138 replies to this topic

[B0oN]

Go on, Iraqi, educate them .
Even while my faith to succeed in this is 100% with you, my experience with the playerbase tells me you WILL get refuted anyway, just because "reasons" .

Too many people playing this game do not want it to be balanced .

[Revorn]

If the Game dont gets balanced well till this World Championchip 100.000 k bucks thing. Yeh, then Lol.

PGI should realy start to eleminate some Trolls here.

[Tarl Cabot]

How is the balance if the population is removed from the equation?

How is the balance if both sides are using trial mechs?

How is the balance if both sides are using mastered, customized mechs?

How is the balance if both sides are not communication with their teams but simply going by play history?

How is the balance if both sides are using both VOIP/text?

How is the balance if (for CW) total tonnage is increased/decreased?

There are many more "How is the balance if " scenarios. For each balance means a different thing though. Will there ever be true balance in the game? Nope, the flavor will constantly be changing due to how PGI manipulates stats, from base weapon stats to weapon quirks.

What will not change with the current game settings is the weapon platform. The larger the mech, the increased importance of weapon hardpoint placement, more so on torso placement, followed by arm length and weapon placement top/high side/low side/under. If majority of mechs had the ability to raise their arms, that would change the mech dynamics up some, to where not only if a weapon can be used as a good shield but to bring weapons to bear at a different angle. Many who were here for closed beta should remember wanting arm mounted weapons, to better deal with pesky lights and fast mediums.

Heat Scale - One but not the only reason laser vomit is preferred. Heat cap dynamically affected by the number and type of heatsinks. From the BT game lines, have the Heat Scale affect more than just when the mech shuts down. Does not need to include all the steps and thresholds but should include more than what happens at 100%. That would also allow more manipulation of heat dissipation as well as base heat cap.

PGI should also change their thoughts on quirks. Should quirks be done in percentages? Should 10% weapon quirk mean the same thing, whether it is on a light or an assault? The game is constantly changing due to experiences and the results of game play.

Recall that the last major quirk changes, PGI moved percentages from specific weapon quirks to general weapon quirks while decreasing the overall effect, eg 15% PPC range/10% energy range to 5% PPC range/15% energy range. Now on the next pass those general energy range quirks are being reduced to 10%, but will the next round have PGI changing the specific weapon quirks, sorta going back to the original changes? Will be increasing how the Clans respond to the primarily ballistic quirks this upcoming patch.

Will there ever be a true balance between the techs? I do not see that happening, not when all the other variables are taken into consideration. What PGI can do is stop providing the favorite mech of the month huge buffs that will eventually be rolled back. One of the things that can be changed is the "flavor" of the mechs on both sides, and between the techs, by providing a wider use of arms for something other than being a shield, remembering that the battlegrounds are not a flat open plains with very little elevation, followed by a heat scale that would provide a better governor for weapon fire control. Then a more effective use of quirks to modify the flavor of the techs, taking into the consideration of a set amount instead of using percentages.

[IraqiWalker]

Russhuster, on 13 February 2016 - 05:11 AM, said:

Yes one CAN bring some of your mentioned 235builds to a drop deck but in how many do you think you do your team a favour?

More than half

Russhuster, on 13 February 2016 - 05:11 AM, said:

exactly so your 235 builds are nonsense in that context, Ofc everybody wants to be ceompetetive,the ability to pull some weight in a game is important if you want to win, Do you play to loose? - i seriously doubt that.

1- No it isn't you asked about variety, and I gave you the full list, every single one of those builds is VIABLE in group play, and solo play. About half or so are good for CW, mainly because range impacts them in different ways.


as for the "everyone wants to be competitive part" LOL, nope.
Let's look at some basic math:

Estimated total player base: 30,000 players+
Total number of competitive players: almost 200

The majority don't care about being competitive. If everyone wants to be competitive, we wouldn't have joke builds, we wouldn't have people running tier 5 mechs. Don't press what YOU think is important, and generalize it to the rest of the population. Especially when the data contradicts you here.


Everyone wants to do well in this game, in the mechs they like. Which is why quirks help, because they made sure that almost every chassis is salvageable.

Russhuster, on 13 February 2016 - 05:11 AM, said:

Yes it brought false benifits to mechs like the Blackjack what ex nihilo had the survivability of an assaultmech
so let us take a closer look at that benifits you were speaking of it made a mech almost using god mode
so that ONE mech was dominating from that point on

Folks, if you are paying attention, this is actually a very common fallacy in discussions: Focus on ONE extreme edge case, and make it seem like it's actually the common one.

First off: The Blackjack was common before the durability quirks. Yes, they added to it's popularity, but your argument already loses credibility because the BJ-1 was always a widespread mech. Great hitboxes, XL friendly, pocket jager mech, and though the trial version is running the AC 20 build, most of us could swap that for a Gauss Rifle, and now we have a great Gauss mech for CW.

Second: That's not a point against the quirk system, because what's happening within the next month or so? That's right, the quirks are being balanced on the BJ-1. Because it's better to quirk each mech on a case by case basis, and then fix the outliers, than it is to adjust an entire weapon system with a very wide range of impact on the game, and the mechs.

This is surgical, and precision balancing. Let's take similar examples from other games that are more competitive, and have a better competitive scene shall we:

World of Tanks: They don't adjust the behavior of ALL HEAT rounds, they adjust them per chassis.

League of Legends: They don't adjust what move speed or attack speed does, but instead they fix them per hero (chassis/variant, however you want to think of it)

Counter Strike: They don't adjust the projectile speed of bullets, but rather the rate of fire of a specific weapon (again, think of it like a chassis, or variant)

What MWO did is not new, every other game does it the same way, and they rarely make any large sweeping adjustments that blindly impact the entire game, because that's a bad decision, and carries a lot of unintended consequences.

Russhuster, on 13 February 2016 - 05:11 AM, said:

Everybody used the Mini Atlas you do see these robots in the dozen - great variety - i really have to applaude
in the consequence Assault mechs were obsolete why using an Atlas when the BJ can tank as much but is faster has a better mobility and a better Hardpoint solution?
so one mech bolstered and about 5 chassis types destroyed

Sorry, gonna call BS on that one. 5 chassis were destroyed? Which 5? You listed the Atlas there, and even then, the Atlas was rarely used in competitive play to begin with, because there are better assault mechs for dishing damage. So that's not much of a case either. Did the BJ-1 replace the Thunderbolt? Did it replace the Jagermech? Did it replace the Grasshopper? Did it replace the Hunchback? There are 10 tier 1 CW mechs for the IS. For the record, since after wave 1 of clans came out, the Atlas was NEVER anywhere near tier 1, so the BJ-1 didn't replace it because of the quirks. The BJ-1 was already there in Tier 2, and sometimes 1, before the structure quirks even showed up.


You can choose to exaggerate an argument, but the problem here is that you are portraying a false image.

Russhuster, on 13 February 2016 - 05:11 AM, said:

The spiral turned and so the IS Assaults were buffed with similar structure/survivability/movement quirks just to keep up with the Blackjack-Quirkchimera,. what will be to see in the future a further spinning spiral of quirks and requirks?
I d say that galloping Quirk-idiotism has to come to an end

You clearly don't bother to read what people post, or what PGI announces, because this is at least the fourth time that we're telling you the quirks on the BJ-1 are getting revamped.

Then there's the fact that the IS assaults didn't get structure and armor buffs because of the blackjack, but because for the longest time they had none, and needed them. The Atlas is only good for receiving damage, at long range it has half the firepower of the left arm of the DWF-Prime. That's not good. So it needed something to help emphasize that it can take damage. This is why the Atlas is almost never seen in competitive play. Even back before clans showed up, there would be the occasional DDC, but that only lasted 3.5 seconds once the poptarts spotted it.

Russhuster, on 13 February 2016 - 05:11 AM, said:

Mechs have to be viable through theyr specific advantages the ability to fit in certain weapon types

i.e.: I want my OP clan mechs back. OR "sized hardpoints"

Both of those arguments are negative to the game. If you can answer this question truthfully, then I'll consider there is room for more debate

"Why should I pick a Commando over a Firestarter?"


If you think that's unfair, how about " why should I pick the Trebuchet over the Hunchback?, why should I pick the Cataphract over the Black Knight?"

Why would I EVER pick the regular HBK over the HBK-IIC? Why would I pick any IS light over the JR7-IIC? Why would I pick a heavy other than the TBR, or HBR? Why would I pick any medium over the SCR?

Try and answer these questions please.

The competitive scene does not care for viability, nor does it care for weapon balance. The competitive scene cares for which mechs optimize the most damage. Which is why the competitive mech selection is always minuscule. Your system has already been tested, and it's performed far worse than the quirk system has, by a very, very long mile.

we went through the numbers before, we can do it again.

The problem with your argument is that we KNOW what would happen if quirks are removed. We were there, we played the game before quirks showed up. The competitive scene was just Firestarters, with one or two ECM spiders, and the rest was Dragon Slayers.

Before that it was Heavymetals. Before that it was Stalkers with ERLLs, before that it was Stalkers with 4-6 PPCs, before that it was Gauss literally everywhere. After the Dragon Slayers were nerfed, it was Gauss with PPCs on Cataphracts, or PPCs with AC 5s on Cataphracts.

1-2 builds in the competitive queue, and no one picks anything other than the top tonnage mech of the weight class, because why pick anything worse?

Quirks are creating those "advantages" and "ability to fit certain weapons" that you so cherish, which never existed before quirks, except to make 1-3 variants out of every weight class the absolute gods of the battlefield, while everything else sucked.

Russhuster, on 13 February 2016 - 05:11 AM, said:

light mechs get light and medium weapons in rare exceptions heavy like the Hollander that could fit in a heavy weapon, the Gauss cannon that was the main purpose of sucha design would a mech like the Hollander make sense now in this wonderful world of MWO where even a raven can equip a AC 20?

Yeah, it would fit just fine. The AC 20 satellite raven (a very rare build btw), does not violate the lore, and does not impact the Hollander in any way.

Russhuster, on 13 February 2016 - 05:11 AM, said:

NO its purpose is destroyed - like many other mechs nieche

Again: BS. Why would it's purpose be destroyed? Give it a couple gauss quirks and she's good to go. Hell, before quirks were even in the game we were running Firestarter Hollanders, which means that the Hollander would be fun to have in the game. Much like the Urbanmech.

Russhuster, on 13 February 2016 - 05:11 AM, said:

And thats why so many mechs duffer a dust catcher existence building quirkbucket - Frankenstein Mechs will not help just destroy more of the mechwarrior feeling in MWO where very little is left of that anyway

Again. Look at how many viable builds we had BEFORE quirks, and AFTER quirks. You're monumentally wrong on this one, because basic math shows that not only are there more viable mechs, but there's a much larger percentage of viable mechs, than before the quirks.

Russhuster, on 13 February 2016 - 05:11 AM, said:

When a Thunderbolt can deliver every need of the battlefield because its quirked over the top
why using any other mech ? when a BJ can tank like an Atlas but is faster more maneuverable and provides the better gardpoint ratio, whilst using less tonnage in the dropdeck why using an atlas then?
that list could be continued as you know

Yeah, because you decided to pick one of the worst mechs in the game "Atlas" and used it as the benchmark. No one used the Atlas except for a very short period of time where 12 atlas rushes in CW were funny.

Russhuster, on 13 February 2016 - 05:11 AM, said:

Yes, i would like to have the atlas when it uses FFB AR to have 900 AR points why not? An Atlas is a Assault mech and no flea or firestarter or no Arctic cheetah should be able to kiill one with two or three salvos but that s the case atm. Assaults losing theyr niche because light mechs are buffed and quirked that was so speed is more worth than ammo
Ofc The Direwolf should have an adequate AR as well but i would give the Arlas or the Stone Rhino an advantage of 100 AR at the least

Clearly light mechs are OP, which is why their queue is always so saturated, and full. Are you divorced from reality?

Light mechs are not OP, most assault pilots are terrible, and that "no light mech should be able to kill one with two or three salvos" line is the reason those pilots suck. Why shouldn't a light mech be able to kill an assault mech that's playing like an idiot and giving it's back to the light mech?

This is the wrong kind of thinking. Assault mechs die to light mechs, and vice versa, all the time. If the assault pilot doesn't know how to track a fast moving target, or how to back up against a wall to protect his rear torso that he CHOSE to have only 8 armor on, that's not the light mech's fault. That's the Assault pilot's fault.

Assaults are being rendered obsolete by heavies. They carry as much firepower, while moving 30Kph faster. Which is why the Heavy queue is always full.

If light mechs were really OP they would be the biggest portion of the queue, not the smallest.

Russhuster, on 13 February 2016 - 05:11 AM, said:

Quirks were in the pastand are in the future the worst and most destructive way to play PGI s try and mostly error with the players

That's what you think. What the numbers tell us, on the other hand is very different. This is the difference between personal experience, and opinion, and large scale data collection.

You THINK quirks are bad for the game. In reality, they have been very good. They added more variety, not just in which chassis, or variants are played, but also in builds. They helped balance the game better. They salvaged chassis that would never be played due to design issues into being playable (Trebuchet), and best of all: They can be adjusted on a case by case basis with extreme fine tuning. Leading to almost zero unintended consequences that break the game.

This is why people say "look at the bigger picture", because it seems like you're only looking at one corner, and missing the full picture entirely.


I think PGI's biggest mistake was give us such a restricted mechlab. I'm wrong of course, because I think 20 Medium Laser Atlas builds would be hilarious to have. HOWEVER, considering the bigger picture, I can see why that much freedom is bad for the game, and the mechs.

Edited by IraqiWalker, 14 February 2016 - 12:44 PM.

[Alec Braca]

Ariesmercwar, on 09 February 2016 - 04:39 AM, said:

if you want to complain to me about how overpowered clan mechs, clans etc are, maybe you would get more sympathy from me if clans had swallowed the IS whole not the other way around. We only have one planet now, botany bay. Meanwhile inner sphere rules the galaxy. Screw the IS and all their overpowered mechs.

Are you new to the game? Did you see the layout of the IS before the reset? You must be new because if you had, you would not be whining about how you have no territory. This is the CLans highest loss in territory EVER and I have no sympathy. What the IS looked like before was that the Wolves and Falcons made the Republic of the Sphere around Terra and went into Capellan territory, nearly surrounded Tharkad, ate up FWL and a huge chunk of the Dracs, and were marching towards New Avalon. You also lost territory because all of your merc teams left at once, then you face the SAME good seasoned pilots and ***** about it being the Clans in general fault. We have seen this before dude again and again.

Edited by Alec Braca, 14 February 2016 - 04:34 PM.

[Bud Crue]

IraqiWalker...great post content-wise. Maybe the longest wall of text I have ever read outside of a patent! PGI give this fellow some premium time for that much effort.

[IraqiWalker]

Bud Crue, on 14 February 2016 - 04:30 PM, said:

IraqiWalker...great post content-wise. Maybe the longest wall of text I have ever read outside of a patent! PGI give this fellow some premium time for that much effort.

Lol. Thanks bud, XD.

It actually means a lot to read that.

[B0oN]

I, for instance, have absolutely no qualms with carefully cherrypicked mechs, that get quirked with a tender hand to make them viable in MW:O WHILE retaining their lore-flavour -> Awesome + PPC´s, Jaeger/Cataphract + AC´s, Warhawk Prime + ERPPC, Summoner Prime+Gauss/ERPPC/LRM/JJ and so on, you get the drift hopeflly .
What I really don´t like are those over-the-top blanket quirks, looks really sloppy and tells me the DEV doesn´t care .

An to add : I´ve played approximate 15k games in public and CW combined, on both sides of the fence, and what I really like now is the diversity on the battlefield . Yes, performance/range outliers need to get reined in (eh, BJ, BLR,BNC^^) but besides those little things balance ain´t too bad .
I´m saying "not too bad" with the full knowledge that we aren´t even close to a good "imperfect" balance, but we definitely turned towards it and maybe even took one step towards it, let´s see and wait what le futuré brings .

The only thing that stilly massively pisses me off in this game is it´s wonky, finnicky and plain randomly working hit-registration .

Iraqi, as usual, thanks for the lecture, it was a treat to read

[Bud Crue]

Rad Hanzo, on 15 February 2016 - 05:48 AM, said:

I, for instance, have absolutely no qualms with carefully cherrypicked mechs, that get quirked with a tender hand to make them viable in MW:O WHILE retaining their lore-flavour -> Awesome + PPC´s, Jaeger/Cataphract + AC´s, Warhawk Prime + ERPPC, Summoner Prime+Gauss/ERPPC/LRM/JJ and so on, you get the drift hopeflly .
What I really don´t like are those over-the-top blanket quirks, looks really sloppy and tells me the DEV doesn´t care .

Spot on.
Mods = Viability and Character.
This is, I think, the core of how modifiers should work.

(My personal preference is that lore ought to be the source for that character, and thus the appropriate buffs and nerfs, but I will take ANYTHING that helps make low performers playable and gives all mechs a bit of distinction).

[Vanguard319]

DivineEvil, on 09 February 2016 - 05:45 AM, said:

In case you didn't knew, this is how map begins. For a year it was the reality - Clans took just as much planets as they liked to. We do not claim that Clans are OP now - we're arguing that factions are balanced. The fact, that Clans do not take planets hinges on the amount of players on the opposite sides, and their actual skill and depth of understanding of CW tactics.

so what you are saying is that CW would be balanced if the ratio of clan and IS players were about equal on both sides. The reality that the clans are unable to hold worlds implies that the player ratio is heavily geared towards IS, because of the belief that IS mechs are better. You don't have a mass exodus of top-tier players switching sides when factions are balanced.

[Surn]

No, what he is saying is that given equal player numbers, clans are OP and march through the map just like smoke jag is right now.

The only reason clans were almost wiped out was because of a concerted effort by large groups to make their clan mech uber OP. So they all went IS, leaving clan planets undefended, as a trolling effort vs PGI to get what they want...to hell with the game or the rest of the player base.

Basically, they used threats of players leaving, but in the end threatened the steam release by crushing new players and dissuading them from continuing in the game or buying mechs.

It was extortion.

[Dawnstealer]

IraqiWalker, on 14 February 2016 - 09:07 PM, said:

Lol. Thanks bud, XD.

It actually means a lot to read that.

Preach.

[Russhuster]

Quote

More than half

thats a very strange statement you say there are 132 bilds that are competeive?
i really doubt this, the deadquirking does not support that

I asked you about variety in the game not a imaginate number possible funbuilds there are not 235 different builds played in the game esp not in CW and you know that very good yourself

Quote

as for the "everyone wants to be competitive part" LOL, nope.
Let's look at some basic math:

Estimated total player base: 30,000 players+
Total number of competitive players: almost 200

The majority don't care about being competitive.

you seriously say of all players in MWO just 200 want to win rhe rest plays for the purpose of losing ??
as i did ask you as well if you play to lose i doubted that and still dount that now

more and more i get the impression youre not interested in a serious debate

Quote

Folks, if you are paying attention, this is actually a very common fallacy in discussions: Focus on ONE extreme edge case, and make it seem like it's actually the common one.

OFC i do point out one example to illustrate the destructive effect of the quirk desaster and of course a significant one
using a not significant example would be rather stupid and meaningless no?

trolling me there again IraquiWalker?

Quote

First off: The Blackjack was common before the durability quirks.

exactly it was viable and usable through its good designed high Hardpoints the relatively small sprite and as the result of that good hitboxes its good maneuverability and broad hardpoints variety

So tell me WHY did that Robot need THAT quirks???

Can you answer THAT question?

It got boostet to almost god mode and took over matter of factly the usage nieches of many assault mechs
it destroyed more than 5 assaults ( Atkas, Banshee, Awesome, Highlander, Victor for example )
i just took that number to visualize that the quirks didnt bring variety but destroy variety in making one chassis here the BJ to the"flying egg laying Woolmilksow" providing all abilitys of a number of mechs in one
making those mechs obsolete in doing so

You say they will balance the quirks on the BJ

well i will believe that when i do see it - they may reduce the quiks minimalisticly but in the end the BJ will remain out of balance. I havent seen one single time a considerated dealing with quirks on IS side yet, maybe iam wrong but the past told me that - we will see.


I count that as a very heavy point against the quirk madness

I am with you in saying chassis specific balancing quirks would have its benefits

But that has not been happening one singe time in all the time iam playing this game - welcome to reality!

I DO bother what other peole are writing even when it is blind white knighting, or what PGI is announcing
BUT what PGI is announcing and what we did get then in the end are two different stories true or not?

So you may forgive me some reasonable doubts there - it isnt so that we havnt been fooled at all in the past havnt we?

Mechs like the Atlas were loosing more and more of theyr purpose by quirking and the resulting increased damage output over ridiculous distances caused by quirkmonsters, so they needed quirks to stand a chance against former quirks thats the spiral i was talking about just in case you didnt read it

You asked why one would take a Commando over a Firestarter

Answer. SPEED!

A Hunchback over a IIC? or the Jenny over a IIC
Answer: ARMOR and Survivability as *** IIC s have paper armor

Quote

Everyone wants to do well in this game,

you do see youre leading your own words about just 200 players want to be ompetetive in whole MWO ad absurdum yes?

Quote

<p class="citation"><a class="snapback" href="http://mwomercs.com/forums/index.php?app=forums&amp;module=forums&amp;section=findpost&amp;pid=5018128" rel="citation"><img alt="View Post" src="http://static.mwomercs.com/forums//public/style_images/master/snapback.png" /></a>Russhuster, on 13 February 2016 - 01:11 PM, said:

Mechs have to be viable through theyr specific advantages the ability to fit in certain weapon types


i.e.: I want my OP clan mechs back. OR &quot;sized hardpoints&quot;

how do you come to that conclusion from what i d write?

I dont want op on neither side i want a considered specific nieche creating usable concept in the game where mechs like the hollander have its purpose,.. &lt;you say it would fit in - maybe but will it be used ? NO because it isnt needed.

Quote

Give it a couple gauss quirks and she's good to go.

do you realize you are delivering the answer yourself? without additional quirks no Chassis will be used
Thats how far thequirks have brought MWO, applause applause

Its purpose, its nieche is destroyed; or more taken by quirk mechs that provide ALL abilitys in ONE or very FEW chassis

And that is the absolute opposite of diversity

Maybe the AC 20 Raven isnt against the lore but against physics. A Robot with more than half its overall weight mountet in one cannon on one side can not walk it will tilt to the weighted side because there is gravity

Quirks do not create good hardpoint diversity they do create BOATING

Quirks do not support variety in builds they do artificially boost ONE certain (quirked) build that one build you will see played in the dozen no matter how far of reality your white knighting may be

I d choose the atlas because i do play it mayself and can say something about its abilities
because i tend to speak of facts i did test myself bevore typing instead of white knighting
The Atlas was bevore Quirks and even bevore clans a very useful mech, as were the Highlanders
Clans as Wave I came did bring to many advantages andwere nerfed

but another player did give a very good statemet to that so i ll answer you with the words of Lily from animove

Quote

your post implies the clanners are stronger by balance which is just not true. Atm IS has some superior stuff available, and clanplayers, who mostly played IS mechs before clanners were released know how to play BOTH kind of mechs. Some even returned to IS to enjoy the easy stomping with the current imbalance. Most clanplayers are tired of getting shafted for their faction wide skill and coordination effort leading to unreasonable IS buffs. While in fact how many mechs in the entire MWO (clan and IS) are basicaly dead choices?. Al that happened was more and more imbalance being placed into the game.

Because history is: clans were stronger, PGI nerfed and buffed. Until proepr balance existed, Tukkayid 1 happened. clans still stronger by statiistics, PGI nerfed more and buffed more, Tukkayid 2 happened, clans were now even stronger (statistically) than in Tukkayid 1. which by the buffing and nerfing shouldn't be possible. But clanners just organsied themselves and the large units betters (like Wolves, getting MS into their faction and such)

PGI went over the baord with unreasonable nerfings of clan, and buffing on IS. And all this actually without ever makign more chsssi competitive, it just was the same on clanside + a few new ones and always like 3 on the IS side (which changed which balance passes)

If PGI wants to make a &quot;test&quot; they should make everyone able to drop in IS and Clantech regardless of faction, and please the players to go to the faction they like. Then they can compare and see how much of the large &quot;clan units&quot; impact on matches is actually &quot;tech&quot; based or &quot;group based&quot; because when both, IS and clanners can bring both mechs to the game its entirely the players doings causing the result. That would be an amazing test for just a duration of 4 weeks ending in Tukkayid 3.


Further funny, you &quot;blame them now&quot;? after IS cried all day towards the clanners: If IS is stronger why don't you proof it? The clanners now came over &quot;proofing it&quot; and get flamed by the IS egain for &quot;destroying the game&quot; It jus shows that the balance was initially dstroyed by IS whines not able to organise themselves faction wide (the few loyal units had not the numbers to do so) and to work with the IS strengths. We (clanners and IS loyalist elite palyers) had LAODS of threads trying to explain the IS noobs how IS is to be played. All they got was getting flamed for how &quot;Clan XL OP&quot; while ignoreing these help (even against loads of pictures proofing IS mechs doing what clanemchs couldn't ever reach).
This destruction si the result of unreasonably whine and many IS palyers wanting to &quot;win&quot; the game in clanner playstyle intead of using the IS playstyle their chassis needed.

Blame them for bringing Clanmechs below IS emchs to a degree where clanplayers gave up believing in serious balance attemps.

PGI needs to finalyl get rid of the clan vs IS baalnce idea, its plain stupid and WRONG. They need to work out chassis balance, because when chassis balance to each other independend on factions it will:

balance solo queue mech choices.
balance CW dropship containment, since they all are composed by chassis.

then people will go back to their faction they like, or maybe circle for free mechbays. But this will still leave balance issues due to how units and player coordination work.

And that can be fixed outside of chassis balance that needs to be fixed by ingame CW mechanics, like detemrining how many planets a faction owns. And then adjust cbill rewards and droptonnage to &quot;nerf/buff strong/weak factions. So that the fluctuating playerbase switches between the factions towards the eaker ones.

the player numbers tell us the sad truth Quirk and Nerf idiotism drove many away some left the game completely others just left sides

you may white knight all you want and i am the opinion you should get a reward by PGI for doing so

maybe some reality glasses

Edited by Russhuster, 15 February 2016 - 12:51 PM.

[Bud Crue]

This whole issue of "competitive builds" as discussed here and in other threads is interesting to me (http://mwomercs.com/...e-how-to-build/).

As to the idea that the clans are in such rough shape and that the CW map proves it...I think you should take a look at the map. Now that many of the big units have moved back to clans, they are taking plenty of worlds. I don't pretend that this shows "balance" but it does show that organized groups in clan mechs are doing just fine against "op" IS mechs (quirks and all).

[Russhuster]

exactly that doesnt say a bit about balance

Some of the big units did return bec of the shitstorm. and organized drops can do fine against PUG quirkbuckets
that tells us what?

[Bud Crue]

To me it tells us that balance isn't as big of an issue as many seem to think (from either perspective). I mean if one side is truly OP then the fact that a few large units MS, SWOL, etc. can change the map this much would suggest that at least a large number of players are doing just fine with either kind of mech. No?

[Russhuster]

when you drop in a coordinated group yyou can in the team compensate alot of weaknesses through teamplay and concentrated fire ( what is completely against clan play by the way, but teams are forced to do so by the Quirk-desaster)

That does in no way replace balance it can cope with the braindead situation better but new players will be hit the more of this situation who arnt in a unit and that will drive a lot of steam newcomers as fast away as they d come- what about these?
The Game is living from its playerbase and when BT fans are driven away by kicking LOre in the trash bion whilst the quirk desaster is driving away new players, where do you see the Future of MWO?

again:
The fact SWOL or MSdo come back and cope with the desastrous situation via teamplay does not say the situation is anywhere 100 miles near balance

EDIT Those Players who left MWO completely wont be back so easily

Edited by Russhuster, 15 February 2016 - 01:53 PM.

[Bud Crue]

You may be right. Which is (I hope) why PGI continues to play with the quirk values, buffs, and nerfs etc. They have the data, and they make the rules. Russ via the town hall seems to think said data suggests we are close to balanced and a few more tweeks (such as the energy range nerf to IS, etc.) will get us closer. Guess we shall see.

In the meantime (one more day), the poor nerfed clan mechs, but only those played by large units and comp players, will some how manage to make do. Then sometime around...oh Friday maybe we can start the whole "______ faction is OP and here is why" threads all over again. The fun never ends.

[Djinnhammer]

Bud Crue, on 15 February 2016 - 12:58 PM, said:

This whole issue of "competitive builds" as discussed here and in other threads is interesting to me (http://mwomercs.com/...e-how-to-build/).

As to the idea that the clans are in such rough shape and that the CW map proves it...I think you should take a look at the map. Now that many of the big units have moved back to clans, they are taking plenty of worlds. I don't pretend that this shows "balance" but it does show that organized groups in clan mechs are doing just fine against "op" IS mechs (quirks and all).

One question to ask here though would be:
How are these groups doing vs each other, pure Is meta vs pure clan meta?

[Koshirou]

Bud Crue, on 15 February 2016 - 01:56 PM, said:

Russ via the town hall seems to think said data suggests we are close to balanced and a few more tweeks (such as the energy range nerf to IS, etc.) will get us closer. Guess we shall see.

The Clans clobbered the IS in the first CW cycle.
The Clans clobbered the IS in the second CW cycle.
And the Clans will clobber the IS in the third CW cycle. (They are already doing so, QQ by Wolves and JFs who can't read the map right nonewithstanding.)

The completely bummered strategic setup, which PGI quite obviously does not even understand, is more to blame than the tech balance, though.