107 replies to this topic

[Wing 0]

Heres a good idea PGI. Why don't you just put the tonnage for both sides back to 240 instead of this idiocy ive been seeing all week. you really want the I.S to be O.P so bad... You've already listened to players from 2 units on twitter who are mainly doing the abusive crap and shot calling right now and I think its time for them to "step aside". They obviously have made things worse because you were listening to them too much. If you really wanted I.S to win so bad in the tuk event, you should've just paid us to make that happen. As a bounty hunter would say "a job is a job and you're no good to me alive."

Edited by Wing 0, 06 January 2016 - 10:22 PM.

[Dagorlad13]

Wing 0, on 06 January 2016 - 10:21 PM, said:

Heres a good idea PGI. Why don't you just put the tonnage for both sides back to 240 instead of this idiocy ive been seeing all week. you really want the I.S to be O.P so bad... You've already listened to players from 2 units on twitter who are mainly doing the abusive crap and shot calling right now and I think its time for them to "step aside". They obviously have made things worse because you were listening to them too much. If you really wanted I.S to win so bad in the tuk event, you should've just paid us to make that happen. As a bounty hunter would say "a job is a job and you're no good to me alive."

If they wanted IS to win, all they had to do was enforce lore and not allow mercenaries to fight for clans unless they became loyalists (bondsmen).

[Rushin Roulette]

I say the tonnage should be per faction and not per side.

Lets make it more balanced and give Marik and Davion 400 Tons

[Reitmeier]

Rushin Roulette, on 07 January 2016 - 12:50 AM, said:

I say the tonnage should be per faction and not per side.

Lets make it more balanced and give Marik and Davion 400 Tons

So four LRM D-DCs for Davion/Marik?

[MovinTarget]

Rushin Roulette, on 07 January 2016 - 12:50 AM, said:

I say the tonnage should be per faction and not per side.

Lets make it more balanced and give Marik and Davion 400 Tons

I see what you did there...

Though I actually agree to make it per faction. As a faction expands (is successfully increasing planet count) then they are technically spreading themselves thinner, manifested in a rationing of tonnage for drops. Opposite for factions losing too much group.
Yeah I know it could be argued that more acquisitions = more resources = more tonnage...

Just talking out ideas here...

Oh and leave the mass Atlas drops to Steiner scouts.

[Lily from animove]

S C A R, on 06 January 2016 - 03:28 PM, said:

Russ, why do you hate Clans? Have youa actually dropped against teams pushing in 12 Assults. Not only they wipe out the first wave but they also push in the drop zone and clean the 2nd wave. You are selling the product and you don't know what you are selling. So many players offered really good solutions.

I do think he cares, yet I just think he is very unsuited to any balance related stuff. He should do his job as the companies president.

sometimes I imagine him dual wielding the nerfbat and the buffhammer trying to make cool moves while wlaking through the office randomly just hitting things around him.

Edited by Lily from animove, 07 January 2016 - 06:41 AM.

[Polkastein]

I think a lower drop deck tonnage would be fine. The average in the group quick play queue for a 12 man is 55 tons, that would make a CW drop 220 tons, which would probably work out to one of each weight class.

[S C A R]

I'd like to take time and summarise everything I've heard so far from this topic. Before you start saying that more testing is needed there are a few things I'd like to say. I am a member of KCom and I've played more than 200 matches since the changes to IS and the tonnage against various other units and pugs. I have a thourough understanding of this game and my average damage in CW is between 2,000 - 2,500. Every 3rd or 4th game I get damage between 3,000 and 4,000.

I run 2 brawlers - Gargoyle and Arctic C (optimum range with 200 meters) and 2 medium range mechs (optimum range 400 meters).

Also, I'd like to point out that I am not a 100% clanner (it is 50% - 50%). I prefer to play for clans at the moment because it is challenging, really challenging.

1) Clans brawlers:

Simply doesn't work in 80% of matches (but I like the challenge as there is nothing else to do). 80% of the matches end up in people brinning IS mechs equipped with ER LL lasers (between 3 to 5 ER LL on each mech). What happens in games like that is that they try to snipe for the first 10 mins and when we stop traiding they push (cause everyone gets boared) and get slaughtered.

Clan brawlers overheat too much during brawls and can't tank as hard as IS counterparts. Only pure skill saves me in many instances.

2) Clan snipers:

Once again, a bad idea. IS mechs have insane range and internal structure buffs that allow them outrange you, outdamage you and take less damage them you. We (KCom) tried to pay in a snipe game many times and it didn't go well.

3) Tonnage:

When we see 12 assaults pushing us we try to pull away and keep our distance but it is increadiably difficult to do as Atlases go around 61 kph and some assaults push it to 70. The time it takes to turn around and start running means you will be dead (killed in you back). Mobility is a massive nerf to clans.

I like what some people said about logistics, the fewer planets a faction has the easier it is to shift mechs and this should allow a higher tonnage.

Another excellent idea was to reduce the tonange for bigger groups (maybe even ensure they have to bring one light and medium). Larger units are abusing higher tonnage quite a bit. It is not against the rules but it is against the spirit of the game.

Russ:

As some people pointed out he is the president of the company and thus should be concerned with running the business. He is trying to do everything and he fails very hard at it. Russ should not be involved into balancing of the game if he doesn't have a full understanding of it (bounded rationality). The only way I can compare the tonnage adjustments is like giving a monkey glasses. You never know which part of its body it is going to put them on. No offense Russ but this is how it looks like from the side. If you want a balanced CW gameplay you need to allocate a full time person who can monitor CW on daily basis and make specific small adjustments based on his personal observation and feedback from the community.

Russ may care about the clans and the game but he has a funny way of showing it. Russ, a happy community doesn't leave so many angry, even offensive at times comments. There is something to think about.

If I am wrong on some of the points let's discuss them. I am only but a human and can be wrong just like anyone else. At least, I am not afraid admitting it.

[mechbane]

CW needs a point to it not an increase in tonnage!

[Alec Braca]

IronClaws, on 05 January 2016 - 04:40 PM, said:

After PGI is done adding re(un)seen Mechs to the game, we really need the Clan totem Mechs, especially the Kodiak.

They have plenty to work with for the Clans. They have not even touched the 3055 IS chassis yet, if they ever, but I'm sure we'll see more Clan specific mechs come out, IIC, second line mechs, Star League Era maybe, more OmniMechs, etc.

[Dawnstealer]

MovinTarget, on 06 January 2016 - 04:53 PM, said:

I mean seriously, how many times in the BT universe did 12 Atlases rise up and move as one? Oh and BTW after those 12 are wiped, we will drop in 12 more!

I know lore can't rule all, but come on, this is redonkulous!

How about rank influencing your tonnage cap?

Scrub level ones can bring 3 lights and a med (i.e. 160 -180 tons).

By level 10 you can pull 240 tons.

If you change faction, you tonnage is based on you level in the new faction.

Yes we'd need a way to balance a bunch of scrubs vs vets but this would also keep people faction hopping so much...

It would give us something to work towards instead of just cookies...

I could get on board with this one. It would also prevent new players from being outright mauled in a match (or at least would spare their team losing a KGC, etc), let them warm up with mechs that are a little more expendable and a little more capable of getting away from a bad tactical decision.

I've also been pushing the idea of letting the Clans have the same tonnage cap, but if a player goes under that cap, they are rewarded for it. The more they go under, the greater the reward (both in XP and C-Bills). I've said this elsewhere: you can't force roleplaying in a game like this, but you can incentivize it.

[Alec Braca]

I mean seriously, how many times in the BT universe did 12 Atlases rise up and move as one? Oh and BTW after those 12 are wiped, we will drop in 12 more!


This also works the other way around. No one is happy when we see 12 Timbers/Ebons/Warhawks/Direwolves rise up and push, then 12 more. I just don't understand, I really don't. You have the numerous weapons, the range, the XL engines that don't kill you instantly, the speed, and the cool blue cockpit monitors. Yes I own Clan mechs and drop with them in PUB matches and am fine, I just got to watch my heat bc I can't alpha more. Who are you facing on the reg or is this just one match that went horribly wrong?
I played KCom the other day as 7 man with pug fillers and they mopped the floor with us. Although, towards the end of the match they went easy on us, they didn't tell us but you could see they were easing up a bit and thank you for that. If we drop against pugs or mostly pugs and we are really destroying them, we set the cap at 36 and complete with mission to end it. No one wants to be farmed or watching as the last few mechs are defeated. We've all been there and hate it.

I am not trying to hate upon the Clans but I just hear this all of the time that "the Clans are dead!" and oh no CW is dying! Yeah MUCH of the population of mercs went IS at the same time. I don't know what to tell you, take it up with them. The Clans WILL come back, we all know it including you reading this right now. Due to a combination of things the Clans are "for the first time" really getting their asses handed to them. I know it's a scary thought, but if there is anyone here who has been in the FRR for a long time, you will get over it and you will fight harder to come back. Eventually you will. Remember what the map looked like before this last reset?

Edited by Alec Braca, 07 January 2016 - 08:33 AM.

[Chaotic Clyde]

Why not make it like it is for public queue for 12 man 4 drops per deck and each drop has 600 hundred tons to work with. It all gets worked out before the actual drop during the wait. Or something along them lines.

Edited by Chaotic Clyde, 07 January 2016 - 08:35 AM.

[Dagorlad13]

Alec Braca, on 07 January 2016 - 07:56 AM, said:

They have plenty to work with for the Clans. They have not even touched the 3055 IS chassis yet, if they ever, but I'm sure we'll see more Clan specific mechs come out, IIC, second line mechs, Star League Era maybe, more OmniMechs, etc.

True, the game is still supposedly in 3052, so no 3055 Mechs yet, and technically, the Kodiak is a second line mech that was developed at the same time as the Executioner (by Clan Ghost Bear), but I agree that there are more IIC Mechs that can be introduced first (Rifleman IIC, Warhammer IIC...).

Rushin Roulette, on 07 January 2016 - 12:50 AM, said:

I say the tonnage should be per faction and not per side.

Lets make it more balanced and give Marik and Davion 400 Tons

If you do that, then Marik would have the least tonnage and Steiner the most (for IS) and Clans would be able to "bid" whatever they want, but would receive scaling rewards that increase with lower tonnage.

[Alec Braca]

IronClaws, on 07 January 2016 - 08:32 AM, said:

True, the game is still supposedly in 3052, so no 3055 Mechs yet, and technically, the Kodiak is a second line mech that was developed at the same time as the Executioner (by Clan Ghost Bear), but I agree that there are more IIC Mechs that can be introduced first (Rifleman IIC, Warhammer IIC...).

I think if they really had money and manpower to spend, they could create the first OmniMechs that led to the Timber/Summoner Etc, and even a few Clan Wolverine mechs that were awesome until they were framed by the Widowmakers.

[Dagorlad13]

Also, it should cost MC to break a permanent contract and your pilot should never be allowed to join that faction again (and any merc unit your pilot joined would not be given contracts for that faction if you are part of the forces). Mercs should have scaling rewards based on the length of their contracts and whether they stay with the same faction for the duration of that contract or not.

Alec Braca, on 07 January 2016 - 08:36 AM, said:

I think if they really had money and manpower to spend, they could create the first OmniMechs that led to the Timber/Summoner Etc, and even a few Clan Wolverine mechs that were awesome until they were framed by the Widowmakers.

They could, but most of those Mechs were destroyed, or replaced before the invasion, so you would most likely never see them outside the Pentagon Worlds.

[Alec Braca]

IronClaws, on 07 January 2016 - 08:40 AM, said:

Also, it should cost MC to break a permanent contract and your pilot should never be allowed to join that faction again (and any merc unit your pilot joined would not be given contracts for that faction if you are part of the forces). Mercs should have scaling rewards based on the length of their contracts and whether they stay with the same faction for the duration of that contract or not.



They could, but most of those Mechs were destroyed, or replaced before the invasion, so you would most likely never see them outside the Pentagon Worlds.

Yeah.... They belong in the BattleTech / RPG games.

[Dawnstealer]

IronClaws, on 07 January 2016 - 08:40 AM, said:

Also, it should cost MC to break a permanent contract and your pilot should never be allowed to join that faction again (and any merc unit your pilot joined would not be given contracts for that faction if you are part of the forces).

Not totally sure if that's sarcasm or not, but I'll take it at face value. While I think the costs for a permanent loyalist to break a contract should be much greater than for a merc (mercs aren't expected to be loyal, after all), a "never" in a game meant for entertainment isn't such a good idea. Huge C-Bill hit with their new faction until they "prove their loyalty?" HUGE negative rep with their former faction (that they'd have to overcome if they ever came back)? TOTALLY cool with that.

IronClaws, on 07 January 2016 - 08:40 AM, said:

Mercs should have scaling rewards based on the length of their contracts and whether they stay with the same faction for the duration of that contract or not.

Absolutely. It's fluffy and it's cool. Make it happen, PGI.

[Moldur]

lore and mechwarrior logic went out the window when PGI nerfed Clans at all instead of making uneven battles. Why can't we go one way or the other, instead of sitting in some sort of purgatory where clans are better but not really but they're better, but there is super quirked chassis but clans have an advantage but not really when IS knows what they're doing.

[Dagorlad13]

Moldur, on 07 January 2016 - 10:22 AM, said:

lore and mechwarrior logic went out the window when PGI nerfed Clans at all instead of making uneven battles. Why can't we go one way or the other, instead of sitting in some sort of purgatory where clans are better but not really but they're better, but there is super quirked chassis but clans have an advantage but not really when IS knows what they're doing.

I am just suggesting that different factions get different rewards based on how they operate in lore. This way players will be positively motivated to join a faction, rather than negatively motivated by knee-jerk dropdeck tonnage changes and buffs / nerfs.