9 replies to this topic

[James Warren]

For a long time I've wondered what it would be like if the 'mechs were balanced around each weight class, rather than their individual tonnage.

We have 'mechs like the Catapult, Commando and Mist Lynx that will never be competitive within their respective weight class in the current system. Some people say they aren't meant to be - this would agree with the game lore but doesn't make them any more rewarding to play.

I would say the medium weight class almost balances this way already, where the lighter mediums have a slightly different role but aren't (for the most part) totally outclassed by the heavier mediums - and its good!

Opinions?

Pros:

• Many more viable choices in regular game play.

Cons:

• Requires changes to CW FW drop deck system.
  
• Disregards game lore.
  
• Would likely require ridiculous quirks.

[Johnny Z]

Balance is amazing right now considering this is the toughest game to balance ever. Aside from a few minor issues and that info warfare and energy pool will be added later, as well as quite a few more mechs.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

IMO, ideally this game should focus more on making both mechs in a class equal and classes equal to each other so that the game can take the more Overwatch/TF2 approach, but I don't see that happening anytime soon. Considering the dislike for tonnage based balance though (PGI tourney uses classes, and so does the main comp league left), class based should be the focus.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Mechs like the Catapult require balance through maps and weapons allowing for proper use of their main weapon systems. Right now LRms are an utter joke. They seem to be either OP as ****, or UP as ****, there doesnt seem to be an in between there.

The current meta of the game and the way it plays out pretty much means you gotta bring a mech that can go toe to toe with stuff and that leaves behind mechs like the Archer and Catapult, at least their LRM, or fire support variants.

Maybe in a PVE environment, where the playstyle is a little more calculated, slow, methodical and tactical, mechs like the Catapult will fit in perfectly.

[Darky101]

What i dont get about the lurms is why there is a diferent cooldown time on them.
Simplest thing would be to let the lurms do proper damage but have an equaly high cooldown across the board.
This way lurms could become the good fire support weapons they are supposed to be.

[ScarecrowES]

The thing is... classes, as you say, aren't the important thing. ROLES are the important thing. A 40-ton mech should be operating very differently than a 55-ton mech, even though they're in the same weight class. Many people want a 40-ton mech and a 55-ton mech to be equal and equivalent, and that's a huge mistake.

A 40-ton mech shouldn't be built to do the same job as a 55-tonner. And it shouldn't be played the same way as a 55-tonner. Look at mechs like the Viper and Stormcrow, for instance. Those mechs should appeal to completely different playstyles.

When looking at balance, the heavier mech will always be better overall. It's going to carry more guns, more armor... it's just MORE. However, that doesn't mean that it's going to perform straight-up better. The lighter mech has an opportunity to overcome its written deficiencies and bring something different to the table... usually speed. And as any light or medium pilot will tell you, speed is an oft-underrated factor that can overcome even the worst hardpoints and least armor.

So you need to look at roles. What a 40-ton mech does vs a 55-tonner. You have to consider that for balance, too.

[James Warren]

ScarecrowES, on 27 May 2016 - 02:16 PM, said:

A 40-ton mech shouldn't be built to do the same job as a 55-tonner. And it shouldn't be played the same way as a 55-tonner. Look at mechs like the Viper and Stormcrow, for instance. Those mechs should appeal to completely different playstyles.

So you need to look at roles. What a 40-ton mech does vs a 55-tonner. You have to consider that for balance, too.

I completely agree. I love 'mechs like the Ice Ferret (its really not as bad as everyone thinks it is) and what I mean by the medium 'mechs being balanced with one another for the most part - the faster ones can compete with the slower, more heavily armed ones.

Unfortunately you don't see the same thing happen in say the light 'mech bracket. A Commando, for instance, has speed on an Arctic Cheetah, but not enough to make up for 5 extra tons. I'd hate them to be the 'same', but I'd love them to both be valid, competitive choices for their own strengths.

[ScarecrowES]

James Warren, on 27 May 2016 - 02:58 PM, said:

I completely agree. I love 'mechs like the Ice Ferret (its really not as bad as everyone thinks it is) and what I mean by the medium 'mechs being balanced with one another for the most part - the faster ones can compete with the slower, more heavily armed ones.

Unfortunately you don't see the same thing happen in say the light 'mech bracket. A Commando, for instance, has speed on an Arctic Cheetah, but not enough to make up for 5 extra tons. I'd hate them to be the 'same', but I'd love them to both be valid, competitive choices for their own strengths.

Well, part of this is a limit in the availability of roles. MWO focuses on one aspect of mech combat, smacking weapons into the opposing side. It ignores things like information warfare, scouting, ranged support, etc. If you aren't good at point-and-shoot damage, you're the poor cousin to mechs that are. That's no so much the mech's fault, as it is for PGI ignoring whole swaths of Battletech combat.

But, if you've got two mechs, approximately the same weight, approximately the same role, then yes, THOSE should probably be reasonably balanced against each other.

[wanderer]

Darky101, on 27 May 2016 - 02:11 PM, said:

What i dont get about the lurms is why there is a diferent cooldown time on them.
Simplest thing would be to let the lurms do proper damage but have an equaly high cooldown across the board.
This way lurms could become the good fire support weapons they are supposed to be.

Amusingly enough, in TT (and I'm talking Solaris VII rules, where everything does NOT have the same rate of fire), all LRM launchers fire at the same rate.

Instead, in MWO bigger launchers not only tend to cost more in weight and critical spaces, they're penalized with wider missile spread AND longer reload times. But I digress.

Honestly, weightwise 'Mechs shouldn't be strictly divided by light/medium/heavy/assault. It should be 5 different tonnage slots- 20-30,35-50,-55-65,70-85,90-100. I've said it before, and I'll happily say it again any time.

[Chuck Jager]

if each player is making the choice and there is not a shoot on refusal to follow orders rule (or similar harsh penalty) all mechs need to have a similar potential output but only with different playstyles revolving around damage.

It is not PGIs job to change the online player base to be focused on anything else other than damage. Most attempts for scouting or otherwise have resulted in more losses if the team is trying for the basic objective. TT and this game are way to different for roles and individual choices in mechs for the team tonnage.

It is the reality of Santa Claus VS the Story of Santa Claus. They are similar but exist in different realities.