93 replies to this topic

[Scout Derek]

Yeah, I said it. It's the complete opposite of the orion in some categories.

Why?

Well, let's look at it.

First off, the Orion IIC can carry much, much more than its IS counterpart. It can also use a Clan XL, which is a huge advantage even with the penalties.

One problem I see, though, is the quirking here for the IS Orion.

Now let's compare the two builds I've prepared, the Orion IIC Lighter Atlas build, and the Orion Mini Atlas Build:

Orion IIC

Orion IS(M Variant was the closest I could get to the IIC verison)

So the IIC gets more Damage and Speed (Thanks for reminder Gas Guzzler), while the IS gets, well, a slower engine and a STD. Here's where the quirkening comes in.

ORION QUIRKS:


They look fair, right?

Well, sort of. The weapon quirks and others are fine, but what gets me are the Structure quirks. These were implemented when the Skill Tree was knocked down a bit so that mechs could be more survivable.

Yet, the Clan mechs got a few, if not any, quirks to complement this. Even before this, IS mechs had Structure quirks, and now they've been beefed up even more.

What I'm getting at is that IS mechs have the armor to take damage but don't have the weapons to do the best damage, while the Clans have the weapons to do damage but do not have the armor to sustain it.


And this problem is going to keep staying this way unless new tech is implemented, such as the other IS Ultra Autocannons, and the clans Heavy Lasers, or even the IS X-Pulse Lasers.

At least this is what I see in my eyes. If PGI can gives us some new tech I'm more than happy with the game than what's already coming.

EDIT: Orion IIC has another advantage against the IS counterpart when no quirks are involved.

Edited by Scout Derek, 12 January 2016 - 10:02 AM.

[Cion]

not sure if complaining or just wanting new tech....

[Gas Guzzler]

Well, 84 vs 67 kph is a huge difference in mobility, that factors in as well..

[Scout Derek]

Cion, on 12 January 2016 - 09:55 AM, said:

not sure if complaining or just wanting new tech....

Not complaining, just wanting new tech. If I were to complain I would have said "Rant over" at the end of this.

You'd want new tech too, wouldn't you? Come on, don't you want the Arrow (Not the hero mech the Missile weapon) on your Catapult so you could scare everyone away because of it's range and damage? Or how about RACs?

Gas Guzzler, on 12 January 2016 - 09:57 AM, said:

Well, 84 vs 67 kph is a huge difference in mobility, that factors in as well..

Was going to add that in as well, forgot about that.

[Adamski]

Since its structure quirks and not armor quirks, it still leaves the IS mech missing its weapons very quickly, especially with TC1 buffing all the Clan crits against internal components.

EDIT: I really don't want PGI messing around with adding more weapons and tech until we can get closer to balanced now.

In fact, I would rather have everything balanced and the timeline frozen than having to go through the hell that is 2 years of balance Russian roulette hoping that every patch gets things right.

Edited by Adamski, 12 January 2016 - 10:03 AM.

[Tyler Valentine]

Gas Guzzler, on 12 January 2016 - 09:57 AM, said:

Well, 84 vs 67 kph is a huge difference in mobility, that factors in as well..

Yeah, honestly they seem pretty balanced to me. I like the equal, but different approach PGI is trying right now. If I want to feel tanky and I'm up for a brawl, I take my IS 'mechs. If I want to use medium range uber-alphas or dakka/ERmeds I run Clan.

[Barantor]

IS Orion-M comes with an XL 300, to change this it has to give up weight it had put in weapons or ammo. If it doesn't change this then the all it's torsoes become center torso because they second those pop it is dead.

IIC has a standard engine it can change too, but has the benefit of lighter clan weaponry.

Some of the quirks make the Orion ok, but I would hardly call it a 'top mech' because of it.

The main problem with both is the low weapon mounts that aren't missiles. Something has to be done so that the meta changes or is altered away from the corner peek/hill peek methodology of what makes a good mech, either through bonuses or reductions in capacity for those mechs hardpoints.

Edited by Barantor, 12 January 2016 - 12:01 PM.

[Khobai]

One advantage the Orion does have is that AC20 > CUAC20

doing 20 damage at a time is way better than doing 5 damage in multiple bursts, especially against moving targets that are torso twisting around

But the truth is neither the Orion or Orion IIC are top tier mechs

Edited by Khobai, 12 January 2016 - 10:07 AM.

[Scout Derek]

Barantor, on 12 January 2016 - 10:06 AM, said:

IIC has an XL engine it can't change, but can have one of the side torsos taken out without death.

This is wrong, the IIC can also use a STD engine as well.

[Kristian Radoulov]

I have a better KDR on my IICs than my Originals TBH. The only time I've struggled in my IIC is when I went down to a 300XL. /shrug

[Scout Derek]

Adamski, on 12 January 2016 - 10:02 AM, said:

EDIT: I really don't want PGI messing around with adding more weapons and tech until we can get closer to balanced now.

In fact, I would rather have everything balanced and the timeline frozen than having to go through the hell that is 2 years of balance Russian roulette hoping that every patch gets things right.

But that's the thing though, when has anything been truly "Balanced"?

Do you remember the Poptart Ages? The short Clan tech> IS tech era? Do you remember the T-Bolt ERPPC Terrors?

I could go on and on with them, but those are some of the most significant I remember. And guess what? either they completely downgraded the factors, or edited them in a way that they are completely different than what they were a long time ago.

And the Russian Roulette? That's what we've been doing for 3 years now in different periods of time!

[Adamski]

The shorter the range, the less of a penalty the burst fire of Clan UAC is. When you are talking about the AC20 / UAC20, they have such a short range, the burst fire is hardly a penalty, and is absolutely worth the reduced weight and the double tap ability.

[adamts01]

The iic mechs are all glass cannons compared to their counterparts. I'm cool with them being different.

[Khobai]

Quote

The shorter the range, the less of a penalty the burst fire of Clan UAC is. When you are talking about the AC20 / UAC20, they have such a short range, the burst fire is hardly a penalty, and is absolutely worth the reduced weight and the double tap ability.

Except the meta is long range laser vomit. Hence why the Orion IIC with a UAC20 isnt a top tier mech anyway.

I dont get how comparing two Orions that arnt even effective meta builds proves anything. If you want to prove a point you need to compare the best mechs, or at least best Orions, each faction has to offer, you know the builds people actually use?

A meta Orion IIC has CLPLs
and a meta Orion has ERLLs

Because those weapons play to the strengths of the meta and their respective factions. The Orion clearly isnt as bad off as people make it out to be when you consider it can still outrange most Clan mechs.

Quote

structure buffs are a bit useless.

not really. especially when structure buffs are combined with heavier drop tonnages. it draws out the attrition game longer and makes it easier to run down the clock in CW.

Edited by Khobai, 12 January 2016 - 10:29 AM.

[mogs01gt]

structure buffs are a bit useless.

[Revis Volek]

Barantor, on 12 January 2016 - 10:06 AM, said:

IS Orion-M comes with an XL 300, to change this it has to give up weight it had put in weapons or ammo. If it doesn't change this then the all it's torsoes become center torso because they second those pop it is dead.

IIC has an XL engine it can't change, but can have one of the side torsos taken out without death.

Some of the quirks make the Orion ok, but I would hardly call it a 'top mech' because of it.

The main problem with both is the low weapon mounts that aren't missiles. Something has to be done so that the meta changes or is altered away from the corner peek/hill peek methodology of what makes a good mech, either through bonuses or reductions in capacity for those mechs hardpoints.

IIC's dont have locked engines like the Omnis.

[Tyler Valentine]

Scout Derek, on 12 January 2016 - 10:11 AM, said:

But that's the thing though, when has anything been truly "Balanced"?

Do you remember the Poptart Ages? The short Clan tech> IS tech era? Do you remember the T-Bolt ERPPC Terrors?

I could go on and on with them, but those are some of the most significant I remember. And guess what? either they completely downgraded the factors, or edited them in a way that they are completely different than what they were a long time ago.

And the Russian Roulette? That's what we've been doing for 3 years now in different periods of time!

Would you agree that it is more balanced now then it has ever been? Personally I feel like they have made a lot of progress in the last 6 months as far as balance is concerned. We're almost at the point of introducing new tech but no quite methinks. It would also be good to wait for CW phase 3 to drop and see if that changes the game dynamic at all.

mogs01gt, on 12 January 2016 - 10:17 AM, said:

structure buffs are a bit useless.

I'd love armor buffs on my Atlas instead too, but the structure buffs are far from useless. IS mechs feel tanky and you don't always lose all your weapons. Sometimes the CT is orange and those buffs allow me another 2 or 3 AC20 shots.

[mogs01gt]

Tyler Valentine, on 12 January 2016 - 10:30 AM, said:

I'd love armor buffs on my Atlas instead too, but the structure buffs are far from useless. IS mechs feel tanky and you don't always lose all your weapons. Sometimes the CT is orange and those buffs allow me another 2 or 3 AC20 shots.

I dont think structure buffs protect weapons from getting crit'd.

[Grimlox]

I'm not sure what the balance problem is. It's nice that the IIC and IS variants have differences in the way they function. One has a clan XL for survivability, more firepower, more speed, while the other has its survivability through structure quirks, cooldown/heat effiencies through quirks, and accel/decel/turn rate through quirks.

Seems like a bit of a toss up based on playstyle preferences which is good in my books.

[Scout Derek]

Tyler Valentine, on 12 January 2016 - 10:30 AM, said:

Would you agree that it is more balanced now then it has ever been? Personally I feel like they have made a lot of progress in the last 6 months as far as balance is concerned. We're almost at the point of introducing new tech but no quite methinks. It would also be good to wait for CW phase 3 to drop and see if that changes the game dynamic at all.

I would agree in that category a bit, for the 6 months that is (With other things in that time going on), and yes, new tech is non-existent at this point, save for battlemechs that are added to the game.