60 replies to this topic

[Chimera_]

Just wanted to post this real quick. I asked Russ a few minutes ago about IIC quirks (since the Kodiak got some), and he just now posted this.

https://twitter.com/...199033725702144

It's great news I think, since I had seen no indication they were even thinking about it.

I think the general consensus is that the ON1-IIC needs better durability and the HGN-IIC needs better agility.

Thoughts?

[Wintersdark]

Chimera11, on 13 May 2016 - 11:23 AM, said:

I think the general consensus is that the ON1-IIC needs better durability and the HGN-IIC needs better agility.

Agreed. Jenner and HBK are fine. ON1 some structure and HGN some twist/turn and I'm happy.

[Chimera_]

Wintersdark, on 13 May 2016 - 11:24 AM, said:

Agreed. Jenner and HBK are fine. ON1 some structure and HGN some twist/turn and I'm happy.

Yeah, I'm 100% happy with my HBK IICs, but only the ON1-IIC-C feels any good to me. Most of the onions are set with brawler hardpoints, but lack the durability to stay in a sustained brawl. I didn't buy the HGN, but with its low engine cap and no agility quirks...it's basically a given.

[Snowbluff]

I like my 3 HUnchback IIC, but I generally prefer the Arctic Cheetah over my Jenner IIC.

[Adamski]

Hooray! Let the Power Creeping begin jogging!

WTF are they thinking giving quirks to mechs that have access to all the clan equipment and upgrades and weapons, with the only downside being fixed hardpoint locations and a smaller engine cap on the HGN-IIC

Any model / hitbox issues really better be fixed by the release of the rescaling next month, so no excuse to leave those weaknesses on the table.

[Chimera_]

Adamski, on 13 May 2016 - 01:11 PM, said:

Hooray! Let the Power Creeping begin jogging!

WTF are they thinking giving quirks to mechs that have access to all the clan equipment and upgrades and weapons, with the only downside being fixed hardpoint locations and a smaller engine cap on the HGN-IIC

Any model / hitbox issues really better be fixed by the release of the rescaling next month, so no excuse to leave those weaknesses on the table.

That argument would make sense prior to the IIC release, but not anymore. On paper the ON1 and HGN might look impressive, but in use they have major shortcomings. Have you even played them?

Also, we're talking about battlemechs here, not omnis. The ON1-IIC and HGN-IIC both have missile-heavy hardpoint setups but are poorly suited to using them currently. We can't swap the pods for the ideal setup, you get what you get.

If you don't think underperforming mechs should be buffed to be on par with most other mechs (or at least somewhat comparable), you're advocating for poor balance.

[Adamski]

I play the IS versions of the ON1 and HGN, the IIC versions are stronger without a doubt.

If Russ wants Paul to take a balancing pass at all of the IS & Clan mechs, and also their weapon stats, that is fine.

But buffing the IIC mechs because they cannot boat your preferred weapon type or for your playstyle is ridiculous. They aren't like the IS versions that have to boat weapons that are quirked or be left in the dust.

[Felicitatem Parco]

Adamski, on 13 May 2016 - 01:51 PM, said:

I play the IS versions of the ON1 and HGN, the IIC versions are stronger without a doubt.

If Russ wants Paul to take a balancing pass at all of the IS & Clan mechs, and also their weapon stats, that is fine.

But buffing the IIC mechs because they cannot boat your preferred weapon type or for your playstyle is ridiculous. They aren't like the IS versions that have to boat weapons that are quirked or be left in the dust.

. Many, many others disagree and feel that the IS versions are better with their quirks

[Mcgral18]

Chimera11, on 13 May 2016 - 01:48 PM, said:

That argument would make sense prior to the IIC release, but not anymore. On paper the ON1 and HGN might look impressive, but in use they have major shortcomings. Have you even played them?

Also, we're talking about battlemechs here, not omnis. The ON1-IIC and HGN-IIC both have missile-heavy hardpoint setups but are poorly suited to using them currently. We can't swap the pods for the ideal setup, you get what you get.

If you don't think underperforming mechs should be buffed to be on par with most other mechs (or at least somewhat comparable), you're advocating for poor balance.

The issue is...power creep

Every 50 tonner used to be as squishy as the Hunch 2C (even moreso, without HoverJets and cXL, along with the half damage instead of 60% damage reduction)


There are more guns, cooler weapons, faster mechs in this game than their used to be. Not exclusively due to quirks, but in large part due to them.


At this point, we're adding bandaids (Initial IS quirks to combat OP AF Clams) on top of bandaids (Terribad Clam quirks because they're worse than their IS counterparts) on top of bandaids (Top tier IS mechs now rubbish because of quirks, previous Trash Tier made God Tier due to quirks) on top of bandaids (quirking weapons instead of changing their base values, thus balance will always be dependant on a select few mechs who is either more durable, harder hitting, cooler....or, as PGI has created, all of the above).


More quirks likely isn't the answer in this case...aside from the LowLander. PGI gimped him hard with HoverJets™

[Chimera_]

Mcgral18, on 13 May 2016 - 02:24 PM, said:

More quirks likely isn't the answer in this case...aside from the LowLander. PGI gimped him hard with HoverJets™

I'm speaking in terms of what's actually realistic for making the underperformers better. We can always speak in hypotheticals and about our dislike of certain systems in the game, but really quirks seem to be here to stay. I'd love for the game to be reworked from the ground up, with every system re-evaluated and remade, but that's just not at all realistic.

With what we have, right now, I think quirking the ON1-IIC and HGN-IIC to be better mechs is the only real option. They're unlikely to spend any money and effort into reworking them as a whole (hitboxes, models, etc.), even with the rescale going on.

I don't disagree with you and I do think the quirk system is pretty crappy and would love to see a replacement, but I have no reason to think that'll ever happen.

[Narcissistic Martyr]

Wintersdark, on 13 May 2016 - 11:24 AM, said:

Agreed. Jenner and HBK are fine. ON1 some structure and HGN some twist/turn and I'm happy.

I'd argue that the Hunchie IIC with 4 ballistics hard points could use some slight UAC20 jam rate quirks to even it up a bit with the C version that can actually shoot down UAVs and hit lights up close.

[Snowbluff]

Narcissistic Martyr, on 13 May 2016 - 02:37 PM, said:

I'd argue that the Hunchie IIC with 4 ballistics hard points could use some slight UAC20 jam rate quirks to even it up a bit with the C version that can actually shoot down UAVs and hit lights up close.

The 4B/2E should probably get quirks, yes. It's worse than the 2B/4E by a pretty wide margin, since carrying 4 ballastic weapons is kind of insane. I like x4 AC2, though.

[Adamski]

Snowbluff, on 13 May 2016 - 02:42 PM, said:

The 4B/2E should probably get quirks, yes. It's worse than the 2B/4E by a pretty wide margin, since carrying 4 ballastic weapons is kind of insane. I like x4 AC2, though.

OMFG, just because it has hardpoints doesn't mean you have to fill them. Just run it with 2x UAC10.

If you want to fill up every single hardpoint it has for a joke build, doesn't mean the mech needs quirks to make your joke build viable.

The HBK-4G has 3 Ballistic hardpoints, but only utilizes 1 of them on the best builds. (Without getting into how even with its quirks, the HBK-4G is < than the HBK-IIC)

[Moldur]

Unless you think these quirks make the IICs the best mechs in their respective weight classes, then the argument of powercreep is pointless. Unless you want to extend your argument and explain why powercreep is or is not ok in terms of whatever the previous and current 'best mechs' are, then don't start some pick-and-choose argument against the IICs because you're just making yourself look dumb.

[Adamski]

I'm not going to get into a stupid argument over which 50 ton mech is the best 50 ton mech.

I am going to stand by my opinion that the HBK-IIC along with all of its variants are in a balanced state right now, and do not need assistance from quirks to perform.

[Chimera_]

It's a good idea for everyone to keep in mind that the "IICs" are 4 mechs, all different from each other. In general, the HBK and Jenner are much better performers than the ON1 and HGN. I don't think the Jenner or HBK need any quirks, but I do think the ON1 and HGN do.

Making blanket statements about them as a whole is silly, since they vary so wildly in effectiveness.

Edited by Chimera11, 13 May 2016 - 03:19 PM.

[Adamski]

Here's where I'm coming from:

ON1-IIC > ON1-P
HGN-IIC > HGN-HM

So it is hard for me to swallow the IIC mechs getting a balance pass distinct from a general balance pass, especially after the big sloppy felatio that the Kodiak just received. (Most notably the KDK-SB having both MASC and 30%+ movement and twist quirks)

[Adamski]

I also may be unnecessarily salty after they "reviewed" the Vindicator and left it in the crap heap.

I just have ZERO trust that Paul & Russ can even see straight enough to do the right thing anymore.

[Chimera_]

Adamski, on 13 May 2016 - 03:22 PM, said:

Here's where I'm coming from:

ON1-IIC > ON1-P
HGN-IIC > HGN-HM

So it is hard for me to swallow the IIC mechs getting a balance pass distinct from a general balance pass, especially after the big sloppy felatio that the Kodiak just received. (Most notably the KDK-SB having both MASC and 30%+ movement and twist quirks)

To be fair though, neither of those heroes are particularly good, even among their own chassis. In general, I think both the ON1-V (2x UAC 5, 2 LL) and ON1-VA (4 SRM4A + AC10/20) are all around better mechs than any of the ON1-IICs. They have major defensive and offensive quirks, and have slightly better hitboxes. ON1-IICs could likely outgun them, but it's ridiculously easy to strip an ON1-IIC.

For the Highlander I can only speak with experience for the IS HGN, as I didn't buy the IIC after seeing its stats. Once again, I think the HGN-732B is quite easily a better mech than any of the HGN-IICs. It might be more of a toss-up between the weaker IS HGNs vs the IICs, but the 732B has amazing structure, agility and offensive quirks. Having brawled against HGN-IICs, I can say their lack of agility is a major issue and they can be very easily outmaneuvered even by other assaults.

I don't want to make this into a silly war, I simply think the ON1-IIC and HGN-IIC are very subpar, even against their already mediocre IS counterparts.

[Adamski]

So you admit that the IIC mechs are better than some IS variants but worse than others, but they still need to be buffed? Are they then only balanced once they are better than every IS variant?