314 replies to this topic

[Darian DelFord]

Cathy, on 21 July 2016 - 12:45 PM, said:

Or how you get C-bills and X.P to master that light mech, with the current system.

?

[operatorZ]

MischiefSC, on 21 July 2016 - 12:37 PM, said:

You know what I meant

I know, I know, couldn't resist

[Jables McBarty]

operatorZ, on 21 July 2016 - 11:42 AM, said:

First thing, forget what Russ says. It's not reality.

By revamp the whole system I mean they would have to change the underlying premise of the entire weapons, weight, armor and engine relationship. As it stands lighter means less armor, less weapons. These quirks are all about giving mechs more of something. Structure buffs give a mech more armour essentially, weapon buffs essentially give a mech more weapons. But the whole system is locked into a weight = more dynamic. Many people feel that lights are asking to be quirked to levels where they compete on a similar damage and kill level as other mechs. The problem is to do that would make lights way OP because they are in fact smaller and faster.

Other games such as WOT and WOW have these kind of dynamics and the very same arguments go on in thier forums. The exact same arguments.

This particular argument has been going on since I joined, the exact argument, even the same people arguing.

Do I agree that light mechs are subpar for most players ability to deal similar damage as a heavy? Yes, Hell Yes.

But it's beyond ridiculous for people piloting a smaller, lighter, less weapons mech to expect to achieve similar damage stats to a heavy. It's not how the game is set up. The very premise of the entire franchise is based on heavier = more.

I have no problem with bonusing light payouts for scores that are above average for their class, PGI should do this. A light that gets 250 damage a game should be treated like a heavy that gets 400 damage score wise. I see no reason not to do this.

If lights as a class where to be made as combat viable as other mechs they would have to be a similar size as heavies to account for their current advantage. They would either have to sacrifice speed or firepower, otherwise that would be an advantage. Then give all mechs the same hit points with the only trade offs being speed and firepower. This in no way sounds like a game I want to play, because now it's essentially COD with robots.

In essence the changes that could be made "in system" would make lights very much like mediums. So why have different classes at all.

Have lights ever been balanced? Please somebody tell me a time or a change that would make them balanced? and what balance are we going for? Damage? Points? C bills? Kills? Over the last 2 years many changes have occurred to balance that effects lights and even after all that the same complaints arise. the reason is that you can't balance something that at its very core is an unbalanced system.

I'm tired of this endless griping on both sides. All I can say is if lights aren't fun for you....stop playing them. Because expecting lights to be as combat viable, on average, as heavier mechs is fool's errand. You are arguing against the very game mechanics. It's not happening.

I don't play lights hardly at all, they are not fun to me, they take wayyyy more concentration than I am willing to put forward for this game. They are harder than heavies. Does that mean I shouldn't be allowed to voice my opinion? I am sure I will hear just that.

I don't have a problem with lights, they kill me I kill them, but I am sure I will be written off as just a "fatty" pilot.

Lot going on here. I'll break down my responses....

Quote

Many people feel that lights are asking to be quirked to levels where they compete on a similar damage and kill level as other mechs. The problem is to do that would make lights way OP because they are in fact smaller and faster.

I have to fundamentally disagree with this assertion. If in a game focused around TDR, and therefore around damage or kills, all 'mechs achieve the same average damage, then none are OP. If some are super-fast glass cannons BB guns while others are lumbering bunkers, that's fine. You have different playstyles, and there is balance.

On a very basic level, this is what we as light pilots take offense to--the concept that a well-performing light is inherently OP.

And I want to note that lights don't need to post high damage--just lots of effective damage, which is usually damage to legs or rear torsos. Yet any time an assault or heavy gets cored out in the back by a light, they come to the forums to cry, and PGI listens to them.

Quote

But it's beyond ridiculous for people piloting a smaller, lighter, less weapons mech to expect to achieve similar damage stats to a heavy. It's not how the game is set up. The very premise of the entire franchise is based on heavier = more.

But it's not. More tonnage does not always equal more. It means more armor, more HS, more ammo, more equipmonk, and more weapons, but it also means lower speeds, and (theoretically) lower agility. However because so many heavy and assault (and also medium) 'mechs have agility quirks, lights are losing on agility. This can be remedied by nerfing heavy agility or buffing light agility.

I'm not necessarily asking for weapons or structure/armor buffs, as you are right, it blurs the lines between the chassis. But the one thing that the light class should excel at is given away for free to all other classes. We end up with a superstar agility 'mech--the Locust--and it's immediately nerfed because people can't hit it--but THAT'S THE POINT.

Quote

If lights as a class where to be made as combat viable as other mechs they would have to be a similar size as heavies to account for their current advantage. They would either have to sacrifice speed or firepower, otherwise that would be an advantage. Then give all mechs the same hit points with the only trade offs being speed and firepower. This in no way sounds like a game I want to play, because now it's essentially COD with robots.

Again, I have to fundamentally disagree with you on this. We can have a combat-viable, small, lightly armed, lightly armored, but incredibly fast and agile 'mech that is combat-viable. Maybe it's because I had been playing MOBAs for a while before I came back to the MechWarrior franchise, but balance doesn't mean equivalence. Not everything needs the same hit points and damage output to have a niche.

Quote

I don't play lights hardly at all, they are not fun to me, they take wayyyy more concentration than I am willing to put forward for this game. They are harder than heavies. Does that mean I shouldn't be allowed to voice my opinion? I am sure I will hear just that.

I don't have a problem with lights, they kill me I kill them, but I am sure I will be written off as just a "fatty" pilot.

Well, to be fair, you are. But here's the shocker: So am I. My most-played chassis is the HGN-IIC (across all variants). I learned on lights, and I own the most lights, and probably have more matches in the light class than any other. But I've also learned the assault and heavy classes, and am slowly stubbing my toes on the mediums.

But the difference between fatty pilots like you and me, and other fatty pilots is that we "don't have a problem with lights, they kill me and I kill them," whereas there is a very vocal segment of the fatty community that does have a problem with them, and believes the killing relationship should only go one way.

Quote

Have lights ever been balanced? Please somebody tell me a time or a change that would make them balanced? and what balance are we going for? Damage? Points? C bills? Kills? Over the last 2 years many changes have occurred to balance that effects lights and even after all that the same complaints arise. the reason is that you can't balance something that at its very core is an unbalanced system.

Honestly, I started in December 2015, started with Jenners, and didn't think anything of balance back then. I went for lights because they were "hard-mode" and because they were 5% of the queue. I went from Jenners to Locusts, picked up Cheeters for FW, got into Urbies and Spiders and an MLX. So I've run the gamut from the Oxide (which I initially detested due to its lack of JJ...I still prefer my JR7-D) to the NARCer Myth Lynx. And I had no real complaints about balance, even though I know fatties thought the Oxide was OP. Which was not a discussion I ever really engaged in either way.

But the rescale--which I agree with in principle--changed everything, and I'd like to see things get back to where they were prerescale in terms of balance.

ADDENDUM: I couldn't post this due to downtime, so I did an Excel dump and quickly analyzed my chassis/class play-time.

By Class:
A 696
H 658
M 435
L 1280

Most-played chassis:
HGN-IIC (427)
JR7 (256)
LCT (233)
MDD(231)
JR7-IIC (214)
HBK-IIC (210)

EDIT: Cleaned up some formatting to save on space.

Edited by Jables McBarty, 21 July 2016 - 02:26 PM.

[Mekwarrior]

There seems to be a core group of vocal assault/heavy etc. pilots that simply want lights out of the game. They will say anything to achieve this, they constantly talk about things that haven't been in the game as long as I have played as though they are still current. There are many comments on here by assault pilots that generally say. 'it should be a [slow boring predictable] stompy mech game with no room for lights in any realistic role.

Except for some nonsense role, ie. if you see any heavier mechs get within 1200m of your team you have to run to the edge of the map and look for a big rock.

Edited by Mekwarrior, 21 July 2016 - 11:58 PM.

[Talorien]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 July 2016 - 11:20 AM, said:

well in fairness Mediums have never had the benefits of egregiously broken scale and lagshield (intermittent or not) that have been more pronounced in Lights over the years.

I think the rescale got Lights wrong and was fundamentally misconceived.

The presumption was that scaling should be linear, but TTK for Lights is *not* linear.

So Lights actually need to be proportionately smaller than Med/Hvy/Assault, to be balanced in terms of TTK.

[Mole]

I have no idea why it is so damn difficult for people to grasp the concept that this is a MOBA basically and in a MOBA no matter what 'character' or 'mech' you are playing, it needs to be combat effective enough to have a chance 1v1 against any of the others. Stop clinging to the idea that "THEY ARE SMALLER AND LIGHTER SO THEY SHOULDNT BE SO COMBAT EFFECTIVE" nonsense. This. Is. A. MOBA. There is nothing else to do in this game but kill the enemy. At least nothing else meaningful. If lights cannot kill things effectively then there is simply zero reason to ever bring one. Should it be this way? No. Not really. I'd like to see lights have other roles they can fulfill that are just as rewarding as killing things. But PGI has failed time and time again to provide such in-depth role warfare. I don't believe they will ever succeed. As such, we need combat effective lights. Plain and friggin' simple.

Edited by Mole, 22 July 2016 - 10:39 AM.

[Darian DelFord]

Yeah I am soooo gonna get laughed off the forums for this.... but could you enlighten my 40+ year old self as to what MOBA actually stands for?

[Kirkland Langue]

Mole, on 22 July 2016 - 10:39 AM, said:

I have no idea why it is so damn difficult for people to grasp the concept that this is a MOBA basically and in a MOBA no matter what 'character' or 'mech' you are playing, it needs to be combat effective enough to have a chance 1v1 against any of the others. Stop clinging to the idea that "THEY ARE SMALLER AND LIGHTER SO THEY SHOULDNT BE SO COMBAT EFFECTIVE" nonsense. This. Is. A. MOBA.

So, in LoL, any healer needs to be able to go 1v1 vs any ADC in the game - because otherwise the healer is underpowered?


EDIT - a much much better comparison would be WOT compared to MW.

Edited by Kirkland Langue, 22 July 2016 - 12:32 PM.

[operatorZ]

Jables McBarty, on 21 July 2016 - 02:21 PM, said:

I have to fundamentally disagree with this assertion. If in a game focused around TDR, and therefore around damage or kills, all 'mechs achieve the same average damage, then none are OP. If some are super-fast glass cannons BB guns while others are lumbering bunkers, that's fine. You have different playstyles, and there is balance.

On a very basic level, this is what we as light pilots take offense to--the concept that a well-performing light is inherently OP.

And I want to note that lights don't need to post high damage--just lots of effective damage, which is usually damage to legs or rear torsos. Yet any time an assault or heavy gets cored out in the back by a light, they come to the forums to cry, and PGI listens to them.

Appreciate the reasoned response.

I don't understand how a mech that is 1/3 the weight and 1/3 the armor and 1/3 the firepower can be expected to achieve average damage scores that are equal to a mech that is 2-3 times bigger and has all the armor and firepower that goes with it. It's just not logical. In my mind the only thing that would allow this smaller mech to do that is 1) really good pilot, or 2) if the mech was not in fact 1/3 of everything. In all the MOBA's I have played this relationship is the same, If you play a heavy tank in WOT your damage range the equals good or average play per match is X-X and the mediums are a little lower and the lights are a little lower than that, on average over the playerbase.

I am not saying a well performing light is OP (although I do understand some pilots can't handle being killed by a light and cry endlessly). A light should be rewarded by its damage or kills in a way that makes these expected and totally rational lower damage numbers worth it for the player. But if the average damage of lights is less than heavies and light pilots consider this UP then I don't know what to say....it's just not how the game at its core is designed.

I honestly have no idea if PGI listens to the players or not, yes it does seem suspicious the timing of thier "balance decisions". But few people can deny that at one point lights did benefit from a bugged hit reg. Never bothered me but I noticed it.

Jables McBarty, on 21 July 2016 - 02:21 PM, said:

More tonnage does not always equal more. It means more armor, more HS, more ammo, more equipmonk, and more weapons, but it also means lower speeds, and (theoretically) lower agility. However because so many heavy and assault (and also medium) 'mechs have agility quirks, lights are losing on agility. This can be remedied by nerfing heavy agility or buffing light agility.

I'm not necessarily asking for weapons or structure/armor buffs, as you are right, it blurs the lines between the chassis. But the one thing that the light class should excel at is given away for free to all other classes. We end up with a superstar agility 'mech--the Locust--and it's immediately nerfed because people can't hit it--but THAT'S THE POINT.

Again, I have to fundamentally disagree with you on this. We can have a combat-viable, small, lightly armed, lightly armored, but incredibly fast and agile 'mech that is combat-viable. Maybe it's because I had been playing MOBAs for a while before I came back to the MechWarrior franchise, but balance doesn't mean equivalence. Not everything needs the same hit points and damage output to have a niche.

I would be open to nerfing agility on heavies. I doubt PGI would though, at the end of the day the vast majority of its players play heavier classes and I don't think they would want to piss them off, no they are much more comfortable pissing off the small % of light pilots.

I like fighting locusts they are a challenge to hit.

I am not saying that lights aren't combat viable but they are not "As" combat viable as other classes. If we are equating getting an equal amount of damage/kills as a heavier class as "equally combat viable". As far as I know the rewards in XP and C bills are not scaled to the mech that achieves them by tonnage, which they should.

But back to the MOBAs, I don't see this equality of class in other MOBAs, I played 10,000 matches in World of Tanks and 5,000 in World of Warships and the lighter classes do not, on average achieve the same damage levels that heavier classes do. That doesn't mean they are combat ineffective, it just means that, on average they will have a hard time getting the same amount of kills and damage as heavier classes.

Lights do have a niche and a niche that isn't defined by being able to put out the same damage as heavier units. PGI has done a terrible job with any role warfare or real time economy that might offer more for light pilots. For example in the WOT or WOW games you have to grind up to heavier weight classes that then punish you for using them by thier high repair costs, an economy of balance in a sense. If it actually cost more in time and money to play heavier units you might see more focus on the smaller, cheaper weight classes and once the class had a lot of players in it, PGI would have to give it equal attention. But as it stands anybody can get a heavy or assault and game on with basically no need to play a light ever. Nevermind that I think forcing people to play lights by having a "grind up" system would invariably result in more light players and better players overall.

I don't think we are far apart here but I just as light pilots get pissed when they see a thread complaining about lights OP, some of us heavy pilots get a little tired of the endless hyperbole about how the weight class is dead when I see good light pilots dominating games all the time.

[operatorZ]

Darian DelFord, on 22 July 2016 - 12:29 PM, said:

Yeah I am soooo gonna get laughed off the forums for this.... but could you enlighten my 40+ year old self as to what MOBA actually stands for?

Multiplayer Online Battle Arena

[Jables McBarty]

Mole, on 22 July 2016 - 10:39 AM, said:

I have no idea why it is so damn difficult for people to grasp the concept that this is a MOBA basically and in a MOBA no matter what 'character' or 'mech' you are playing, it needs to be combat effective enough to have a chance 1v1 against any of the others. Stop clinging to the idea that "THEY ARE SMALLER AND LIGHTER SO THEY SHOULDNT BE SO COMBAT EFFECTIVE" nonsense. This. Is. A. MOBA. There is nothing else to do in this game but kill the enemy. At least nothing else meaningful. If lights cannot kill things effectively then there is simply zero reason to ever bring one. Should it be this way? No. Not really. I'd like to see lights have other roles they can fulfill that are just as rewarding as killing things. But PGI has failed time and time again to provide such in-depth role warfare. I don't believe they will ever succeed. As such, we need combat effective lights. Plain and friggin' simple.

Darian DelFord, on 22 July 2016 - 12:29 PM, said:

Yeah I am soooo gonna get laughed off the forums for this.... but could you enlighten my 40+ year old self as to what MOBA actually stands for?

Kirkland Langue, on 22 July 2016 - 12:31 PM, said:

So, in LoL, any healer needs to be able to go 1v1 vs any ADC in the game - because otherwise the healer is underpowered?

EDIT - a much much better comparison would be WOT compared to MW.

operatorZ, on 22 July 2016 - 02:01 PM, said:

Multiplayer Online Battle Arena

https://en.wikipedia...ne_battle_arena

I agree with Kirkland that MOBA is an imprecise comparison, but I do think it is an apt comparison. I think it reflects a conception of balance to strive towards--different roles that are all balanced though not equivalent--however MWO is not a MOBA in the sense of LoL or Dota.

Because we don't have other feasible roles beyond "good killer" and "bad killer" and a few semi-viable spotter/scout roles, I look to MOBAs as a model of how to get variety without everything being identical in terms of speed, damage output and tankability.


Darian--MOBA's tend to be top-down, RTS-type games in which two teams of (usually) 5 players try to destroy each other's bases. They kill derpy AI units ("creeps"), take down progressively harder buildings, and along the way gain in level and sophistication of equipment. Some proposals to make MWO more immersive have slanted it towards MOBA--one suggestion that I've liked is the idea of adding AI tanks/combined arms that move on predefined paths towards the enemy base/position, to add an extra element to the battle.


Z--I saw your longer post and want to read and respond, I'm about to hop on a bus to Chicago, and since I don't have a smartphone (probably the only 27-year-old without one), I'll have to respond later in the weekend).

Happy Hunting.

[adamts01]

operatorZ, on 22 July 2016 - 01:52 PM, said:

I don't think we are far apart here but I just as light pilots get pissed when they see a thread complaining about lights OP, some of us heavy pilots get a little tired of the endless hyperbole about how the weight class is dead when I see good light pilots dominating games all the time.

The only time a light dominates a game is when it has a very good pilot and his opponents are absolutely incompetent. And also in tier 5.

[Darian DelFord]

adamts01, on 22 July 2016 - 03:19 PM, said:

The only time a light dominates a game is when it has a very good pilot and his opponents are absolutely incompetent. And also in tier 5.

I won't go that far.... tier 3 or less ;pp

operatorZ, on 22 July 2016 - 02:01 PM, said:

Multiplayer Online Battle Arena

Thanks

[DAYLEET]

Enforcing 3/3/3/3 would go a long way to make light more attractive. Some sort of battle value, that we were supposed to get, would help too. That probably would go too far(BV) because the scoreboard isnt agreeing with the common knowledge of which mech should always be good or bad.

[Darian DelFord]

DAYLEET, on 22 July 2016 - 03:59 PM, said:

Enforcing 3/3/3/3 would go a long way to make light more attractive. Some sort of battle value, that we were supposed to get, would help too. That probably would go too far(BV) because the scoreboard isnt agreeing with the common knowledge of which mech should always be good or bad.

3/3/3/3

Went out the window long time ago.... rarely does that actually happen especially in PUG queue.

[Bilbo]

They should go back to 8v8 and enforce a 2/2/2/2. I believe everyone would be much happier.

[Darian DelFord]

Bilbo, on 22 July 2016 - 04:13 PM, said:

They should go back to 8v8 and enforce a 2/2/2/2. I believe everyone would be much happier.

Aye, 12v12 I think was the proverbial snowball.

[DAYLEET]

Darian DelFord, on 22 July 2016 - 04:07 PM, said:

3/3/3/3

Went out the window long time ago.... rarely does that actually happen especially in PUG queue.

just like tiering. not a good place to balance things. im extraordinarily average in lights, meaning i still get an even kdr. Thats with all the games i fall flat on my face and do less than 50 damage because i put myself in some very fabulous situations early. I often get 2kmdd. What do you want? So far ive had most of my light match with JR7-K & FS9-E and that was mostly during the Medium Events with streaks cspl all around.

3/3/3/3 would really help make matches more interesting.

[adamts01]

DAYLEET, on 22 July 2016 - 04:21 PM, said:

just like tiering. not a good place to balance things. im extraordinarily average in lights, meaning i still get an even kdr. Thats with all the games i fall flat on my face and do less than 50 damage because i put myself in some very fabulous situations early. I often get 2kmdd. What do you want? So far ive had most of my light match with JR7-K & FS9-E and that was mostly during the Medium Events with streaks cspl all around.

3/3/3/3 would really help make matches more interesting.

Not to mention you need lights to make some game modes work. If both teams have all fatties on Alpine Assault, are both supposed to guard their base? if there's only a single light per team on Polar conquest, one team has an Adder and the other a Locust, guess how that's going.... Locust wins on caps unless the Adder team splits up and gets stomped by Locust team's deathball. Equal skill there's no avoiding that. Of course that could happen with 3 Adders vs 3 Locusts, but it's much less likely.

Edit: I'll be back later, logging on to Planetside 2. Have fun MWO.

Edited by adamts01, 22 July 2016 - 06:32 PM.

[Brain Cancer]

Darian DelFord, on 22 July 2016 - 04:07 PM, said:

3/3/3/3

Went out the window long time ago.... rarely does that actually happen especially in PUG queue.

If PGI had played Battletech they might have realized 35/55/75/100 left you with 20-30 ton robots that were nowhere near as scary as the 35 tonners, 60 tonners that were rarely in the same boat as "real" heavies, and that 90+ tonners were in a class of their own vs. the 80-85 ton machines that matched up well with many heavies.

30/45/60/85/100 would have made for more even matches right off the bat, even if it was more complex than light, medium, heavy, assault. 2/2/3/3/2.

Or if they really wanna have the four-thing stay there needs to be a bonus percentage "pool" that gets split to whatever weight class is forced to play out of fewer slots. Only get two lights when you should have three? Give the light pilots a bit sweeter share of the pot at the end of the game. Everyone has to deal with 6 assaults because it's Cyclops release day? Bonuses go to the most neglected weight class(es) in a drop.

Encourage people in neglected weight slots by lightening the grind.