92 replies to this topic

[pbiggz]

Rhaythe, on 03 February 2016 - 08:46 AM, said:

There's a reason no competitive Mechwarrior PC game was set in 3050 before... and this thread does a pretty good job of listing them.

I've advocated for a long time a move to tech 2, but it seems to be opposed not by clanners (who IS fanboys would tell you are conspiring with russ to make clans even moar OP) but by hard, hard, hard core IS fan boys who want to see the timeline rolled BACK to 3025. They want tech 1, stock only. Removal of the mech lab and all the clans. Of course this will never happen, but those people are perhaps the biggest blocker to progress here that you'll ever find. You can find lots of great debates here, but when it comes to clan VS IS balance those same people will storm your thread like police raiding a grow op and they'll talk **** right in your face until you want to quit the game.

[Pariah Devalis]

Rhaythe, on 03 February 2016 - 08:46 AM, said:

There's a reason no competitive Mechwarrior PC game was set in 3050 before... and this thread does a pretty good job of listing them.

You make it sound like there was ever a competitive Mechwarrior title. The closest was MW4, where Microsoft was actually looking to get in on a partnership with G4tv to have them air competitive MW4 matches, but decided against it at the last minute. No Mechwarrior title in the history of ever was ever taken as a serious competitive game in the eyes of the public. It's a balancing nightmare, though I'm not convinced it has to be. It's just that they put too much in too quickly to balance each piece of equipment, each weapon, and each mech effectively with what came before it.

[Rhaythe]

pbiggz, on 03 February 2016 - 08:56 AM, said:

I've advocated for a long time a move to tech 2, but it seems to be opposed not by clanners (who IS fanboys would tell you are conspiring with russ to make clans even moar OP) but by hard, hard, hard core IS fan boys who want to see the timeline rolled BACK to 3025. They want tech 1, stock only. Removal of the mech lab and all the clans. Of course this will never happen, but those people are perhaps the biggest blocker to progress here that you'll ever find.

I'm one of the community you're referring to, and this is incorrect. We wanted a stock game mode added to the game, not the complete exclusion of the mechlab. Our reasons were many, but that fight died a long time ago, and I don't care enough anymore to advocate it at this point.

At this point, PGI might as well fast-forward to the Dark Ages timeline anyway, since that feels like where this game probably should have picked up to start. If you're going to design a game that includes clans, it either needs to be *truly* asymmetric in technology and population or NOT set in 3050 at all.

Pariah Devalis, on 03 February 2016 - 08:58 AM, said:

You make it sound like there was ever a competitive Mechwarrior title.

I'm loosely including Living Legends.

[pbiggz]

Rhaythe, on 03 February 2016 - 09:01 AM, said:

I'm one of the community you're referring to, and this is incorrect. We wanted a stock game mode added to the game, not the complete exclusion of the mechlab. Our reasons were many, but that fight died a long time ago, and I don't care enough anymore to advocate it at this point.

At this point, PGI might as well fast-forward to the Dark Ages timeline anyway, since that feels like where this game probably should have picked up to start. If you're going to design a game that includes clans, it either needs to be *truly* asymmetric in technology and population or NOT set in 3050 at all.


I'm loosely including Living Legends.

Im not opposed to a stock game mode, im opposed to the false CLANS OP PLS REMOVE FROM GAME narrative that people keep pushing. This game will never be stock 3025. It never was that game in the first place.

[Mystere]

Havoc SC, on 03 February 2016 - 01:14 AM, said:

Why are clan mech's getting the shaft?

Because the decades-long anti-Clan Crusade are finally getting their way.

[Rhaythe]

pbiggz, on 03 February 2016 - 09:12 AM, said:

Im not opposed to a stock game mode, im opposed to the false CLANS OP PLS REMOVE FROM GAME narrative that people keep pushing. This game will never be stock 3025. It never was that game in the first place.

That was my point. The Stock Community agrees with you.

[Mystere]

627, on 03 February 2016 - 03:33 AM, said:

getting the shaft... o_O

do we play the same game? Clan mechs are still superior if you look at the current meta builds, even with the nerfs. And don't start comparing a myst lynx with an overquirked IS mech, please.

Oh! Is that why Clans are losing their negative quirks?

[Haakon Magnusson]

Wolfways, on 03 February 2016 - 03:32 AM, said:

Tc's? Waste of space imo. I'll only use one if I can't fit another DHS in.
Extra hardpoints? Clan mechs have the hardpoints of their stock weapons, and unlike IS mechs don't get extra hardpoints (at least none that I've seen).
Omni-pods... No thanks. They are the only thing I don't want to change.

You conveniently bypass lower tonnage and less crits on weapons and equipment.
It has to be balanced somehow,. Clan XL... Clan mechs a far from the rustbuckets they are implied to be.
I just love I can fit heavy weapons to CT and even one slot in head is useful, not to mention leg double heatsinks in water. These are in actuality better than IS, are they not?

[Mystere]

Skarlock, on 03 February 2016 - 02:32 AM, said:

How would teams of mixed clan/IS work?

That's easy: get rid of it. Instead, the matchmaker forces IS vs. IS, Clan vs. Clan, or IS vs. Clan fights based on player availability.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Clans have to get the shaft because everyone is so brainwashed by TT that the clans are Op that no matter what, the Clans are always OP and therefore are never balanced enough and so therefore must endlessly be nerfed, while the IS end up being basically as OP as the clans intially are perceived. But, because its the UP IS, no matter how much they are buffed, the Clans are always OP and the IS always UP.....and so the cycle never ends.

[Mystere]

Rhaythe, on 03 February 2016 - 09:01 AM, said:

If you're going to design a game that includes clans, it either needs to be *truly* asymmetric in technology and population or NOT set in 3050 at all.

And that is the basic flaw of MWO and PGI. They insist on 1:1 balance but chose the 3050 era.

This decision was not rocket science, yet here we are today.

[Gyrok]

FupDup, on 03 February 2016 - 07:58 AM, said:

Here are some of the upcoming game changes later this month...

1. MASC buff (some IS mechs have it, but the Clan mechs that have it tend to benefit more, and the Exe is already viable as it is...)

2. Targeting Computer buffs (esp. heavier ones)

3. Removal of negative quirks from SCR and TBR (maybe DWF too?)

4. Supposedly some quirks for the "dog" Clan mechs

5. Nerfs to Inner Sphere range quirks on 72 different Inner Sphere chassis


No, the Clams are not "getting the shaft" this month, at all.

For the first month in the last 18+ months...clan adjustments will not be simply more red ink.

[Rhaythe]

Mystere, on 03 February 2016 - 09:25 AM, said:

And that is the basic flaw of MWO and PGI. They insist on 1:1 balance but chose the 3050 era.

This decision was not rocket science, yet here we are today.

Exactly.

The biggest missed opportunity of the clans coming to MWO (an IGP decision, if I remember correctly) as not making them truly different. Aside from burn times, damage, and colors, all of the weapons are identical. They do the same thing and behave the same way when you pull the trigger (minor exceptions for LRMs and CUACs). IGP/PGI/Whoever dropped the ball by not differentiating the clans at a playstyle level.

It needn't have been too much of a departure either. Maybe make clan's operate more efficiently (better speed, better damage, etc) at higher temperatures, always riding the razor edge of overheating. Make clan lasers hold-trigger to discharge and recharge over time. Make IS heat sinks favor dissipation while clan heat sinks favor capacity. I don't know. SOMETHING that made piloting a clan mech feel different from IS technology, given that each is 300 years removed from the other.

But no. Instead we get burn percentages and range buffs.

[Triordinant]

Mystere, on 03 February 2016 - 09:25 AM, said:

And that is the basic flaw of MWO and PGI. They insist on 1:1 balance but chose the 3050 era.

This decision was not rocket science, yet here we are today.

They should have stuck with their original 3015 timeline and avoided a shipload of problems.

[CDLord HHGD]

Paigan, on 03 February 2016 - 01:21 AM, said:

Lorewise, clans have better tech and are supposed to be better, because IS tech has decayed over the centuries to moreless crap (sorry Freebirthers ).

Normally, this is balanced by some "rigid" tactics of the clans (right down to being almost stupid) and on the IS side by superior numbers and "mean" tactics (ambushes, artillery strikes, etc.).

Don't apologise, you are correct. I would add in (and you touched on it a little) that in Company engagements, Clanners use 10 mechs (two Stars) where IS uses 12 mechs (three lances). This was a major balance factor in lore.

PGI refuses to take this into account. The pure solo queue and the CW queue can do this. The pug group queue is a free-for-all.

Other suggestions is to give all clan mechs a ghost (yeah, everyone hates that word now) +5 tons added to the mech for their weight limit balance mechanic.

People blame the imbalance on lore but very few people realize that we are imbalanced because so much of the lore has been ignores, excused away, or overridden.

Edited by cdlord, 03 February 2016 - 09:39 AM.

[Gyrok]

Rhaythe, on 03 February 2016 - 09:01 AM, said:

At this point, PGI might as well fast-forward to the Dark Ages timeline anyway, since that feels like where this game probably should have picked up to start. If you're going to design a game that includes clans, it either needs to be *truly* asymmetric in technology and population or NOT set in 3050 at all.

I have been advocating hard for 3060 tech for IS.

That alone would solve 90% of the problems of balance in this game.

[pbiggz]

cdlord, on 03 February 2016 - 09:38 AM, said:

Don't apologise, you are correct. I would add in (and you touched on it a little) that in Company engagements, Clanners use 10 mechs (two Stars) where IS uses 12 mechs (three lances). This was a major balance factor in lore.

PGI refuses to take this into account. The pure solo queue and the CW queue can do this. The pug group queue is a free-for-all.

Other suggestions is to give all clan mechs a ghost (yeah, everyone hates that word now) +5 tons added to the mech for their weight limit balance mechanic.

People blame the imbalance on lore but very few people realize that we are imbalanced because so much of the lore has been ignores, excused away, or overridden.

TT values can never be used in a mechwarrior game. It works in single player, not multiplayer.

We all know the deal is 1:1 balance. Thats what we have to shoot for. 10v12 doesn't solve any clan vs IS balance, it just sidesteps the issue.

For the record, Living legends completely ignored table top values and it was probably the closest to clan vs IS balance we've ever seen.

[Monkey Lover]

Wolfways, on 03 February 2016 - 03:32 AM, said:

Tc's? Waste of space imo. I'll only use one if I can't fit another DHS in.
Extra hardpoints? Clan mechs have the hardpoints of their stock weapons, and unlike IS mechs don't get extra hardpoints (at least none that I've seen).
Omni-pods... No thanks. They are the only thing I don't want to change.

rofl if you hate clans so much why you playing them?

Who doesnt change the omni-pods? Why wouldnt you use a 1 ton TC for increased crit rates? If you can't count the huge number of hardpoints on the good clan mechs than i can't help you.

Gyrok, on 03 February 2016 - 09:33 AM, said:

For the first month in the last 18+ months...clan adjustments will not be simply more red ink.

18 months of easy mode.

[Mystere]

pbiggz, on 03 February 2016 - 09:47 AM, said:

TT values can never be used in a mechwarrior game. It works in single player, not multiplayer.

We all know the deal is 1:1 balance. Thats what we have to shoot for. 10v12 doesn't solve any clan vs IS balance, it just sidesteps the issue.

For the record, Living legends completely ignored table top values and it was probably the closest to clan vs IS balance we've ever seen.

Why do people keep insisting that the "lore folks" want nothing less that TT values? I see it as nothing more than a red herring used by many to shut down an opposing idea.

What people are really asking for is to keep the "spirit" of the lore: factional asymmetry. There is a universe of a difference between the two.

Edited by Mystere, 03 February 2016 - 10:06 AM.

[CDLord HHGD]

pbiggz, on 03 February 2016 - 09:47 AM, said:

TT values can never be used in a mechwarrior game. It works in single player, not multiplayer.

We all know the deal is 1:1 balance. Thats what we have to shoot for. 10v12 doesn't solve any clan vs IS balance, it just sidesteps the issue.

For the record, Living legends completely ignored table top values and it was probably the closest to clan vs IS balance we've ever seen.

This would be valid had I said ANYTHING about TT.... I said LORE. LORE. L-O-R-E.

And I bet 10:12 would fix a lot of imbalance (though a lot of other stuff would have to change as well. Heal the wound and you don't need all those bandaids).

1:1 balance is a unicorn when the entirety of the lore is asymmetrical. You want 1:1 balance? You better be asking for a 3025 timeline.