better than nothing.

But PGI never had a clue about the balance itself neither CW. Its only balance-WHACK-A-MOLE and not even a concept for CW.
The more players complain, the more 50% nerfs n buffs you´ll see. Iteration that works itself to a balance in small steps will never happen.
Its all about calming the baddies, newbies and forum warriors,not about the game!
The consitent imbalance and meta-shifting emerges from only one "mandatory" circumstance:
Yesterdays good stuff in the shop must be bad tomorrow, so that the ppl buy "new" stuff!

PGI must deliver a game mode that makes this imbalance less "game-breaking/deciding". They must bring CW-economics soon or they will burn the latest influx of steam players aswell , like they did with the founders!

Edited by Cyborx, 26 January 2016 - 03:51 AM.

[Widowmaker1981]

TheSilken, on 25 January 2016 - 08:12 AM, said:

C-LPL would have been worse since you can't trade at 900+ meters with them you need the C-ERLL. And trying to close on a firing line of ERLL with LPLs would have netted the same result since not only do the IS get to reach out and hit you before you can effectively fire back but also they can extend the amount of time it takes for you to reach them due to the canyons on Canyon Network and the large area to cover on Tourmaline, and then even if you do reach them they run just as cool as you do, have the damage advantage, and have the structure quirks to top it off. C-LPL would have been the inferior weapon choice for those engagements. Now on Frozen City Night they would be overall better but at that point you should be taking more brawly type weapons due to the way the spawns were done.

Is cover not a thing though? there are few maps where you cant safely close to within 600m of any spot that exists. If the IS team are going to do something like walk out to the edge of HPG so they can have 1k sightlines, my reaction as the clan team would be 'screw that, not walking into that firing line which we cannot possibly trade with, either move or we can have a draw'

[Bows3r]

Widowmaker1981, on 26 January 2016 - 04:05 AM, said:

Is cover not a thing though? there are few maps where you cant safely close to within 600m of any spot that exists. If the IS team are going to do something like walk out to the edge of HPG so they can have 1k sightlines, my reaction as the clan team would be 'screw that, not walking into that firing line which we cannot possibly trade with, either move or we can have a draw'

Cover? I'm sorry. Show me the cover when they have an entire firing line spread all around their side of the map pointed to castle all with 825+ M ER-LL's. Compare the damage of Infernal Eternal's DireWolf to mine, the difference? (besides positioning) I had ER-LL's, he had LPL's, end of story. Also, Celyth with ER-LL's on his Timber, compare his damage to the other's on the team. And enjoy your cowardly draw, we were trying to play a game and prove somewhat of a point, not sit around with our thumbs up our rears.

Edited by Bows3r, 26 January 2016 - 12:06 PM.

[Volts]

Bows3r, on 26 January 2016 - 12:05 PM, said:

we were trying to play a game and prove somewhat of a point

That makes a little more sense.

Not sure the value of the point though. I was hoping this match would have been an example of IS playing to their strengths vs Clans playing to their strengths.

As has been said, we are all fairly sure of the result anyhow; but for the rest of us who didn't know this was about making a point, it just looked a bit weird with you playing your weakness to their strength is all.

gg I guess.

[Bows3r]

Volts, on 26 January 2016 - 12:32 PM, said:

That makes a little more sense. Not sure the value of the point though. I was hoping this match would have been an example of IS playing to their strengths vs Clans playing to their strengths. As has been said, we are all fairly sure of the result anyhow; but for the rest of us who didn't know this was about making a point, it just looked a bit weird with you playing your weakness to their strength is all. gg I guess.

Team Tripping Marsh Hackers showed that even playing to the clans "strengths", they still got beat, horribly. Despite the aggressive, and trade focused playstyles both teams showed, not only did the IS win all 6 drops, but the clans only managed 6 kills through the whole series. While I don't believe this event was definitive proof, and there's things I'd like to see done differently, it definitely showcased the inferiority complex the Clans have right now to the Innersphere.

Edited by Bows3r, 26 January 2016 - 03:43 PM.

[MahKraah]

i am abit suprised that the claners played the trade game, as longrange trading is (was at that time) the worst situation for clans.
also the is side had those selected few overquirked meta mechs only while the clan side used mechs that are usualy reffered to as "they suck" aka exe.
did the teams know witch map they had to play and where free in selecting what ever they thought is best for it?(clanside)
besides boreal and alpine, there is no map that FORCES you to play ranged trading.

with the last balance pass the range advantage and the bj´s mega tanking for the is is gone anyway.

opening clan for full customisation ... remove ferro and use the freed slots for heatsinks, that would be a end to the overly hot clans while still having 30-40% more alpha , i think it would buff the clans ALOT as everything is smaller and lighter and the numbers of free slots is the restricting/balancing trade off.

[Celtic Warrior IS]

The outcome doesn't surprise me at all. The differences in the weapons and heat generation between Clan and IS are in favor of IS. This type of scenario plays out all the time in CW/FW this is why many have switched to the IS side.