151 replies to this topic

[TheSteelRhino]

Wow. This seems very slanted towards clan mechs. Additionally, I cannot help but wonder if this is because PGI is spending a lot of time listening to the competitive units that want to see this become an "ESport".

I agree, negative quirks should be removed from the clan mechs. And some that are performing sub par should get buffs. No issues there.



But when you combine this with the nerfs to the Energy range that the IS is about to get hit with, I cannot feel like the put the Nerf Bat Away and picked up the Nerf SLEDGE. The problem is the GENERIC energy range buffs that were put on many chassis's. If they were more weapons specific then these crazy ranges we are seeing with IS ERL's wouldn't really be a problem. But in fixing this one problem around ERL now they are effectively nerfing mpl, lpl, Large Laser, ..etc. A fine touch would have been the appropriate action here imho not a 20 lb sledge.

Hopefully, PGI will reduce heat, or cooldown..something to make up for this. Or what I am afraid we are likely to see will be an imbalance in "quick play" matches where clan mechs dominate, and IS are of limited use as they cannot even support their team with the reduced ranges. This will certainly bleed over into CW as well, and with 7 day contracts units will be jumping ship frequently again, and IS won't be able to help IS units defend. With the small CW player base currently in place this seems like a huge error in judgment.

I'm generally pretty open minded about things, and am very supportive. But now am considering asking a refund for my Rifleman/archer packages. (then again, I may NEED the archer as LRM's will likely be the only viable alternative for the IS).

I hope PGI see's this comment and takes it with the good intent in which is was made. Balance in this game is actually pretty good, and I feel like this is definitely heading down the wrong path.
Regards,
Rhino

[Void Angel]

Sereglach, on 29 January 2016 - 10:59 PM, said:

- The Flamer is supposed to be an enemy heat builder, in MWO and TT. Having a total of over 80k Flamer Damage since I joined MWO (which for a LONG time they only did .4 DPS) and many, many, hours of usage, I can assure you they currently build heat for the wielder far faster than the target in practical function.

Well, they always did, to be fair - 3 heat for 2 heat for the enemy. This was also an optional rule (unless they changed it after I stopped buying books,) though we all used it; what's the point of a flamer otherwise? Forest fires? The current scaling heat is designed to stop griefing (packs of flamer lights, anyone?) and other abusive strategies - it would be Jenner Football all over again - but the weapon definitely needs some adjustment.

[Surn]

Ember Stormfield, on 30 January 2016 - 01:14 PM, said:

So reading the highlights from the town hall meeting, as a unit faction loyal player I can not do solo quick matches after the changes, but I can do grouped quick matches. As well as the normal CW.

So can I do grouped matches solo? As others might be active in another drop or such, or do I just hope for another to be active so I can actually play the game?



The Clan got nurffed and the rebalancing will lead to better fights for all. We are getting un-nerffed!

So Ember, does not understand that clan mechs are currently about 5 tons better than IS mechs as it stands, some are more OP than that. So Nerfing IS and unhindering Clan will lead to a 10-15 ton advantage per mech for the clans. The big "comp" teams will all go clan and kill CW, group drops, etc.

No one will play IS, because when new players move from LRM to Long Range Lasers (ERLL) they will see that only clan mechs have a sniper role, plus speed, ecm and suitability. So, this will force new players, hackers and comp players to play clan.

My proof of this is that PGI realizes that the CW map will last about 1-2 weeks, so they now intend on limiting the number of planets that can be taken per day. THAT is how unbalanced this makes this game.

[Void Angel]

Aylek, on 30 January 2016 - 10:26 AM, said:

I was wondering if there will be some kind of compensation for taking away any IS energy range quirks above +10%? Checking all the quirks here quickly showed that there are a lof of variants relying on this, starting as early as with the Locusts.

As those variants were considered to be 'balanced' at some point in time of development, taking those quirks away creates some kind of vacuum if not replaced by some other kind of weapon quirks, e.g. cooldown, duration or -heat generation.

The compensation may well be having a balanced game; the Clans (by design) in this game have had longer ranged, better damage weapons, but with drawbacks like longer burn times and more heat/dps. Those huge, 25% range buffs mean that the Inner Sphere can field 'mech teams that both outgun the Clans at range and outperform them at close-range endurance brawling.

This makes balancing... problematic for PGI, because certain weapons (e.g. ERLLasers,) perform wildly differently for different 'mech variants. So yes, you're seeing a lot of builds abusing those quirks - but so what? If the quirks are nerfed, the builds will simply be adjusted; but PGI will have a much clearer data set as to what weapons really need help - and the Clans will again have something they are clearly intended to do better than the Inner Sphere.

[TheSteelRhino]

The problem I have here is that it's a general nerf. No IS mech will have any Energy Range buffs over 10%. Does that include the weapons specific range buffs? I'm pretty sure IS Medium Lasers and IS MPL are not a huge overbearing threat to the clans with their extended range. Why not make them weapon specific again on certain chassis's? I don't even run ERLL boats...I do have some LL boats, and LPL, and MPL boats however. But the issue I have is that his proposed solution hammers everything. Literally trying to kill a fly with a shotgun. It'll work, but...it's gonna make a mess in the process.

As far as Balance goes, this game has never been this balanced ever. I'd just hate to go back to the days when it's basically clan mechs all the time. If anything we are about to see a mass migration back over to clans. That'll really make CW take off... </sarcasm>

I think buffing clans, while nerfing IS is a great way to unbalance the game. Remove negative quirks first from clans and buff the underperformers. Then gently, and intelligently adjust the IS...not just "we are going to limit all energy range quirks so no mech gets more than 10%. Should have stuck with more specific quirks to avoid these shennanigans..

Void Angel, on 30 January 2016 - 01:55 PM, said:

The compensation may well be having a balanced game; the Clans (by design) in this game have had longer ranged, better damage weapons, but with drawbacks like longer burn times and more heat/dps. Those huge, 25% range buffs mean that the Inner Sphere can field 'mech teams that both outgun the Clans at range and outperform them at close-range endurance brawling.

This makes balancing... problematic for PGI, because certain weapons (e.g. ERLLasers,) perform wildly differently for different 'mech variants. So yes, you're seeing a lot of builds abusing those quirks - but so what? If the quirks are nerfed, the builds will simply be adjusted; but PGI will have a much clearer data set as to what weapons really need help - and the Clans will again have something they are clearly intended to do better than the Inner Sphere.

[MovinTarget]

TheSteelRhino, on 30 January 2016 - 01:39 PM, said:

Wow. This seems very slanted towards clan mechs. Additionally, I cannot help but wonder if this is because PGI is spending a lot of time listening to the competitive units that want to see this become an "ESport".

I agree, negative quirks should be removed from the clan mechs. And some that are performing sub par should get buffs. No issues there.



But when you combine this with the nerfs to the Energy range that the IS is about to get hit with, I cannot feel like the put the Nerf Bat Away and picked up the Nerf SLEDGE. The problem is the GENERIC energy range buffs that were put on many chassis's. If they were more weapons specific then these crazy ranges we are seeing with IS ERL's wouldn't really be a problem. But in fixing this one problem around ERL now they are effectively nerfing mpl, lpl, Large Laser, ..etc. A fine touch would have been the appropriate action here imho not a 20 lb sledge.

Hopefully, PGI will reduce heat, or cooldown..something to make up for this. Or what I am afraid we are likely to see will be an imbalance in "quick play" matches where clan mechs dominate, and IS are of limited use as they cannot even support their team with the reduced ranges. This will certainly bleed over into CW as well, and with 7 day contracts units will be jumping ship frequently again, and IS won't be able to help IS units defend. With the small CW player base currently in place this seems like a huge error in judgment.

I'm generally pretty open minded about things, and am very supportive. But now am considering asking a refund for my Rifleman/archer packages. (then again, I may NEED the archer as LRM's will likely be the only viable alternative for the IS).

I hope PGI see's this comment and takes it with the good intent in which is was made. Balance in this game is actually pretty good, and I feel like this is definitely heading down the wrong path.
Regards,
Rhino

The simplest way would be to simply make ERLL have a max range ceiling such that it doesn't matter WHAT the quirk states, it simply ceases to register damage past a certain distance (i.e. 1400m).

Or simply have the quirks on ERLL only apply to max optimal and have no effect on max overall range. So your optimal range can get pushed up to 914m (I think thats waht it is with the 25% quirk + module) but your max range is still around 1450 (or what ever it is at base stats).

[Sereglach]

Void Angel, on 30 January 2016 - 01:44 PM, said:

Well, they always did, to be fair - 3 heat for 2 heat for the enemy. This was also an optional rule (unless they changed it after I stopped buying books,) though we all used it; what's the point of a flamer otherwise? Forest fires? The current scaling heat is designed to stop griefing (packs of flamer lights, anyone?) and other abusive strategies - it would be Jenner Football all over again - but the weapon definitely needs some adjustment.

Currently Flamers do 3 heat with 2 physical damage and 1d6 heat damage on the enemy . . . so a heat damage potential of 6 on the target. It's been that way for a long time. Also, MWO works with the maximums of TT, otherwise we'd have missiles that randomly fly off in the wild blue yonder, because in TT even at point blank range some of your missiles can, and will, still miss the target on a solid hit.

Now, as far as the heat damage caps go, there's logic and reasoning behind the 90% heat cap. In TT there's even (as far as the most recent edition) an 18 point heat damage cap that mechs can take from external sources each round (Inferno missiles, Flamers, terrain fires, etc.). That heat cap acts as the limiter that prevents obscene griefing/trolling from happening. Here's an example using the heat damage numbers I talked about at flat values, and the effects it'd actually have, in practice, on a 10 SHS mech with a heat cap of 40 (base 30 + 10 SHS) using .5 HPS wielder generation and 1.0 HPS in heat damage generation:

- 1 Flamer would take a mech with a heat cap of 40 (10 single heat sinks on a standard mech) 72 seconds to inflict the heat damage for a 90% cap of 36 heat. It's a nuisance, but with reasonable DPS (something like my suggestion of 1.4) on the weapon it is still at least a light energy damage weapon that can cause some hindrance on the enemy. Like a gnat that keeps you from cooling down as fast as you should.

- 2 Flamers cut it to 36 seconds to reach that 90% heat cap. It's significantly better, but it's not going to utterly troll people on their own. However 4-5 seconds of weapon connection is still 4-5 points of heat damage . . . which is equal to an extra medium laser being shot. That can give someone pause when thinking about firing their Alpha, or a big energy weapon group.

- 4 Flamers still only cuts it down to 18 seconds. 18 seconds of solid weapon connection is a LONG time in MWO. On the other hand, we're reaching a point where just a few seconds of connection is quite damaging and functions as a respectable form of crowd control. 5 seconds would yield 10 heat damage, or 1 IS PPC being shot . . . that's enough to certainly stem weapons fire.

- 16 Flamers (say 4 mechs with 4 flamers each in a "troll" lance) would get said mech to the 90% heat cap on that 10 SHS mech in just 2 seconds . . . but then everything after that is an utter waste of their own heat-damaging potential. Either they switch to other weapons/targets and give the guy a chance to cool off while they heat themselves up, or they do minimal DPS with the Flamers and put a lot of potential to waste just to keep one guy sitting at 90% heat.

Now, that's just a base point for theoretical tuning values (even looking at it now I think the HPS and Heat damage of one flamer should be a bit higher). I'm sure more tuning can be done from there. Also, they'd still be lighter DPS weapons, so they wouldn't be able to utterly thrash enemies on their own. It's a give/take scenario . . . get a whole lance of trolling lights and the enemy team should be able to provide more than enough support in a reasonable time to slaughter the trolls.

After all, it's a team game, and team tactics should be taken into account for weapon balance. A few flamer trolls might cripple one energy boat, but a lower-heat ballistic mech would be able to provide cover and rip them to shreds; and a streak-boat light hunter that has fire discipline would never overheat past that 90% cap. Besides, even the flamer-boats would need to cool off some time; and that gives everyone the opportunity to take a breath and ready for the next round of combat.

It's a start. It's not perfect, but it's a start. Personally, I just want a more functional weapon system that I can go out and go pyro on everything in sight with a red triangle over it.

[Void Angel]

You were referencing the franchise in general, not just MWO, thus my response was intended to be all-encompassing and to start with the original game rulesets - this should have been obvious from my reference to optional rules?

That heat damage cap wasn't in the original rules - much like moving vehicles four at a time per turn had to be erratad in. =)

[Surn]

This change to unbalance clan mechs is infuriating! Leave is erll range alone!

[Void Angel]

TheSteelRhino, on 30 January 2016 - 02:10 PM, said:

The problem I have here is that it's a general nerf. No IS mech will have any Energy Range buffs over 10%. Does that include the weapons specific range buffs? I'm pretty sure IS Medium Lasers and IS MPL are not a huge overbearing threat to the clans with their extended range. Why not make them weapon specific again on certain chassis's? I don't even run ERLL boats...I do have some LL boats, and LPL, and MPL boats however. But the issue I have is that his proposed solution hammers everything. Literally trying to kill a fly with a shotgun. It'll work, but...it's gonna make a mess in the process.

As far as Balance goes, this game has never been this balanced ever. I'd just hate to go back to the days when it's basically clan mechs all the time. If anything we are about to see a mass migration back over to clans. That'll really make CW take off... </sarcasm>

I think buffing clans, while nerfing IS is a great way to unbalance the game. Remove negative quirks first from clans and buff the underperformers. Then gently, and intelligently adjust the IS...not just "we are going to limit all energy range quirks so no mech gets more than 10%. Should have stuck with more specific quirks to avoid these shennanigans..

It's not a general nerf. It's a very specific nerf to a broken quirk. Now, I'm not about to sift out the gems from that four hour long video, so I'm just going by what people have said in the thread - but based on the Polar Highlands announcement, I'm pretty sure a lot of response is just demonstrating the Wizards' First Rule. Regardless, if we need the 20% base range the Thunderbolt 5SS is losing (assuming a total cap of 10% which is probably wrong) for MPLasers to be competitive, that's a problem with the weapon system. Without the huge outliers and data distortions generated by excessive quirks and their effects, it's also a problem that can actually be seen and fixed without breaking the balance of hyper-quirked builds.

[Dagorlad13]

I actually liked what I heard for the most part. The balance changes and rescaling sound good and the Kodiak is a good as bought.

TheSteelRhino, on 30 January 2016 - 01:39 PM, said:

Wow. This seems very slanted towards clan mechs. Additionally, I cannot help but wonder if this is because PGI is spending a lot of time listening to the competitive units that want to see this become an "ESport".

I agree, negative quirks should be removed from the clan mechs. And some that are performing sub par should get buffs. No issues there.



But when you combine this with the nerfs to the Energy range that the IS is about to get hit with, I cannot feel like the put the Nerf Bat Away and picked up the Nerf SLEDGE. The problem is the GENERIC energy range buffs that were put on many chassis's. If they were more weapons specific then these crazy ranges we are seeing with IS ERL's wouldn't really be a problem. But in fixing this one problem around ERL now they are effectively nerfing mpl, lpl, Large Laser, ..etc. A fine touch would have been the appropriate action here imho not a 20 lb sledge.

Hopefully, PGI will reduce heat, or cooldown..something to make up for this. Or what I am afraid we are likely to see will be an imbalance in "quick play" matches where clan mechs dominate, and IS are of limited use as they cannot even support their team with the reduced ranges. This will certainly bleed over into CW as well, and with 7 day contracts units will be jumping ship frequently again, and IS won't be able to help IS units defend. With the small CW player base currently in place this seems like a huge error in judgment.

I'm generally pretty open minded about things, and am very supportive. But now am considering asking a refund for my Rifleman/archer packages. (then again, I may NEED the archer as LRM's will likely be the only viable alternative for the IS).

I hope PGI see's this comment and takes it with the good intent in which is was made. Balance in this game is actually pretty good, and I feel like this is definitely heading down the wrong path.
Regards,
Rhino

I can guarantee you that it is not just competitive players who think that IS mechs are just a tad over-quirked at this point.

[TheSilken]

No reason a mech should be able to deal optimal damage at 900+ meters with a weapon designed for less than 700 meters optimal range I'm sorry but that isn't balance that is over quirking.

[Sereglach]

Void Angel, on 30 January 2016 - 02:42 PM, said:

You were referencing the franchise in general, not just MWO, thus my response was intended to be all-encompassing and to start with the original game rulesets - this should have been obvious from my reference to optional rules?

That heat damage cap wasn't in the original rules - much like moving vehicles four at a time per turn had to be erratad in. =)

There have always been optional rules in all of the editions. There's also so much rules bloat in classic Battletech that trying to play it any more is a mess, even with "Standard" rules. The rules you're used to and referencing would be little more than the "Introductory" rules. There are many reasons I prefer the Alpha Strike rules in comparison to Classic Battletech.

I mentioned the rules I mention because they're the newest edition of rules, and those that are considered canon. Thusly those rules are what PGI is going off of in their conversion of the tabletop game concepts to MWO.

[Asmosis]

Aylek, on 30 January 2016 - 10:26 AM, said:

I was wondering if there will be some kind of compensation for taking away any IS energy range quirks above +10%? Checking all the quirks here quickly showed that there are a lof of variants relying on this, starting as early as with the Locusts.

As those variants were considered to be 'balanced' at some point in time of development, taking those quirks away creates some kind of vacuum if not replaced by some other kind of weapon quirks, e.g. cooldown, duration or -heat generation.

well, they do seem to want to push lasers for clan mechs, so stay with me on this.

Clans are super high tech etc, and so are lasers right? well what's not high tech? ballistics! it fits the IS theme as well.

So clans can have their laser superiority, give IS mechs a ballistic superiority. they have a good starting point with the single slug, but I mean similar to clan energy superiority give IS mechs better ballistic range/cooldown/heat "buffs" along the lines of what clan mechs get. Probably don't give clans the single slug option, although I know they are (or were) looking at doing that for the defunct standard clan AC's.

Just don't get too carried away with how much better (or worse) a weapon is between clan and IS.

[TheSteelRhino]

Here's a thought..just advance the stupid timeline. Let IS have streak 4/6, UAC10, LBX20..etc. As well as ER lasers etc.

enough is enough.

[TheSteelRhino]

scratch that...it'll just lead to even more balancing. sadly it wasn't in a BAD place..but put the nerf sledge away.

[Void Angel]

Sereglach, on 30 January 2016 - 04:37 PM, said:

There have always been optional rules in all of the editions. There's also so much rules bloat in classic Battletech that trying to play it any more is a mess, even with "Standard" rules. The rules you're used to and referencing would be little more than the "Introductory" rules. There are many reasons I prefer the Alpha Strike rules in comparison to Classic Battletech.

I mentioned the rules I mention because they're the newest edition of rules, and those that are considered canon. Thusly those rules are what PGI is going off of in their conversion of the tabletop game concepts to MWO.

If they were real Battletech fans, they'd be using the original rulebooks!

[Dagorlad13]

Void Angel, on 30 January 2016 - 10:04 PM, said:

If they were real Battletech fans, they'd be using the original rulebooks!

That would be cool, but would not translate well into FPS, even I agree that some changes were necessary like the double armor and double internals in this game. I would like to see CW reward faction loyalty more though, but that seems to be coming with CW3.

TheSteelRhino, on 30 January 2016 - 08:14 PM, said:

scratch that...it'll just lead to even more balancing. sadly it wasn't in a BAD place..but put the nerf sledge away.

It would have been best if MWO was based in the 3025-3039 era and neither Clans nor lostech were ever in the game, but it is too late for that now.

[Void Angel]

Hence the ironic sarcasm. =)

The cloak of "True Fandom" is one of the favorite garments of the denizens of Troll Island.

[Desintegrator]

Thanks for the summary 8mmspikes !