30 replies to this topic

[Wesxander]

Quite literally I am not sure what the hell you guys are up to giving clanners the same tonnage as Innerspehre for CW matches. You need to show us how a 12 man IS CW team can beat a comparable team regularly on CW maps. Additionally when you are collecting data in the future on IS vs Clanners it would help if you display which units are with each faction while data is collected. I wondered why most the clans went IS For awhile. Then found out you were collecting data at the time. PGI claims that each side is balanced then put your money where your mouth is. Get a 12 man together and show the IS units how you can beat clans 12 mans. I am betting you will have hard time doing so. Thereby that throws your claim that tonnage in CW for both sides should be equal out the damn window. Seriously letting clanners bring same tonnage as IS shows extreme favoritism. You nerfed IS quirks claiming they need rewrite then when collecting data on it ignore clans all switched to IS at the time. So show us how it is done put a 12 man CW team together. Plus in the future when your collecting data in for CW watch to see which units switch around to do what where. Something many the CW players already knew there is quite a few teams that when they want skew the data results their way they change faction allegiance. This is to ensure one side seems more powerful than it actually is when data is not being collected. I have played on some teams and noticed the better teams have required builds on each side. I don't expect a pug CW team to beat a 12 man who plays together all the time. What I do expect is not putting 12 Sherman tanks up against a unit of 12 M1A's and expecting all things equal that the Shermans will carry the day.

In summary:
Currently clans again out range nearly all IS mech (as it should be)
On average their heavies pack more fire power and speed than IS counter parts (again as it should be)
Their tonnage is now also the same. Someone is seriously smoking and staying high if they think this should be the same.
This supposed to = balanced with both teams having 12 v 12 rather than 10 v 12. Any tournament judge that tried that on table top, in it's glory days, would have nothing but clanners show up.

When collecting data in the future for CW pay attention to which units are where and why. It is possible to skew data results being collected in CW something that is obvious to anyone that understands the concept.

[VorpalAnvil]

Would PGI have trouble beating a 12 man clam team? I think PGI would have a hard time opening the gate lol! But 12 competent IS players? Not so much...

[S T I N G S]

I think that it is fairly balanced. Us SRPH guys have beaten several Clan 12 mans, It has been close though

[MaxFool]

Not sure if PGI even claims IS vs Clans is balanced, but just about every good player does, and that's what matters. You asking PGI to prove it tells quite a lot about your understanding of the game.

PS. "Clans OP pls nerf" and "IS OP pls nerf" threads are about even right now, which says balance is good.

Edited by MaxFool, 10 April 2016 - 10:02 PM.

[Vxheous]

Russ played CW as part a 12 man a few times in the past:

[meteorol]

0/10

[VorpalAnvil]

Vxheous Kerensky, on 10 April 2016 - 10:11 PM, said:

Russ played CW as part a 12 man a few times in the past:

Any word on where those pugs are in the SWOL ranking system?

[Zolaz]

12 man competent team vs PGI will end up with competent team losing 12 mechs and PGI wreked. If you make stupid decisions and you cant hit what you are aiming at you are going to lose. It is like when you see Tier 1 team vs a Tier 5 team, all you will see are tears. Of course, Paul will implement some knee jerk response afterwards.

[Black Ivan]

IS vs Clan is quite close, could be tweaked at some points, but otherwise it is close.What is a big difference is skill and a decent team and don't bring stupid builts to CW

Edited by Black Ivan, 10 April 2016 - 10:36 PM.

[DevlinCognito]

... and in other threads we have Clanners complaining are OP ... balance?

To use your analogy, why are you taking Shermans against M1? Take 3 Black Knights and a Firestarter/Wolfhound. Boom! You can fight on an equal footing.

[Davegt27]

Wesxander you’re wasting your time things change hour to hour day to day

As soon as you post there will be 10 people say the complete opposite of what you just said

PGI has complete control over the game if they want they can buff or nerf any side or any Mech

We as a mixed group kicked the crap out of 11 man SWOL team yesterday
I spent the whole match on the phone talking to a friend and I seemed to have a super Mech lol

Even LRMs where working yesterday

Before anyone jumps off the deep end this is the most fun CW has been since it started
Better then QP so do what I do check any logic and common sense at the door when I log into MWO

[Sjorpha]

Wesxander, on 10 April 2016 - 08:45 PM, said:

Quite literally I am not sure what the hell you guys are up to giving clanners the same tonnage as Innerspehre for CW matches. You need to show us how a 12 man IS CW team can beat a comparable team regularly on CW maps.

Clans are not currently stronger than IS in CW, though it's a pretty close call I think IS has a slight edge right now.

Faction balance is quite good, some mechs on both sides need help.

I would love a reduction in tonnage though, for both factions. 260 is way to high, should be 230 or something to make medium mechs see more play. 240 might be a good change to start with.

Edited by Sjorpha, 11 April 2016 - 07:14 AM.

[MaxFool]

Sjorpha, on 11 April 2016 - 07:11 AM, said:

I would love a reduction in tonnage though, for both factions. 260 is way to high, should be 230 or something to make medium mechs see more play. 240 might be a good change to start with.

Yup, the way they have used tonnage to balance IS vs clans, in a few years with OP side swinging back and forth, we'll hit 400 vs 400 tons. If not 600 vs 600

[Kin3ticX]

VorpalAnvil, on 10 April 2016 - 10:12 PM, said:

Any word on where those pugs are in the SWOL ranking system?

Something similar to an ebay rating........A++++++

[Kin3ticX]

Wesxander, on 10 April 2016 - 08:45 PM, said:

Quite literally I am not sure what the hell you guys are up to giving clanners the same tonnage as Innerspehre for CW matches. You need to show us how a 12 man IS CW team can beat a comparable team regularly on CW maps. Additionally when you are collecting data in the future on IS vs Clanners it would help if you display which units are with each faction while data is collected. I wondered why most the clans went IS For awhile. Then found out you were collecting data at the time. PGI claims that each side is balanced then put your money where your mouth is. Get a 12 man together and show the IS units how you can beat clans 12 mans. I am betting you will have hard time doing so. Thereby that throws your claim that tonnage in CW for both sides should be equal out the damn window. Seriously letting clanners bring same tonnage as IS shows extreme favoritism. You nerfed IS quirks claiming they need rewrite then when collecting data on it ignore clans all switched to IS at the time. So show us how it is done put a 12 man CW team together. Plus in the future when your collecting data in for CW watch to see which units switch around to do what where. Something many the CW players already knew there is quite a few teams that when they want skew the data results their way they change faction allegiance. This is to ensure one side seems more powerful than it actually is when data is not being collected. I have played on some teams and noticed the better teams have required builds on each side. I don't expect a pug CW team to beat a 12 man who plays together all the time. What I do expect is not putting 12 Sherman tanks up against a unit of 12 M1A's and expecting all things equal that the Shermans will carry the day.

In summary:
Currently clans again out range nearly all IS mech (as it should be)
On average their heavies pack more fire power and speed than IS counter parts (again as it should be)
Their tonnage is now also the same. Someone is seriously smoking and staying high if they think this should be the same.
This supposed to = balanced with both teams having 12 v 12 rather than 10 v 12. Any tournament judge that tried that on table top, in it's glory days, would have nothing but clanners show up.

When collecting data in the future for CW pay attention to which units are where and why. It is possible to skew data results being collected in CW something that is obvious to anyone that understands the concept.

Anything you know about table top wont do you much good in this game except for getting a head start with the non intuitive construction rules in the mechlab.

The 3 lance vs 2 Star (12vs10) concept is dumb for all sorts of reasons, the biggest being its suggesting 12 human intelligence's vs 10. Human players are not the same thing as plastic figurines standing in hexes.

Regarding Clan vs IS balance, many think that IS has some edge right now provided its certain 'Mechs. Its the burn time, cooler weapons, & structure quirks etc.

Here is the thing though, in order for the tech base balance to become the biggest factor on match outcome, both teams have to be of near equal ability. I'm more worried about who's attacking or defending on what map rather than what faction I am. Often in CW matches, 1 side is so far outmatched that the tech base argument/factor is irrelevant.

[Hobbles v]

The balance is as close as its ever been Wes, IS even has the advantage in some areas.

With real 12 mans (full HHoD), not the random assortment that gather on the public channels of Davion TS that you play in, we actually defeat organised clan units on a regular basis.

[Depressing-Fire]

And Kerensky ******* wept.

[fbj]

WORST TROLL POST EVER.

[Kin3ticX]

fbj, on 11 April 2016 - 11:02 AM, said:

WORST TROLL POST EVER.

WITH A SIDE OF NO PARAGRAPHS BECAUSE #$%^ BEING ABLE TO READ

[MischiefSC]

It's just a very different meta from the IS vs IS matches. The long range poke matches and waiting games for IS vs IS don't work with IS vs Clans. IS vs Clans is 100% about aggression. Clan decks inherently have mobility synergy with a 12man; they're not going to be stupid enough to take a Dire Wolf on attack, they're going to run a mix of TBRs, EBJs and HBRs. They'll arrive together and they'll push together and it's not hard to pull off. If it's a long map they'll have ERLLs and they'll hope you tuck in and try to trade at range with them. If it's not they'll be SRMs, CERMLs and LPLs and some SPLs. They'll go for a rush and roll.

Two ways to beat Clans:

1. Synergy deck of your own. Look at this thread the FRR is putting up on the Stormtrooper deck. It's an example of one and there's others. A lot of the Clans power with a 12man comes from speed and performance window synergy; when 1 Clanner can hit you in a wave generally they all can. They don't string out on pushes and that translates to a huge advantage.

2. Frontload tonnage and play aggressive. 2 assaults (BLR and a WubShee is great. 2 Maulers works too), 1 BJ and a 35 ton light of choice (Oxide, Firestarter, Wolfhound generally) can be used to stomp 3 waves of 65 tonners and have BJs and lights to clean up the last wave. You build firing lines and either push that line into the enemy or draw him into it. A 12 assault push is very effective IF the assaults in question are good mechs and the pilots know their job and what they're doing.

In either case though you can't do the old standby of 'wait by the Omega' or even 'hide in cover on Boreal until they close'. You need initiative, you need to play up close and push. Ironically Clans need to do the same thing to play well. IS vs IS matches are very trade-heavy anymore. IS vs Clan matches that are very close generally are not. They're about initiative and aggression.

Mech for mech IS can keep up with Clans now. The difference is that it's much easier to put a Clan synergy deck together. Run 12 Black Knights though and you'll inspire tear fountain posts on reddit.

It's just a whole different set of strats, that's all.