206 replies to this topic

[Jables McBarty]

mogs01gt, on 25 July 2016 - 11:38 AM, said:

Why would I want to play in a light? IMO lights are horrible. Are you saying they are viable?

Can't tell if irony, or disproving everything you've already said.

Quote

Maybe English isnt your first language.

Ah yes, the obligatory language-shaming. Must be a monkey-speaker, eh? Wish they'd get off our servers!

Seriously though, grow up Mogs. Maybe it's because I earned my living from manipulating language, but I respect anyone who takes the effort to learn another language, even if they haven't mastered it.

Quote

Look closer, I've barely played all since then. Game is a borefest right now.

Maybe a viable light class would make it more interesting...

[Terona]

just pulled off a 697 damage game with a mist lynx A

3ersl 2srm6

...........after dozens of fails though lol

[mogs01gt]

Jables McBarty, on 25 July 2016 - 11:20 AM, said:

Yes.
No*.
And...cbill cost (?) is?
I'm beginning to wonder what your definition is.
Game modes are a problem, but not "the" problem.
"The" problem would be the general attitude held by certain persons that certain classes should be inherently inferior at doing damage to other 'mechs in a game focused around doing damage to other 'mechs.
EDIT: I find it increasingly hard to argue with people who only discuss the game "we should have" instead of the game "we do have."
*Assumes that these poorly performing heavier 'mechs are not already useless. Also the concern for the "poor mediums and lessxcelent heavies" but none for the lights.

You want lights, that have less armor, less firepower and cost less cbills be equal 1v1 vs, and lets be specific, a TBR? That is beyond asinine. What would be the point of any other weight class if lights are equal? Cbills is a good measurement since this is a f2p game and BV, which is a real value, is not found. Why would the cheapest mechs be equal the most expensive mechs? That make zero sense.

Im starting to think light pilots want everything and not give up anything...

Jables McBarty, on 25 July 2016 - 11:43 AM, said:

Can't tell if irony, or disproving everything you've already said.
Ah yes, the obligatory language-shaming. Must be a monkey-speaker, eh? Wish they'd get off our servers!
Seriously though, grow up Mogs. Maybe it's because I earned my living from manipulating language, but I respect anyone who takes the effort to learn another language, even if they haven't mastered it.
Maybe a viable light class would make it more interesting...

Obviously you arent following a thing Im saying. I've never once said lights are good or too good. I said maybe 3 chassis of lights are good. All others suck. What I've been saying over and over is that lights should NOT be viable in our current TDM game modes. I'll use my COD analogy, a light is like bringing a pistol vs assault rifles in COD.

Edited by mogs01gt, 25 July 2016 - 11:46 AM.

[Besh]

mogs01gt, on 25 July 2016 - 11:44 AM, said:

You want lights, that have less armor, less firepower and cost less cbills be equal 1v1 vs, and lets be specific, a TBR? That is beyond asinine. What would be the point of any other weight class if lights are equal? Cbills is a good measurement since this is a f2p game and BV, which is a real value, is not found. Why would the cheapest mechs be equal the most expensive mechs? That make zero sense.

Im starting to think light pilots want everything and not give up anything...


Obviously you arent following a thing Im saying. I've never once said lights are good or too good. I said maybe 3 chassis of lights are good. All others suck. What I've been saying over and over is that lights should NOT be viable in our current TDM game modes. I'll use my COD analogy, a light is like bringing a pistol vs assault rifles in COD.

Yet, this isn't CoD . Actually, it has been said numerous times that conscious effort will be undertaken to make it nowhere near similar to CoD . Hence we HAD viable Lights .

People like you just helped to upset that .

Too many people have ZERO Idea about the tactical possibilites of 'Mechfighting on the different Maps and GameModes, or if they have, they dont appreciate those possibilities . What they mostly want to do is rush in -> kill/do dmg. as much as possible -> Game over -> CBils and exp. -> next Game . The faster the better .

Its totally horrendous how many Players do not understand the first and fundamental difference between MW:O and Games like CoD : MW:O is a Teamsport . Its not FFA/ everyone for themselves/King of the Hill .It can be played like that,and yeah MANY people ( too many...) DO play it like that . But that means running into a Brickwall re your inGame success at a certain point . Combined Arms is one fundamental premise of 'Mech fighting .

Sadly, it seems PGI has gradually given in to the CoD crowd more and more ( something which has been anticiapted - and feared - during Cb already...)....totally wasting this imho really great Game and all its possibilites to a load of people who have close to zero understanding and appreciation for it .

Saddens me tbh .

Edited by Besh, 25 July 2016 - 12:05 PM.

[Jables McBarty]

mogs01gt, on 25 July 2016 - 11:44 AM, said:

You want lights, that have less armor, less firepower and cost less cbills be equal 1v1 vs, and lets be specific, a TBR? That is beyond asinine. What would be the point of any other weight class if lights are equal? Cbills is a good measurement since this is a f2p game and BV, which is a real value, is not found. Why would the cheapest mechs be equal the most expensive mechs? That make zero sense.

Im starting to think light pilots want everything and not give up anything...

I'll pose this simple question:

If light 'mechs are not to be viable, then why are they in the game?
Here's one interpretation:

Jables McBarty, on 25 July 2016 - 11:39 AM, said:

What is the role of Assaults?
To kill Heavies.

What is the role of Heavies?
To kill Mediums.

What is the role of Mediums?
To kill Lights.

What is the role of Lights?
To be killed by Mediums.

And by your logic nothing should be able to beat a DWF, because it's more expensive than anything else.

Despite the fact that one of the stated goals of MWO--and one of those they've more or less successfully executed--is to not be a "race to the top" in terms of tonnage.

Quote

Obviously you arent following a thing Im saying. I've never once said lights are good or too good. I said maybe 3 chassis of lights are good. All others suck. What I've been saying over and over is that lights should NOT be viable in our current TDM game modes. I'll use my COD analogy, a light is like bringing a pistol vs assault rifles in COD.

Obviously you aren't reading a thing I'm writing, because I already addressed your flawed COD analogy:

Jables McBarty, on 25 July 2016 - 11:12 AM, said:

Except in COD (at least MW2, the last only iteration I played), the dude with the two automatic pistols and speed and knife perks could compete with the guy with a light machine gun and armor-piercing bullet perks.

I'm starting to think you've never played COD.

EDIT: And I'll also add that you need to stop dreaming about MWO games we don't have and focus on the MWO game we do have. And in that game mode--because it'll take months-to-years to get a different one--all classes should be equally viable.

Edited by Jables McBarty, 25 July 2016 - 12:14 PM.

[dario03]

mogs01gt, on 25 July 2016 - 11:44 AM, said:

You want lights, that have less armor, less firepower and cost less cbills be equal 1v1 vs, and lets be specific, a TBR? That is beyond asinine. What would be the point of any other weight class if lights are equal? Cbills is a good measurement since this is a f2p game and BV, which is a real value, is not found. Why would the cheapest mechs be equal the most expensive mechs? That make zero sense.

Im starting to think light pilots want everything and not give up anything...


Obviously you arent following a thing Im saying. I've never once said lights are good or too good. I said maybe 3 chassis of lights are good. All others suck. What I've been saying over and over is that lights should NOT be viable in our current TDM game modes. I'll use my COD analogy, a light is like bringing a pistol vs assault rifles in COD.

So I should always take Zangief or Birdie in Street Fighter 5? They're the biggest so they must be the best... Definitely shouldn't pick Chun-Li since shes like a third their size. It would be asinine for Capcom to make her good right? That wouldn't be balance...

Edited by dario03, 25 July 2016 - 12:17 PM.

[mogs01gt]

Jables McBarty, on 25 July 2016 - 12:11 PM, said:

I'll pose this simple question:
If light 'mechs are not to be viable, then why are they in the game?
Here's one interpretation:

Because Battletech

Quote

And by your logic nothing should be able to beat a DWF, because it's more expensive than anything else.
Despite the fact that one of the stated goals of MWO--and one of those they've more or less successfully executed--is to not be a "race to the top" in terms of tonnage.

Equal pilots, yes nothing should beat a DFW or any other 100t mech. That is how it was in Lore.

Quote

Obviously you aren't reading a thing I'm writing, because I already addressed your flawed COD analogy:
I'm starting to think you've never played COD.

You arent up to speed on balancing, I can see why do you do not understand the reference.

Quote

EDIT: And I'll also add that you need to stop dreaming about MWO games we don't have and focus on the MWO game we do have. And in that game mode--because it'll take months-to-years to get a different one--all classes should be equally viable.

Stop dreaming about MWO?? huh?

[mogs01gt]

dario03, on 25 July 2016 - 12:16 PM, said:

So I should always take Zangief or Birdie in Street Fighter 5? They're the biggest so they must be the best... Definitely shouldn't pick Chun-Li since shes like a third their size. It would be asinine for Capcom to make her good right? That wouldn't be balance...

So you took my specific post regarding lack of armor, firepower and tonnage to that reasoning?? Last time I checked, in any SF games, characters didnt have their damage output limited by weight like we do in MWO.... I'll use your misguided thought process. If SF went by weight, it would be safe to assume that the bigger characters had more power.....

This is how light pilots try to convince people that light should be viable in combat? By irrational and throughtless posts.

Edited by mogs01gt, 25 July 2016 - 12:32 PM.

[Jables McBarty]

mogs01gt, on 25 July 2016 - 12:27 PM, said:

Because Battletech

Equal pilots, yes nothing should beat a DFW or any other 100t mech. That is how it was in Lore.

You arent up to speed on balancing, I can see why do you do not understand the reference.

Stop dreaming about MWO?? huh?

I see why we are at such an impasse:

I am playing MechWarrior Online: A BattleTech Game. It is a fun stompy-robot shooter/mech simulator based on and heavily influenced by the tabletop game called BattleTech, which had its heyday in the late 80's and early 90's. In order to make it into a viable multiplayer platform, the current developer made sweeping changes to the pen-paper-dice-based mechanics in order to achieve a semblance of balance between chassis and classes.

You are playing a BattleTech game that does not exist.

[mogs01gt]

Jables McBarty, on 25 July 2016 - 12:32 PM, said:

I see why we are at such an impasse:
I am playing MechWarrior Online: A BattleTech Game. It is a fun stompy-robot shooter/mech simulator based on and heavily influenced by the tabletop game called BattleTech, which had its heyday in the late 80's and early 90's. In order to make it into a viable multiplayer platform, the current developer made sweeping changes to the pen-paper-dice-based mechanics in order to achieve a semblance of balance between chassis and classes.
You are playing a BattleTech game that does not exist.

Actually this game has been poorly based on BT, that should be the first thing you need to realize. BT has balancing issues and PGI simply added onto those. PGI should have kept up with Lore and realized lore was much more balanced(more convoluted though) than BT.

If this was based more on BT, lights we be even less viable.

[dario03]

mogs01gt, on 25 July 2016 - 12:32 PM, said:

So you took my specific post regarding lack of armor, firepower and tonnage to that reasoning?? Last time I checked, in any SF games, characters didnt have their damage output limited by weight like we do in MWO.... I'll use your misguided thought process. If SF went by weight, it would be safe to assume that the bigger characters had more power.....

This is how light pilots try to convince people that light should be viable in combat? By irrational and throughtless posts.

No we try to convince people that lights should be combat viable by it being better for balance and the game overall. And then pointing out the flaws in counter arguements which for your arguments is simple so a simple response is all that is needed.

[mogs01gt]

dario03, on 25 July 2016 - 12:41 PM, said:

No we try to convince people that lights should be combat viable by it being better for balance and the game overall. And then pointing out the flaws in counter arguements which for your arguments is simple so a simple response is all that is needed.

and there is the issue!!! Lights are inherently NOT balanced for combat. That will never happen in a TDM without massive unbalancing involved. The moment you make lights that viable, it would nullify the majority of mechs in this game, especially assaults.

The only counter argument is to give all lights the Adder treatment. Low speed, bad hitboxes but lots of potential damage. I personally enjoyed the Adder for the brief moment I kept her. Hard to play, rewarding when you get a kill but utterly useless.

Edited by mogs01gt, 25 July 2016 - 12:48 PM.

[dario03]

mogs01gt, on 25 July 2016 - 12:46 PM, said:

and there is the issue!!! Lights are inherently NOT balanced for combat. That will never happen in a TDM without massive unbalancing involved. The moment you make lights that viable, it would nullify the majority of mechs in this game, especially assaults.

The only counter argument is to give all lights the Adder treatment. Low speed, bad hitboxes but lots of potential damage.

Then the buffs would have went to far. Nobody is asking for that.
Making lights better doesn't have to mean every other mech would be worthless. Its not like lights ruled the game pre re-scale when lights were better but still weak.
Balance is finding the level at which all mechs can perform approximately equal.

Edited by dario03, 25 July 2016 - 12:52 PM.

[Satan n stuff]

mogs01gt, on 25 July 2016 - 11:38 AM, said:

Why would I want to play in a light? IMO lights are horrible. Are you saying they are viable? Maybe English isnt your first language.


Look closer, I've barely played all since then. Game is a borefest right now.

So you've barely played at all and you feel qualified to talk about balance? You feel lights are horrible and somehow this is as it should be? Play the game, play a light mech for once and get a clue please, you're just embarrassing yourself at this point.

[mogs01gt]

dario03, on 25 July 2016 - 12:50 PM, said:

Balance is finding the level at which all mechs can perform approximately equal.

That is impossible. There is no way a game can be balanced in that manor especially a f2p game. There has to be a reason for people to spend time or money to advance to better mechs.

Satan n stuff, on 25 July 2016 - 12:55 PM, said:

So you've barely played at all and you feel qualified to talk about balance? You feel lights are horrible and somehow this is as it should be? Play the game, play a light mech for once and get a clue please, you're just embarrassing yourself at this point.

Are you saying that lights arent horrible and I should play lights or that lights are horrible but I should still play them anyway?Why would I or anyone want to play a bad mech??

Edited by mogs01gt, 25 July 2016 - 01:00 PM.

[Jables McBarty]

mogs01gt, on 25 July 2016 - 12:40 PM, said:

Actually this game has been poorly based on BT, that should be the first thing you need to realize. BT has balancing issues and PGI simply added onto those. PGI should have kept up with Lore and realized lore was much more balanced(more convoluted though) than BT.

If this was based more on BT, lights we be even less viable.

Since my strong implications aren't getting through to you, I'll spell it out:

Your opinion is based on a flawed premise, namely you want a game that does not exist. For that game to exist--by your own admission--decisions made 4+ years ago, before the Kickstarter, before MW5's cancellation even, would have to be reversed.

mogs01gt, on 25 July 2016 - 12:55 PM, said:

That is impossible. There is no way a game can be balanced in that manor especially a f2p game. There has to be a reason for people to spend time or money to advance to better mechs.

Um, no. Let's take one of the most popular F2P games on Steam: Dota 2. No permanent character advancement whatsoever. What keeps players interested? Dynamic gameplay. Also a variety of gameplay styles, each with their own strengths and weaknesses. After mastering style A, you move on to B.

[dario03]

mogs01gt, on 25 July 2016 - 12:55 PM, said:

That is impossible. There is no way a game can be balanced in that manor especially a f2p game. There has to be a reason for people to spend time or money to advance to better mechs.


Again someone who lacks reading comprehension. Are you saying that lights arent horrible and I should play lights or that lights are horrible but I should still play them anyway?Why would I or anyone want to play a bad mech??

How is that impossible? I didn't ask for perfect balance, it is very possible to do this. And this was one of the things that was said would be done in the early days. The game was supposed to make all weight classes good so that it wouldn't just be a race to get to the bigger mechs.
Plus bigger=better is not needed for there "to be a reason for people to spend time or money to advance to better mechs.". Players buy multiple mechs for variety. And like I said weight isn't the only deciding factor to cost and you are not limited by cbill cost when choosing your mech.

Edited by dario03, 25 July 2016 - 01:21 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

dario03, on 25 July 2016 - 01:19 PM, said:

Plus bigger=better is not needed for there "to be a reason for people to spend time or money to advance to better mechs.".

Not to mention how that smells of P2W of a different flavor, having objectively better things in a PvP game without tiers results in exactly what we see currently, very few people playing that which is objectively worse.
As a side note, lights being objectively worse is not the reason we haven't seen a new light mech since the Wolfhound though, its because there is a lack of diversity with lights thanks to construction rules and lack of viable weapons for lights to run with.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 25 July 2016 - 01:47 PM.

[Idealsuspect]

Just give Cbills bonus to empty queue like merc have contract bonus for take empty faction contract.

Oh wait i'am not PGI and only PGI know what is good for MWO also it's better i stfu

[dario03]

Idealsuspect, on 25 July 2016 - 01:56 PM, said:

Just give Cbills bonus to empty queue like merc have contract bonus for take empty faction contract.

Oh wait i'am not PGI and only PGI know what is good for MWO also it's better i stfu

While that is better than nothing I don't think it wouldn't be as good as buffing lights. Just increasing rewards would get more spread in the classes but buffs would mean more cbills by actually doing more in the match. So you would get more spread across the weight classes and better balance.