46 replies to this topic

[cSand]

Mystere, on 23 January 2016 - 09:22 PM, said:

Balance is working out pretty well? That's hilarious considering the large amount of complaints about the misguided use of over-quirks.

well, OK over the history of drastically over-quirked mechs:
that one Thunderbolt with PPC quirks, and the one with mpl quirks
DRG-1n
BJ

I can't think of any other notorious ones

I guess the Huginn.

Now, I don't like weapons quirks either but you're driving in hyperbole town there little lady

edit I'll add that I still agre with you that I'd love to see weapons quirks gone

Edited by cSand, 23 January 2016 - 09:55 PM.

[Mech Jager]

cSand, on 23 January 2016 - 09:38 PM, said:

I can't think of any other notorious ones

I guess the Huginn

The Huggin was still way behind the Firestarter and even further behind the Cheetah especially if it was a close game with decent players. I still think it was more fun to play especially when seal clubbing.

[Mystere]

cSand, on 23 January 2016 - 09:38 PM, said:

well, OK over the history of drastically over-quirked mechs:
that one Thunderbolt with PPC quirks, and the one with mpl quirks
DRG-1n
BJ

I can't think of any other notorious ones

I guess the Huginn.

Now, I don't like weapons quirks either but you're driving in hyperbole town there little lady

edit I'll add that I still agre with you that I'd love to see weapons quirks gone

Ahem! I said:

Mystere, on 23 January 2016 - 09:22 PM, said:

Balance is working out pretty well? That's hilarious considering the large amount of complaints about the misguided use of over-quirks.

Where is the hyperbole there?

[Brandarr Gunnarson]

Still the isXL vs. cXL function (that is ST loss = death vs. ST loss = slowdown, respectively) coupled with STD engines being simply bad that is the core imbalance resulting in an arbitrary, over-Quirk patchwork.

It just needs to be fixed and the sooner, the better.

Just make isXLs function like cXLs and buff up STD durability and be done with it!

It's just such an easy and effective fix.

No more playing with durability Quirks, no need to waste developer time on endless Quirk rebalances, no need to even think about wasting resources on redundant options like LFEs.

Durability balance completely achieved.

Returns Quirks to a place where they can reflect the chassis/variant.

Allows us to focus on further game development (like IW, weapons, new equipment, etc.).

There's no reason not to make this change. Further, NOT making this change just perpetuates current issues!

Please, PGI, just test it! Please!

[Russhuster]

when the IS XL has the same robust nature like clans reactors then it has to come with the same restrictions as there are

NO absolutely NO reactor change STock reactor and thats it
NO absolutely NO change of structure or AR Live with the Stockbuild and thats it
That includes STD and XL s what mech comes witha STD reactor has THAT reactor wahat comes with an XL has exactly that
no upgrading to a faster/slower reactor
Hardcoded inbuilt interior like Jump jets etc
You cannot remove or add these
In some mechs even hardcoded Heat sinks
DoubleHeatsinks get single heat sinks capacity
Ghost heat like the Clans get 100% heat penalty when firing more than 2 heavy weapons per weapon

That is the situation Cost Clans pay for the robust reactor

De facto the IS mechs are more omni mechs as any Clan mech is Allone being able to choose the Structure and the reactor size is worth gold in my eyes

Are you willing to pay that cost? or just picking the sweets out?

Edited by Russhuster, 24 January 2016 - 08:16 AM.

[FupDup]

Russhuster, on 24 January 2016 - 08:13 AM, said:

NO absolutely NO reactor change STock reactor and thats it
NO absolutely NO change of structure or AR Live with the Stockbuild and thats it
That includes STD and XL s what mech comes witha STD reactor has THAT reactor wahat comes with an XL has exactly that
no upgrading to a faster/slower reactor

Clan Battlemechs (IIC's) say hello.

Engine restrictions have absolutely nothing to do with engine balancing at all. Engine restrictions are based on the fact that they are Omnimechs instead of Battlemechs, and nothing more.

Clan Battlemechs have identical construction rules as Inner Sphere Battlemechs, and I'm willing to bet that PGI will make Inner Sphere Omnimechs have identical restrictions as Clan Omnimechs (while still keeping inferior tech).

[Russhuster]

well when you approach from that side, the quirks IIC s have say hello also as well as theyr paper armor
GHost heat and heatsinks say hello also

I bet when IS omni mechs come they come with an arse full of quirks and at least free chosable interior, Structure and AR

And look at the omni options there are enough omni pods that give absolutely NO choice as all variants are identic
The IS has more variants of a mech chassis AND more chassis in general what allows in the end more flexibility to find a chassis fitting to a playstyle than clan has

so i would give up omnipods with ease for free reactor + structure + AR + heatsink + ghostheat and NO hardcoded braindead inbuilts

Edited by Russhuster, 24 January 2016 - 08:28 AM.

[Vonbach]

How are you supposed to balance two factions when the one faction is a hundred years ahead of them in technology?

[Mcgral18]

Vonbach, on 24 January 2016 - 08:24 AM, said:

How are you supposed to balance two factions when the one faction is a hundred years ahead of them in technology?

Easy: You balance them

[Y E O N N E]

Well, I see a lot of extremely nice, extremely broad balance ideas in here that say absolutely nothing about how to achieve them.

Goals are nice. Goals are also not new. An action plan to accomplish them is better.

[Russhuster]

but all these will give one outcome

IF you balance two sides completely same reactors same weapons etc as it is wished

You dont cet a Mechwarrior game

You get a non athmospheric mecha shooter

[LordNothing]

Aresye, on 23 January 2016 - 06:03 PM, said:

They need to scrap the quirks entirely and just normalize the weapons on both sides, then use (minor) quirks on underperformers to bring them up. Perhaps some optional quirks as well for certain mechs that have iconic loadouts (ex: PPC quirks for the Warhammer).

yes and no. scrap quirks that try to fix unbalanced weapons, then fix the weapons directly. quirks should be used primarily to fix chassis imbalance issues and secondarily to give mechs a unique handling characteristics (for example man vs chicken walkers, the former better at climbing, the latter better at acceleration and cornering).

id like to see general heatsink performance quirks rather than specific weapon heat quirks. you can balence out some of the hardpoint inflation issues that way. mechs with small numbers of energy hardpoints would have positive quirks, mechs with a lot of energy point inflation would see negative quirks. missile point inflation is a lesser issue, but with the archer coming out i might consider it. ballistics could be except, the weapons you could really exploit (2s and 20s) are already very hot, and the others are too heavy to run huge clusters, and gauss has its own limits. lasers are still the biggest balance issue in the game and heat sink quirks can really nip that in the butt.

[AEgg]

Normalizing weapons is a TERRIBLE idea. Balance does not require equality. IS and Clan should be completely balanced against one another, in a match with equal forces on both sides. (uneven teams is also a terrible idea)

If you're going to suggest we make IS and clan closer to one another, think about it for a second and ask yourself "Why?". "Because PGI is too lazy to actually balance it otherwise" is not a very good reason. And it contradicts history.

At first, PGI tried balance without equality, and they had some pretty good ideas. But they didn't go nearly far enough, and instead of pushing the differences, they caved and tried to make the factions more similar (case in point, the CERLL duration and IS structure quirks).

Range:
IS will get ER S/M lasers eventually. Clans never get non-ER lasers, so it stands to reason that their ER lasers should still have slightly but not overwhelmingly more range and more heat than IS non-ER. IS ER lasers should outrange clan ER lasers. Simply because clans don't get non-ER, and thus their ER lasers have to work for both close and long range builds, whereas IS can choose the appropriate type, and thus each type can be more specailized.

Lasers:
Lasers actually have a pretty easy solution, and PGI came up with it: Drastically increase burn times. Not the insignificant little quarter or half second difference we have now, double, or even triple burn times. Whatever it takes. Obviously it's enough at some point, as so many decried the CERLL as "useless" when PGI last increased it's duration and it was quickly reverted.

If burn time is only increased by enough for damage/time to be equivalent to IS, that's not good enough, for obvious reasons. Clan lasers should do less damage for time-on-target, but fire for longer and do more damage if it's all on-target. Why even change their burn time otherwise?

Ballistics:
Actually in a pretty good place right now. Spreading damage really is a huge downside.

PPC:
This one's harder since PPCs in general are pretty bad. Maybe simply increase velocity across the board and reduce heat (maybe only reduce heat for IS)?

SRM:
For the most part, OK. Streaks aren't very good against most opponents, and IS will get SSRM4/6 eventually. SRMs in general are pretty close, wouldn't hurt to give clan SRMs a longer cooldown, though.

LRMs, MGs, Flamers:
I wouldn't touch these until the weapons are reworked to begin with. Too much wrong with them.

Specific chassis still do need weapon and/or structure quirks, but it shouldn't be the norm. Basically, unless the chassis is absolutely terrible or starved for hardpoints, it shouldn't need any quirks. If it does need quirks, structure/armor quirks for tankier mechs and weapon quirks for fire support mechs.

[Mcgral18]

Russhuster, on 24 January 2016 - 08:39 AM, said:

but all these will give one outcome

IF you balance two sides completely same reactors same weapons etc as it is wished

You dont cet a Mechwarrior game

You get a non athmospheric mecha shooter

It's already Shooty Stompy Robots.

Might as well reign in the faction gap (and Trash Tier to God Tier robots afterwards)


Quirks have pushed a handful IS mechs to among the best in the game, even surpassing the God Tier Clams in certain roles. However, the Trash Tier remain sad robots because they don't get God Quirks, for some reason.

[Deathlike]

Yeonne Greene, on 24 January 2016 - 08:37 AM, said:

Well, I see a lot of extremely nice, extremely broad balance ideas in here that say absolutely nothing about how to achieve them.

Goals are nice. Goals are also not new. An action plan to accomplish them is better.

Well, the first part of the plan would just be "Fire Paul".

The way you'd have to go about it is with a "sterile" enviornment... reset the entire deck w/o quirks. Then, with a certain level of ancedotle experiences, you'd have to adjust weapons first and THEN tweak inherently bad chassis (Vindicators, particularly the 1X, Spider-5V, oversized mechs, etc.)... pretty much things are the most common amongst the complaints against them (ignoring the people who claim "they're fine" w/o much reasoning).

It can't just be haphazard-random-dartboard balance that runs rampant.

Part of the previous balance changes indirectly nerfed Clan chassis through efficiencies - primarily Clan mechs went unchanged (Executioner is arguably the lone exception, since it was unquirked before, and quirked post-patch - adjusted against the efficiencies nerf).

It's pretty self-evident, except for the man in charge of balance.

Aresye, on 23 January 2016 - 08:27 PM, said:

Yeaaa...nope.

Think I'll wait for TheSilken to make an official post, but today's balance test shows otherwise:
https://www.reddit.c...e_in_8_minutes/

I'd have to see the vid to see if that's the case, but more often than not... many using Clan mechs prior to the requirkening were never always using them to their optimal abilities (like Clan mechs can brawl, but people don't bother going that route despite really nice CMPL and especially CSPL). Heck, not taking advantage of the inherent benefits of CSRMs... well, whatever.

The only thing I would only agree to is that many of the formerly Good Clan mechs suffered generally from the efficiencies nerf. It helped the Bad Mechs mitigate the nerf (the Maddog is probably the lone exception due to staying squishy), but the majority of the Good Clan Mechs suffered the most.

It's not hard to fix though.

Edited by Deathlike, 24 January 2016 - 10:27 AM.

[Mystere]

Mcgral18, on 24 January 2016 - 09:47 AM, said:

It's already Shooty Stompy Robots.

Might as well reign in the faction gap (and Trash Tier to God Tier robots afterwards)

Quirks have pushed a handful IS mechs to among the best in the game, even surpassing the God Tier Clams in certain roles. However, the Trash Tier remain sad robots because they don't get God Quirks, for some reason.

Well, call me crazy but I'd rather PGI went back to trying rather than taking the very easy way out and going all out generic robots.

[Mcgral18]

Mystere, on 24 January 2016 - 10:33 AM, said:

Well, call me crazy but I'd rather PGI went back to trying rather than taking the very easy way out and going all out generic robots.

When have they ever tried to balance things?

4 year Flamer anniversary of Uselessness coming up, if you need to be reminded.
The Machine gun of all things nerfed in 3 separate facets.

Year+ long "Metas" where nothing else can compete.


Easy Way Out is the PGI way, hence their current obsession with balancing via quirks instead of global variable edits (see PPC quirks)

[Deathlike]

Mcgral18, on 24 January 2016 - 10:40 AM, said:

When have they ever tried to balance things?

4 year Flamer anniversary of Uselessness coming up, if you need to be reminded.
The Machine gun of all things nerfed in 3 separate facets.

Year+ long "Metas" where nothing else can compete.


Easy Way Out is the PGI way, hence their current obsession with balancing via quirks instead of global variable edits (see PPC quirks)

It's all about incremental balance fixes.

Unfortunately, wide swings in balance is what PGI does best. Maybe someday the Spider-5V turns into the 3-second Jenner of lore... because... reasons.

Also... someone in an LRM thread claimed MGs were OP. I had to bump that thread up...

Edited by Deathlike, 24 January 2016 - 10:43 AM.

[Mystere]

Mcgral18, on 24 January 2016 - 10:40 AM, said:

When have they ever tried to balance things?

I have the impression that PGI thought about it at one time or another, but ...

Mcgral18, on 24 January 2016 - 10:40 AM, said:

4 year Flamer anniversary of Uselessness coming up, if you need to be reminded.
The Machine gun of all things nerfed in 3 separate facets.

Year+ long "Metas" where nothing else can compete.

Easy Way Out is the PGI way, hence their current obsession with balancing via quirks instead of global variable edits (see PPC quirks)

IF ONLY PEOPLE STFU ABOUT INSISTING THAT CLAN = IS. And I repeat, IF ONLY PEOPLE STFU ABOUT INSISTING THAT CLAN = IS.

We have a generic robot shooter precisely because of the negative "influence" of same generically-minded players.

Edited by Mystere, 24 January 2016 - 10:48 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

Normalizing weapons is a TERRIBLE idea. Balance does not require equality. IS and Clan should be completely balanced against one another, in a match with equal forces on both sides. (uneven teams is also a terrible idea)

You cant have your cake and eat it to.

Clan tech cannot both be superior while having IS vs Clan be balanced at the same time.

PGI made the massive mistake of superquirking IS mechs to bring IS tech upto the same level as Clan tech. Which creates HUGE problems with lopsided imbalanced quirks that make weapon effectiveness vary wildly from mech and mech and give certain mechs like the blacjack survivability which is totally uncharacteristic of its weight class. It is plainly obvious that superquirks are not the way to balance the game.

What PGI shouldve done from the start was normalize clan tech down to the same level as IS tech.

Quote

If you're going to suggest we make IS and clan closer to one another, think about it for a second and ask yourself "Why?". "Because PGI is too lazy to actually balance it otherwise" is not a very good reason. And it contradicts history.

It may very well contradict history. But the fact is PGI decided to try and balance IS vs Clan 1:1.

The only way 1:1 balance can work, without having asanine superquirks, is if you normalize Clan tech so its on the same level as IS tech.

There is NO other way to do it.

Quote

IF ONLY PEOPLE STFU ABOUT INSISTING THAT CLAN = IS. We have a generic robot shooter precisely because of the negative "influence" of same generically-minded players.

You do realize that two things can be equal but different?

An apple and an orange can both cost the same amount of $ but be two totally different things.

That is the essence of asymmetrical balance which is how Clans should be balanced vs IS. Clan tech should not resemble IS tech at all, and should foster different playstyles, but it should not be better either.

That is the only way 1:1 balance can work without having to have remedial superquirks.

Edited by Khobai, 24 January 2016 - 10:56 AM.