482 replies to this topic

[Deathlike]

DrxAbstract, on 05 May 2016 - 11:20 AM, said:

I said might, not "They definitely will." Having huge arms, and being slow, makes it especially susceptible to being hit, yes? Logical conclusion that less damage going around would make its weaknesses less pronounced, yes? Yes.

P.S. I said might.

Arctic Cheetah literally does the Mist Lynx's job, and then some, with a lot less sacrifices to be made.

[DrxAbstract]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 May 2016 - 11:18 AM, said:

Sounds more like a problem with the game mode more than anything, like how it is the worst game mode.

FW's implementation was poor, that's a given. But when you see elements (Mechs, Builds and Playstyles) bleeding over into other game modes, it suggests there's more to it than just the game modes themselves.

Quote

All IS weapons need some level of quirks to compete (and structure buffs on mechs to compensate for the XLs), it is the nature of tech balance currently.

The UAC5 and AC20 dont need specialized quirking to be useful, though... AC5 and AC2 do. The Mechs that have UAC5 or AC20 specific quirks were to make those specific Mechs viable, not the weapons.

Quote

SDR-5K is actually used a fair amount in comp, by some of the best teams no less.

It's basically a Locust-1V with JJs and more durability, which isnt a bad thing per se... But I think we can agree 'comp' builds are not the end-all-be-all of MWO as some work in Comp, while they dont work anywhere else with nearly the same efficacy and vice versa--What's its representation in Quick Play and FW? And that's my point. It has 4 Ballistic slots that are useless because... Machine Guns. Dont even get me started on the 5V. Extremely niche builds in specific game mode that use 1 or 2 of potentially 5 variants from a particular chassis doesnt qualify as the Mech itself being viable... But I do agree that you cant make them all useful... Still, there could a bit more effort put in, in more than just the Mechs themselves (Weapons).

Deathlike, on 05 May 2016 - 11:42 AM, said:

Arctic Cheetah literally does the Mist Lynx's job, and then some, with a lot less sacrifices to be made.

Sure, but the ACH cant fly...

[Quicksilver Aberration]

DrxAbstract, on 05 May 2016 - 12:09 PM, said:

FW's implementation was poor, that's a given. But when you see elements (Mechs, Builds and Playstyles) bleeding over into other game modes, it suggests there's more to it than just the game modes themselves.

I think it is the other way around, the top heavy queue mechs bleeding into FW because they are easier to play (not necessarily the best).

DrxAbstract, on 05 May 2016 - 12:09 PM, said:

The UAC5 and AC20 dont need specialized quirking to be useful, though

Oh, they do, AC20s are softballs that only wish they had the damage potential of SRMs, and the ghost heat limit on them kills any would be boom mech.

UAC5s are also not as favored on the higher end (unless used in conjuction with AC5s) mainly due to jamming making them not as reliable which is why the only mechs you tend to see pure UAC5 boats on have the jam chance reduction quirk.

DrxAbstract, on 05 May 2016 - 12:09 PM, said:

It's basically a Locust-1V with JJs and more durability, which isnt a bad thing per se... But I think we can agree 'comp' builds are not the end-all-be-all of MWO as some work in Comp, while they dont work anywhere else with nearly the same efficacy and vice versa

Only slow mechs that aren't able to keep up with the NASCAR of solo queue is there a case where that which works in comp doesn't work in solo queue. The reason it doesn't have any representation in solo queue is because of its reputation for being bad, even among comp players that reputation is purveyed.

[cazidin]

DrxAbstract, on 05 May 2016 - 11:09 AM, said:

I like how ignorance prevents understanding the relationship between context and examples in idea-generating discussions, and leads to uniformed forum posts.

Is it ironic to complain about a persons perceived lack of understanding while simultaneously missing the point of their forum post?

[wolf74]

You Never know they could use a system Like the OLD OLD Star Wars X-wing VS Tie-fighter

You have 3 Sliders
Speed (Effects Top speed and Mech Turning speed)
Agility (Effects Torso and Arms Movements)
Recharge (Effect Weapon Recycle Times)

If the Power slide is at ½ point you get current Speed/Movement/Weapon Fire Rates
Between 5-50 slider are a 2% Effect per 1 power change on the Slide.
Between 51-60 its 1% Effect
Between 70-80 its 0.5% effect
Between 81-90 its 0.3% effect
No slider can go below 5 or above 90 (for total power = 100%)

This Make a Max of 118% of current stats and min of 10%
If Power is evenly split is 66.6% of the current stats

[Tarl Cabot]

Quote

PLUS, TT system supposedly represented a '10 second' time frame, which we obviously do not have, for god's sake it would probably make the game pace incredibly slow were they to implement a 10 second refresh on ALL weapons...

Quote

Or change the cooldown, damage and heat figures so they can fire much, much faster but are capped to their maximum TT damage and heat generation potential in those 10 seconds... to at least give the perception of fast-paced fighting. I mean there's nothing really wrong with a PPC or Laser that fires 2, 3 or 50 times per 10 seconds as long as their damage and heat are adjusted accordingly... Which PGI never did. Hence Double Armor, Ghost Heat, Hover Jets, Quirk Balancing, etc.

Why recreate what FASA had already created with Solaris, turns were 2.5secs instead of 10secs with different weapon delays (cooldowns). ERLL/LPL/ERppcs had the longest delays. Fire in turn 1, 3-turn delay, the ability to fire again on turn 4.

Spoiler

[MischiefSC]

Dimento Graven, on 04 May 2016 - 09:49 PM, said:

Admittedly what you describe sounds VERY different from what he describes. Was the PTS "EVER" setup with TT values on armor, weapons, etc?

Just trying to clarify the confusion and statements being made.

I KNOW it's been QUITE a while since the Clans were released, so possibly fuzzy memory is obscuring actual facts...

A bunch of players tried to run 10 v 12 stuff in private matches.

This was an official test, 10 v 12, Clan v IS. I'm 99% certain it was TT values for Clan weapons, it's possible IS weapons were whatever they were 2 years ago, which was way nerfed over where they are now but I honestly don't remember. I think it ran a day? 2?

I do not think it put armor values back, just weapon values. Given that IS mechs were not stock and focus fire = win it was a face-roll non-stop no matter who was on what side. It was considered a definitive failure. If you do the Twitter thing you can probably find some of Russ' comments on it and why they were abandoning the idea. I think it was in announcements as well.

[Dimento Graven]

MischiefSC, on 05 May 2016 - 07:16 PM, said:

A bunch of players tried to run 10 v 12 stuff in private matches.

This was an official test, 10 v 12, Clan v IS. I'm 99% certain it was TT values for Clan weapons, it's possible IS weapons were whatever they were 2 years ago, which was way nerfed over where they are now but I honestly don't remember. I think it ran a day? 2?

I do not think it put armor values back, just weapon values. Given that IS mechs were not stock and focus fire = win it was a face-roll non-stop no matter who was on what side. It was considered a definitive failure. If you do the Twitter thing you can probably find some of Russ' comments on it and why they were abandoning the idea. I think it was in announcements as well.

Uh huh... Yeah... So a few tests, for a few days, on a the PTS with 'some folks' constitutes a "thorough" and "official" test?

I'm not being salty at you, the sarcasm is for even the remotest possibility that PGI thought it was acceptable, and considering some of the absolutely untested **** they've foisted upon us in the past, IF what you say is true, it was a ******** non-event. Something staged so that PGI could say, "No, it won't work", giving themselves a cop out so that they wouldn't have to put the effort into writing a new match making mechanism.

The testing I remember on the PTS was just Clans v everything, 12-v-12, not just Clans v IS, and it was Clans at the value PGI was going to release the Clans at, at that time.

No... I'm not convinced there ever was a REAL "official" 10-v-12 Clans vs. IS test.

[Wintersdark]

Whether there was an official 10v12 test or not doesn't really matter. It's not a matter of "Can it work?" - or at least, not in the way a PTS run can help with.

The reasons against it are legion, but it mostly boils down to:

10v12 mech balance would require separation in the quick play queue adding extra burden on the matchmaker (what, there's only 9 appropriately ranked clanners in the queue? Hahah no match for you!)

10v12 Faction balance is WAY HARDER than 12v12 (mischief covered why)

So whether there was or wasn't, if it was "official" or just player organised, isn't really important. It wasn't a practical option from PGI's perspective.

[Sjorpha]

MischiefSC, on 05 May 2016 - 07:16 PM, said:

A bunch of players tried to run 10 v 12 stuff in private matches.

This was an official test, 10 v 12, Clan v IS. I'm 99% certain it was TT values for Clan weapons, it's possible IS weapons were whatever they were 2 years ago, which was way nerfed over where they are now but I honestly don't remember. I think it ran a day? 2?

I do not think it put armor values back, just weapon values. Given that IS mechs were not stock and focus fire = win it was a face-roll non-stop no matter who was on what side. It was considered a definitive failure. If you do the Twitter thing you can probably find some of Russ' comments on it and why they were abandoning the idea. I think it was in announcements as well.

This is how I remember it:

The player run 10 v 12 were just a bunch of players testing 10 v 12. SJR was one of the organizers. There was no altered stats, they simply tested the state of balance at clan release in a few 10 v 12s. It didn't "run a day or two" it was simply a few private matches, and there was nothing official about those matches as far as PGI was concerned, though Jager XII (I think it was him) posted the youtube videos on the forums afterwards.

The "official" clan vs IS balance test that PGI did was 12 v 12 in the public queue and it was simply the MM forcing teams of clan vs IS during a weekend. That came down very heavily in favor of the clans. I think they did it twice.

There was never any "TT stats" thing to any of this, though the clan weapons at release were closer to canon values than they are now.

It's possible my memory fails me, but since no one else except you seems to remember these "official TT stats 10 v12 tests" of yours I would rather bet on you being the one remembering this wrong.

And you are definitely wrong about this part:

Quote

it's possible IS weapons were whatever they were 2 years ago, which was way nerfed over where they are now but I honestly don't remember.

IS weapons have not been nerfed since clan release, they are generally speaking significantly stronger now than they were at the time of these tests, especially pulse lasers were terrible back then and did the same damage as normal lasers with duration being the only advantage. Those buffs are one of the reasons clan vs IS balance have improved.

The last big nerf to IS weapons was the big anti-poptart nerf package to PPC velocity etc, just before clan release, which also carried over to clan ERPPCs btw, followed by the next anti-poptart nerf to JJs that affected IS and clan equally and created the whole "hoverjet" meme, that one happened shortly after clan release.

Then the whole quirk thing started 3-4 months later.

Edited by Sjorpha, 06 May 2016 - 02:03 AM.

[L3mming2]

Lily from animove, on 02 May 2016 - 01:10 AM, said:

Don't worry, If its going to be a real bad system PGI will revert it.

i admire your positive thinking, are u by any chance a paleontologist?
as u seem to be at home with rather large time scales ..

[Y E O N N E]

Sjorpha, on 06 May 2016 - 01:49 AM, said:

IS weapons have not been nerfed since clan release, they are generally speaking significantly stronger now than they were at the time of these tests, especially pulse lasers were terrible back then and did the same damage as normal lasers with duration being the only advantage. Those buffs are one of the reasons clan vs IS balance have improved.

The last big nerf to IS weapons was the big anti-poptart nerf package to PPC velocity etc, just before clan release, which also carried over to clan ERPPCs btw, followed by the next anti-poptart nerf to JJs that affected IS and clan equally and created the whole "hoverjet" meme, that one happened shortly after clan release.

Then the whole quirk thing started 3-4 months later.

IS pulse have done more damage than the normal lasers since before the Clans. Small pulse did 3.4, medium pulse were the same as now at 6, and large pulse did 10.6. They did, however, generate more a little more heat, too.

Of note, MGs also did 1.0 DPS just before the Clan release and were awesome.

PPCs were nerfed one more time following Clan release, IIRC, lowering the velocity to AC/10 levels.

Then we had the laser re-work which buffed the damage on IS pulse lasers to where it is now while lowering the heat to the same values as their standard counterparts. The same rework also raised the burn duration on Clan lasers, which didn't go over well, so it was then changed to a heat increase and, later, a slight range nerf. IS ERLL got a duration nerf to 1.25 seconds (also somewhere between January 2014 and now, I could have sworn the IS ERLL went from 720 m optimum range to 675).

Much later..quirks happened, starting with extra armor/structure to the Hunchback, Awesome, and Centurion. Then Quirk Pass 1, which was actually great in that it specialized specific weapons rather than whole sets. Then the whining about being "forced" to use specific guns began, and Pass 2 went more general, then Pass 3 even more general still. We're currently on Pass 4, which reigned in those generic quirks. Pass 5 is coming in June.

Edited by Yeonne Greene, 06 May 2016 - 06:26 AM.

[Dimento Graven]

Wintersdark, on 06 May 2016 - 12:58 AM, said:

Whether there was an official 10v12 test or not doesn't really matter. It's not a matter of "Can it work?" - or at least, not in the way a PTS run can help with.

The reasons against it are legion, but it mostly boils down to:

10v12 mech balance would require separation in the quick play queue adding extra burden on the matchmaker (what, there's only 9 appropriately ranked clanners in the queue? Hahah no match for you!)

10v12 Faction balance is WAY HARDER than 12v12 (mischief covered why)

So whether there was or wasn't, if it was "official" or just player organised, isn't really important. It wasn't a practical option from PGI's perspective.

Sjorpha, on 06 May 2016 - 01:49 AM, said:

This is how I remember it:

The player run 10 v 12 were just a bunch of players testing 10 v 12. SJR was one of the organizers. There was no altered stats, they simply tested the state of balance at clan release in a few 10 v 12s. It didn't "run a day or two" it was simply a few private matches, and there was nothing official about those matches as far as PGI was concerned, though Jager XII (I think it was him) posted the youtube videos on the forums afterwards.

The "official" clan vs IS balance test that PGI did was 12 v 12 in the public queue and it was simply the MM forcing teams of clan vs IS during a weekend. That came down very heavily in favor of the clans. I think they did it twice.

There was never any "TT stats" thing to any of this, though the clan weapons at release were closer to canon values than they are now.

It's possible my memory fails me, but since no one else except you seems to remember these "official TT stats 10 v12 tests" of yours I would rather bet on you being the one remembering this wrong.

And you are definitely wrong about this part:


IS weapons have not been nerfed since clan release, they are generally speaking significantly stronger now than they were at the time of these tests, especially pulse lasers were terrible back then and did the same damage as normal lasers with duration being the only advantage. Those buffs are one of the reasons clan vs IS balance have improved.

The last big nerf to IS weapons was the big anti-poptart nerf package to PPC velocity etc, just before clan release, which also carried over to clan ERPPCs btw, followed by the next anti-poptart nerf to JJs that affected IS and clan equally and created the whole "hoverjet" meme, that one happened shortly after clan release.

Then the whole quirk thing started 3-4 months later.

Look the reality is the only 'true' 'official' tests were the Turkayyid events, plain and simple.

The real reason why we can't have 10v12 is because of what is now called the 'quick play' queues. It took PGI SO F'ING LONG to get us CW/FW that the stop gap of the 'quick play' queues has become the mainstay of the game, and therefore has become sacrosanct and untouchable.

[Sjorpha]

Yeonne Greene, on 06 May 2016 - 06:24 AM, said:

IS pulse have done more damage than the normal lasers since before the Clans. Small pulse did 3.4, medium pulse were the same as now at 6, and large pulse did 10.6. They did, however, generate more a little more heat, too.

Of note, MGs also did 1.0 DPS just before the Clan release and were awesome.

PPCs were nerfed one more time following Clan release, IIRC, lowering the velocity to AC/10 levels.

Right, it was the heat on pulses that made them bad back then, I misremembered that.

Dimento Graven, on 06 May 2016 - 06:45 AM, said:

Look the reality is the only 'true' 'official' tests were the Turkayyid events, plain and simple.

The real reason why we can't have 10v12 is because of what is now called the 'quick play' queues. It took PGI SO F'ING LONG to get us CW/FW that the stop gap of the 'quick play' queues has become the mainstay of the game, and therefore has become sacrosanct and untouchable.

I don't think many people think of the tuk events as balance tests, I certainly hope not.

They were completely decided by the population balance of the big competent merc units, plus the fact that the planet takeover system is biased towards attackers and the last batch of matches deciding the final percentage.

Edited by Sjorpha, 06 May 2016 - 06:56 AM.

[Dimento Graven]

Sjorpha, on 06 May 2016 - 06:55 AM, said:

...

I don't think many people think of the tuk events as balance tests, I certainly hope not.

They were completely decided by the population balance of the big competent merc units, plus the fact that the planet takeover system is biased towards attackers and the last batch of matches deciding the final percentage.

Whether or not people of think of them as such, they really were.

It was conducted over a significant stint of time, with thousands of matches being played, ensuring (as much as possible) the widest variety of 'mechs and play styles were employed.

Yeah, unfortunately the big Merc units skewed the results, but the basic quantitative data was gathered, information like, the amount of damage on average it takes to destroy an average IS 'mech vs an average Clan 'mech. The amount of damage an average IS 'mech can put out vs the average damage a Clan 'mech can put out. Data like that could point to significant systemic balance issues that would need to be addressed.

[Y E O N N E]

Dimento Graven, on 06 May 2016 - 07:06 AM, said:

Whether or not people of think of them as such, they really were.

It was conducted over a significant stint of time, with thousands of matches being played, ensuring (as much as possible) the widest variety of 'mechs and play styles were employed.

Yeah, unfortunately the big Merc units skewed the results, but the basic quantitative data was gathered, information like, the amount of damage on average it takes to destroy an average IS 'mech vs an average Clan 'mech. The amount of damage an average IS 'mech can put out vs the average damage a Clan 'mech can put out. Data like that could point to significant systemic balance issues that would need to be addressed.

Even that data is tainted, since those averages do depend on players' shooting and spreading skills; a good player will kill a Timberwolf more efficiently than a bad one, for instance, and one side had way more good players.

[Gas Guzzler]

Dimento Graven, on 06 May 2016 - 06:45 AM, said:

Look the reality is the only 'true' 'official' tests were the Turkayyid events, plain and simple.

Really? Tukayyid events were the real official balance tests?

Maybe a test of "skill" balance between Clan and IS.

Or a test of how well Clan Wolf can gen rush over and over again. Either way, there are so many aspects of a CW that make it not actually a good test of tech balance.

Edited by Gas Guzzler, 06 May 2016 - 07:31 AM.

[cazidin]

Yeonne Greene, on 06 May 2016 - 06:24 AM, said:

Much later..quirks happened, starting with extra armor/structure to the Hunchback, Awesome, and Centurion. Then Quirk Pass 1, which was actually great in that it specialized specific weapons rather than whole sets. Then the whining about being "forced" to use specific guns began, and Pass 2 went more general, then Pass 3 even more general still. We're currently on Pass 4, which reigned in those generic quirks. Pass 5 is coming in June.

The Quirkening V:Age of the Spider?

[Dimento Graven]

Yeonne Greene, on 06 May 2016 - 07:10 AM, said:

Even that data is tainted, since those averages do depend on players' shooting and spreading skills; a good player will kill a Timberwolf more efficiently than a bad one, for instance, and one side had way more good players.

Gas Guzzler, on 06 May 2016 - 07:31 AM, said:

Really? Tukayyid events were the real official balance tests?

Maybe a test of "skill" balance between Clan and IS.

Or a test of how well Clan Wolf can gen rush over and over again. Either way, there are so many aspects of a CW that make it not actually a good test of tech balance.

Gee, that's only true if you assume that only one side or the other had "good" pilots and the other side was comprised primarily of "bad" pilots.

If you're looking for the average difference on all scales of skill, Turkayyid would be the perfect event to gather that information.

Zero mixing of technologies, controlled weight limits, lots and lots and lots of matches with lots and lots and lots of players all of differing skills.

End result, the numbers you get would be an absolute average.

[Y E O N N E]

cazidin, on 06 May 2016 - 07:36 AM, said:

The Quirkening V:Age of the Spider?

I'm game for that. Spider was the first 'Mech I ever played, I wouldn't mind having a reason to actually buy them.

Dimento Graven, on 06 May 2016 - 08:22 AM, said:

Gee, that's only true if you assume that only one side or the other had "good" pilots and the other side was comprised primarily of "bad" pilots.

If you're looking for the average difference on all scales of skill, Turkayyid would be the perfect event to gather that information.

Zero mixing of technologies, controlled weight limits, lots and lots and lots of matches with lots and lots and lots of players all of differing skills.

End result, the numbers you get would be an absolute average.

See, but you have to assume that one side was not composed primarily of bad pilots, so your position is no stronger, and I would say it is weaker in light of the fact that we can go back and see who was playing for whom.

Edited by Yeonne Greene, 06 May 2016 - 08:26 AM.