295 replies to this topic

[Darian DelFord]

I actually support this..... with a caveat


Skill Tree needs to be the next priority IMHO..... you want to diversity this game (which is sorely needed) come up with unique trees for every chassis. Specialize your mech at the cost of other areas...... seriously this should have been done years ago.

[Stone Wall]

Mystere, on 17 July 2016 - 07:47 AM, said:

Here's one way: 10 Clan vs. 12 IS.

And those 2 extra IS being Lights. Then your team of IS mechs can win or lose the game based on those Lights. If they act like some Light pilots, then they will run in and die in the first minute. If they are vets, they will scout/capture points/stab mechs in the back/kill enemy scouts.

[Bishop Steiner]

Pariah Devalis, on 17 July 2016 - 07:25 AM, said:

Seconded, but with a small caveat:

Adjust base weapon stats based on the average amount of quirking that has proved necessary for various weapon systems to become viable in play.


Honestly, I could take or leave this condition, but we all know several weapon systems do need improvements, and the solutions have been staring us in the face for quite some time. Dumping the quirks entirely allows the weapons to be buffed directly, without pushing anything beyond the line.

Definitely. PGI knows that virtually th eonly time a PPC is mounted is on a mech with 40-50% PPC velocity quirks. So common sense is... that the PPC probably need 40% more velocity. Do that and one can feel free to bring the heat back up (whereas IMO, LLs need to go back to an 8/8 scenario, too, LPLs need heat increased, etc)

[Spleenslitta]

I don't select my mechs based on quirks...heck i barelly pay attention to the location and number of weapon slots.
I only care about running speed, torso/arm twist limitations/speed, JJ/ECM and most importantly.....appearance of the mech.

Keep the quirks. Bury the quirks. Cut quirks in half. Fry them for all i care. I don't care about quirks.
If i want an ER PPC on my Firestarter i install one and don't give a damn what the latest fashion statement regarding mech builds is.
Do whatever.

[Tarl Cabot]

Acehilator, on 17 July 2016 - 07:41 AM, said:

Sounds good. Problem is Clan vs IS balance for FW. Without quirks, IS is pretty much screwed.

/edit: Oh, and of course, we all know how fast and iterative PGI works. Getting quirks back to an acceptable level would take what? Half a year?

There is that, never mind most mercs would go Clan that would allow them to carve out sections of the IS. But there is also the following...

Xocoyol Zaraoul, on 17 July 2016 - 07:42 AM, said:

A lot of things would be screwed without quirks, this would just allow us to see the true capabilities of mechs and rebalance from there, adding quirks if needed, or "tweaking" clan balance to bring them in line if needed.

Not really as it would be a stacked deck in the Clan's flavor when organized units go Clan.

Quote

Nuke all the quirks. Take us back to day zero, whatever. Let's get a feel for what each mech can do.

All quirks would not just be the weapon and the structural quirks but also the acceleration, deceleration and turn rate quirks. Those quirks that were added when the SKILL tree was nuked, leaving just the roaches, nor are they locked but being modified with the quirks.

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 17 July 2016 - 08:03 AM.

[Monkey Lover]

Mystere, on 17 July 2016 - 07:47 AM, said:

Here's one way: 10 Clan vs. 12 IS.

Not many people would be cool with using junker mechs even if the game was balanced.

[Trauglodyte]

I foresee all of the quirks going away post-GH 2.0

[C E Dwyer]

I'd agree, but some weapons would need a baseline buff before it happened.

ER/PPC's speed
LB10 LRM15 LRM20 damage spread reduced.

currently LRM20 LB10 are useless as are LRM15 unless you take artemis and then still less cost effective than LRM10.

ER/PPC's are only worth taking on mechs where speed is buffed currently

Streak 2 also need a change, to make them useful.

This change of course means your throwing FW under the bus, but shrugs, currently its not worth spending the effort it requires to play it properly

Edited by Cathy, 17 July 2016 - 07:59 AM.

[Baulven]

Xocoyol Zaraoul, on 17 July 2016 - 07:48 AM, said:

I read it as they have quirk ideas after the pass, as this isn't a "permanent" idea to de-quirk everything.

At least, I wrote my suggestion with that intent.

If that's the case it isn't so bad but I was reading it as "yea take em off! You know, except this and that, those over there, these couple here..."

[Bishop Steiner]

Acehilator, on 17 July 2016 - 07:41 AM, said:

Sounds good. Problem is Clan vs IS balance for FW. Without quirks, IS is pretty much screwed.

/edit: Oh, and of course, we all know how fast and iterative PGI works. Getting quirks back to an acceptable level would take what? Half a year?

so the answer is to stay stupid skewed and overquirked, because? Not my style.

Trauglodyte, on 17 July 2016 - 07:42 AM, said:

I'm all for quirks going away. BUT, I think that weapon quirks are fine IF they're only activated by putting specific weapons in specific locations. The Warhammer should have PPC quirks if PPCs are equipped AND they're put in the arms. The rest of the garbage that we have needs to go away.

I got russ talking about that once, like 6 or more months ago.... was supposed to look in to it, I think... you know, working as intended and all. But totally agree.

TercieI, on 17 July 2016 - 07:44 AM, said:

They're actually pulling them back incrementally. This is good. Tables get flipped too often here, I see no reason to do that again.

They are.

Incrementally though rarely ends up actually in balance, because you are still comparing it against other artificially inflated numbers. It's one reason Weapon Balance has never been nailed down... there was never a baseline set to begin with.

[El Bandito]

I recall you made a similar thread over a year ago. Power creep did not abate, it seems.

http://mwomercs.com/...eset-on-quirks/

I also made another thread about it 5 months ago.

http://mwomercs.com/...moving-upwards/

Edited by El Bandito, 17 July 2016 - 08:07 AM.

[Trauglodyte]

Cathy, on 17 July 2016 - 07:57 AM, said:

I'd agree, but some weapons would need a baseline buff before it happened.

ER/PPC's speed
LB10 LRM15 LRM20 damage spread reduced.

currently LRM20 LB10 are useless as are LRM15 unless you take artemis and then still less cost effective than LRM10.

ER/PPC's are only worth taking on mechs where speed is buffed currently

Streak 2 also need a change, to make them useful.

This change of course means your throwing FW under the bus, but shrugs, currently its not worth spending the effort it requires to play it properly

Like I said before, certain weapons are going to need weapon quirks for specific chassis. I have no issue with the PPC quirks because I'd rather they be very good on specific mechs than create a situation where everyone is running around with them.

LRMs, on the other hand, need a lot of freaking help. But, that is less about quirks and more about bad design mechanics.

[Bishop Steiner]

Acehilator, on 17 July 2016 - 07:47 AM, said:

Yeah, but still with the Dartboard of Doom. Case in Point: Blackjack, Quickdraw, severity of Warhammer/Marauder Nerfs. Still totally mindboggling.

not entirely, IF PGI actually follows through for the first time in 4 year history of MWO. And that's the other reason I dislike this handful here/handful there, approach..... usually before they get done, too much QQ has caused them to reverse course, leaving everything in a perpetual state of flux.

Darian DelFord, on 17 July 2016 - 07:49 AM, said:

I actually support this..... with a caveat


Skill Tree needs to be the next priority IMHO..... you want to diversity this game (which is sorely needed) come up with unique trees for every chassis. Specialize your mech at the cost of other areas...... seriously this should have been done years ago.

Agreed, for sure.

[Ted Wayz]

Only if everything goes to TT values at the same time. Removing quirks will not fix the fact that some mechs are not in line with their TT values.

The biggest effect of your proposal will be in regards to mobility. Take a look at mechs with mobility quirks and now imagine them without them.

[Bishop Steiner]

Tarl Cabot, on 17 July 2016 - 07:51 AM, said:

There is that, never mind most mercs would go Clan that would allow them to carve out sections of the IS. But there is also the following...

If PGI had had the balls to be specific and rigid with ideas like "CLANS DON'T USE MERCS" in the first place, that would be less an issue, yes? And if switching factions actually had real penalties......

[Tarl Cabot]

The engine destruction disparate, particularly between isXL and cXL, should be reviewed and changed, more so for FP and group queue than for solo queue.

Of course, the quirk removal would be a huge change that would cause ripple effects, things we blame PGI doing many times. But getting a base line without quirks with no other changes or adjustments, how would that really affect the population, ESPECIALLY if PGI did not have save the current data to revert it back? You know PGI would not have a "revised" quirk system in place since they would be using stats.

It would have to run on the PTS server, and with emphasis for players to run on that server more often than the live servers.

[Bishop Steiner]

Ted Wayz, on 17 July 2016 - 08:09 AM, said:

Only if everything goes to TT values at the same time. Removing quirks will not fix the fact that some mechs are not in line with their TT values.

The biggest effect of your proposal will be in regards to mobility. Take a look at mechs with mobility quirks and now imagine them without them.

I would be fine with that, too. And hey, I played the game before all the added agility was a thing (old school closed beta)... I would be fine with mobility to going back to what was. (Instead of this odd mix of haves and have nots)

[Ted Wayz]

Brandarr Gunnarson, on 17 July 2016 - 07:44 AM, said:

I'm all for this.

But, if you strip off all the quirks that means Clan 'Mechs will be inherently more durable than IS because of cXL ST survivability.

That needs to be addressed.

At this point I think introducing engine crits is the right way to go and that an engine crit system needs to be in place before doing this.

Quirks came about mainly because PGI cannot balance stars versus lances and tried to make IS mechs as effective as clan mechs. Just sad.

[Stone Wall]

Monkey Lover, on 17 July 2016 - 07:52 AM, said:

Not many people would be cool with using junker mechs even if the game was balanced.

Using OP mechs is fun for 2 minutes, then the fun for me and some people is using the "trash" mechs with success.

Edited by Stone Wall, 17 July 2016 - 08:13 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Tarl Cabot, on 17 July 2016 - 08:10 AM, said:

The engine destruction disparate, particularly between isXL and cXL, should be reviewed and changed, more so for FP and group queue than for solo queue.

Of course, the quirk removal would be a huge change that would cause ripple effects, things we blame PGI doing many times. But getting a base line without quirks with no other changes or adjustments, how would that really affect the population, ESPECIALLY if PGI did not have save the current data to revert it back? You know PGI would not have a "revised" quirk system in place since they would be using stats.

It would have to run on the PTS server, and with emphasis for players to run on that server more often than the live servers.

Well, PGI actually ******* up and allowing people to keep PTS earnings, etc, might help. Probably sweeten the spot with free mechbays, special sales you can only access from the PTS (maybe with unlocks, like tourneys) and maybe even... PTS events.

PGI wants players to have the common sense to realize playing the PTS is actually for their own benefit, but most people today are simply too shortsighted to understand that, so you have to lure em in with treats and attaboys.