170 replies to this topic

[Quicksilver Aberration]

dervishx5, on 24 August 2016 - 10:41 AM, said:

Anyway, if you want engine balance, then copy MW4 and make everything a standard engine.

Or go one step further and copy HC's engine stuff.

• Make no tech base specific engine
  
• Standard engines get 50% higher heat cap and double torso internals
  
• Light Fusion engines get 25% higher heat cap and 50% more torso internals
  
• XL engines get no bonuses

[dervishx5]

HC sucked.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

dervishx5, on 24 August 2016 - 10:58 AM, said:

HC sucked.

You suck


I would gladly play that mod over this game if it actually had a population still (and fixed UACs to not be so strong...)

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 24 August 2016 - 11:03 AM.

[dervishx5]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 24 August 2016 - 11:01 AM, said:

You suck


I would gladly play that mod over this game if it actually had a population still.

When it switched over to that I was done with MW4. Took away too much of what made Mercs good. I liked the arcadey feel.

[Dimento Graven]

Claiming that it's 'balanced' because most Clan 'mechs can't change their engines to standards is a non-sensical argument for me. WHY would anyone want to switch to an ST engine in a Clan 'mech? I can't think of ANY advantage that it would give that would out weight the speed loss, and additional weight required to maintain any speed even CLOSE to that of an XL in a Clan 'mech.

NOW, if you're ACTUALLY trying to claim that because most Clan 'mechs can't change the engines at all (ie: Go to a smaller or larger XL) as a some sort of 'balance' factor, again, a non-sensical argument as most Clan equipped with XL's move extremely fast when compared to their IS counterparts, plus, the smaller size (two extra slots), and ST loss survivability FAR EXCEEDS the IS XL capabilities.

The preponderance of all the Clan system adds up to some hefty advantages:

Free CASE in every location.
Less slot loss from XL
Survivable ST loss
Less slot loss from ferro-fibrous (at least that's how I remember it, I might be wrong on this)
Less slot loss from enhanced internal structure option.
Most weapons are either longer range, and/or smaller slot sized, and/or smaller weight, and/or do more damage than the IS equivalent (when there's actually an IS equivalent available).

It's no wonder that there's so many Clan 'mechs at the top of the leaderboards.

[DrxAbstract]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 24 August 2016 - 08:48 AM, said:

It isn't required, sized hardpoints don't really impact weapon balance, their job is for flavor.

Say what? Lol.

Sized slots were integral to chassis and inter-weapon viability in MW4. The entire system depended on those fixed values to make the universal Heat Sink, Engine, Armor and Equipment possible as the game didnt employ a Critical Slots architecture in the Mech Lab. There was one variant of every chassis and you think the hardpoint size/specificity was flavor?! I.E. Irrelevant, Unnecessary, etc.? It's the primary reason why the game was so lopsided in favor of heavier Mechs in the first place.

Quote

If you can build that though, why would you ever take a Hollander? Sorry, but there is a reason customization should be limited because currently mechs are too homogeneous which means selling some special mech (like a Hollander) is much harder because other mechs can already do what it can.

Because that would be the definition of flavor. There are so many Mechs in BattleTech that overlap in functionality and purpose the only reasons to differentiate your selections would be aesthetics and personal taste. We already have this problem in MWO with variants PGI didnt pull out of its a$$. Balancing around Mechs themselves rather than Weapons, Equipment, etc. creates an endless cycle of balance chasing and this "Every Mech should be a special snowflake" mentality is exactly why we have instances of things like Spiders and Panthers completely sucking compared to Arctic Cheetahs and even Locusts. Players will always gravitate toward the most feasible chassis no matter the actual differences in power, versus homogenizing them on a general level with some smattering of uniqueness that does not lend itself to obvious or significant advantage. Why take a Hollander over a Raven? Because the Hollander gets quirks for Guass/Ballistic and maybe some extra structure in its gun torso... Raven doesnt. People are already buying Mechs for appearance and variety as well as combat effectiveness since there's virtually nothing that sets them apart from what we already have.

MechWarrior is about shooting people in your favorite stompy robbit, not playing Tacto-Commando-Super-Stratago-Mechano-Selecto-for-Scenario... So quite frankly, you can take your "every mech is special" imbalance-causing, source of all evil ideology and shove it.

dervishx5, on 24 August 2016 - 10:41 AM, said:

Kit Fox most certainly could carry LBX20s.

Can it? I have the MekTek 3.1 Mercs so hunting down the original specs wasnt happening soon. Well there you go - 2 out of 8 Lights... Still does not qualify for a "plenty of" statement. Point in case, sized hardpoints unnecessarily restricts build options in MechWarrior that, traditionally, has a "Here's a Mech Lab, go wild" fundamental feature.

dervishx5, on 24 August 2016 - 10:41 AM, said:

But regardless, Quicksilver pretty much destroyed your reasoning there. Without some sort of weapon size restriction, you can only have so much variety before things are just more of the same.

Hardly, and no. Game publishers make a fortune from selling costumes/cosmetics just so people can make the same characters look differently... So yeah, your battleship is sunk my friend. Some variety with solid balance beats mostly variety with little balance; Actual playability matters more.

[Moonlight Grimoire]

IS XL's are for mechs with good hitboxes in MWO, by that I mean they can easily roll damage. King Crab has very wide torsos which makes it easy to shoot a specific torso from any angle. This is why some mechs can get away with it like the Catapult and Marauder, they can wiggle easily as foes shoot at them to spread damage away from their side torso onto other parts of the mech. Same with mechs that have large arms, bonus if said arm also has a large shoulder plate. This, again, helps catch incoming fire and makes a mech more XL friendly. IS XL weakness is a lore thing, want it fixed? Light Fusion Engines are the answer, maybe not as tonnage saving as an XL, but, it can survive a side torso loss and saves 25% of the tonnage of a standard engine while not being bank breaking as an XL.

IS XL's were fine and balanced until clans were introduced, hence why eventually IS got LFE's. Honestly in a lot of mechs an XL is just not worth it due to the extra pod space it takes up. Sure you can put an XL400 in a Cyclops, but, you gimp yourself out of pod space and tonnage for weaponry. IS XL's are mostly for lights and light weight mediums, there are a few assaults that need them (due to a lack of hard points) and a few heavies that can safely use them (Catapult and Marauder) but for the most part an XL means you go from having the most armored part of your mech keeping you in the battle to having a side torso keeping you in the battle, so unless you are easily able to roll damage into an arm or the CT an IS XL is not safe on the mech.

[Roughneck45]

While there is no doubt that Clan XL's are better than their IS versions the bigger problem here is that the OP seemed to have no idea of their actual in game mechanics.

I've brought this up in the new player forum before, but there is literally nothing in game that explains clearly to the player the differences of standard, XL, and Clan XL engines.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

DrxAbstract, on 24 August 2016 - 11:48 AM, said:

Say what? Lol.

Sized slots were integral to chassis and inter-weapon viability in MW4.

No, it really wasn't.

DrxAbstract, on 24 August 2016 - 11:48 AM, said:

There was one variant of every chassis and you think the hardpoint size/specificity was flavor?!

Because a Hunchback that does LRM boating better than a Trebuchet, aka making the Trebuchet worthless, adds flavor to the game . While it mods added multiple variants for mechs, there really isn't a need for it because of the limited number of roles a mech can possibly do. We have almost 350 variants now, and about 80% of them are redundant copies of others.

DrxAbstract, on 24 August 2016 - 11:48 AM, said:

It's the primary reason why the game was so lopsided in favor of heavier Mechs in the first place.

You mean like MWO does now? MW4 had the same problem with weight as MWO does, except it was better for ranged mediums and lights because they could abuse their speed and range (ninja SCat/Ryo teams were notorious during the MW4:Mercs days) without getting cornered.

DrxAbstract, on 24 August 2016 - 11:48 AM, said:

There are so many Mechs in BattleTech that overlap in functionality and purpose the only reasons to differentiate your selections would be aesthetics and personal taste.

That's not flavor, that's ****** skins for the mech is the best of the overlaps.

DrxAbstract, on 24 August 2016 - 11:48 AM, said:

"Every Mech should be a special snowflake" mentality is exactly why we have instances of things like Spiders and Panthers completely sucking compared to Arctic Cheetahs and even Locusts.

No, the reason is because PGI sucks at giving those mechs actual unique equipment or other balancing mechanics (like giving the Spider more firepower than 2 CT energy hardpoints) to counter-balance the power of the Cheetahs and Locusts.

DrxAbstract, on 24 August 2016 - 11:48 AM, said:

MechWarrior is about shooting people in your favorite stompy robbit, not playing Tacto-Commando-Super-Stratago-Mechano-Selecto-for-Scenario... So quite frankly, you can take your "every mech is special" imbalance-causing, source of all evil ideology and shove it.

So you basically want CoD with mechs, now the truth comes out. If you wanted to just shoot people with stompy robots, I'm sure Hawken is still around here somewhere.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 24 August 2016 - 12:17 PM.

[dervishx5]

DrxAbstract, on 24 August 2016 - 11:48 AM, said:

Hardly, and no. Game publishers make a fortune from selling costumes/cosmetics just so people can make the same characters look differently... So yeah, your battleship is sunk my friend. Some variety with solid balance beats mostly variety with little balance; Actual playability matters more.

Okay, throwing that argument aside for now, this thread was about what again? Oh right.

MW4 was balanced when it came to internals and engines. With a similar system with MWO's "flavor" slot limitations, it would be better than anything you've come up with. So your argument was a nice tangent but in the end I win.

ggnore

[Tarl Cabot]

Davison, on 24 August 2016 - 10:37 AM, said:

Not sure where you read that in lore, but it's actually not true. Three engine hits has always been a kill for a Mech, from tabletop to sim to here. An IS XL takes up three slots in each side torso, which is three hits for a destroyed ST. Hence, the Mech is mission killed.

As far back as I can remember, XL Mechs have always been more prone to such hits, but here in MWO it's more of an issue since your weapons fire isn't hitting at random most of the time. How to fix THAT? Well, I could quote a bit of lore that would have salt arriving in thousand ton lots, but aside from that, I've got nothing at the moment.

Definitely more of a trade-off than it ever was in other venues, for sure.

It is also an issue because it is an ON/OFF switch when a side torso is lost. It does not matter if the engine took crit hits 2X in the CT and one crit hit in the OTHER ST, there is no effect until one of the ST is completely destroyed.

That is the fallacy of sticking to 3 engine crits with how MWO is setup. Both c/isXL provide the same weight savings over the STD, but isXL occupies 2 more slots than the cXL but an IS mech w/isXL is disabled with loss of one ST instead of having a greater heat/movement/agility penalty than a Clan mech in the same condition? That is the major disparities between IS and Clan tech in PGI's MWO universe.

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 24 August 2016 - 12:34 PM.

[DrxAbstract]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 24 August 2016 - 12:15 PM, said:

No, it really wasn't.

Ah right, there was some other hidden method to Balance in MW4... Was it the Heat Sinks? Nope. The Engines? Nope. Armor? Mayb... Nope. Maybe the Multi-Checkbox Equipment list-o-utility? Nope.

Let's see, how could Microsoft have possibly differentiated the Mechs while maintaining some form of up-scaling balance? Oh that's right, Sized and Specific Weapon Slots!

Quote

Because a Hunchback that does LRM boating better than a Trebuchet, aka making the Trebuchet worthless, adds flavor to the game . While it mods added multiple variants for mechs, there really isn't a need for it because of the limited number of roles a mech can possibly do. We have almost 350 variants now, and about 80% of them are redundant copies of others.

Hunchie suddenly grow more than 2 Missile Hardpoints did it? Didnt think so--Comparison fail. Now if the Treb can SRM/Lurm as hard as the Kintaro and SRMs/LRMs dont suck, that'd be something.

Quote

You mean like MWO does now? MW4 had the same problem with weight as MWO does, except it was better for ranged mediums and lights because they could abuse their speed and range (ninja SCat/Ryo teams were notorious during the MW4:Mercs days) without getting cornered.

No, not like MWO does now. MWO doesnt force specific weapon sizes on Mechs to specifically hinder them while trying to graduate people to the next heaviest Mech on the ladder in preparation for some fantastical end-game assault mission climax.

MWO's is, for one, to a much lesser degree. Two, it's happening largely in part from lack of attentiveness and foresight to the changes being made... And partially to unsubstantiated whining... PGI fail.

Quote

That's not flavor, that's ****** skins for the mech is the best of the overlaps.

Not when done correctly. I guess that's an unrealistic expectation with PGI, maybe? Possibly. However your 'special snowflakes' is and always will be a failure by nature of the system.

Quote

No, the reason is because PGI sucks at giving those mechs actual unique equipment or other balancing mechanics (like giving the Spider more firepower than 2 CT energy hardpoints) to counter-balance the power of the Cheetahs and Locusts.

So you admit giving the Spider more hardpoints, which would *gasp* further homogenize MWO as being the preferential solution? That's interesting.

Quote

So you basically want CoD with mechs, now the truth comes out. If you wanted to just shoot people with stompy robots, I'm sure Hawken is still around here somewhere.

So... When has MechWarrior ever not been CoD with Mechs? Or rather, when has CoD ever not been MechWarrior with people, since MechWarrior came first and all... Would be nice if my armor repaired after 20 seconds though...

Done with the nonsensical comparisons and assumptions yet?

MechWarrior =/= BattleTech/TT, never has, never will. If you want your Mechs to have restricted and 'unique' builds for the sole purpose of strategic gameplay and 'flavor' I suggest you go sign up for HBR's BattleTech or load up MechCommander and stop trying to transform MechWarrior into something it has never been at the expense of realizing too late the two concepts do not mesh. What we have now is exactly what you're suggesting we should have: 80% useless variants. It is the inevitable conclusion of a system with so many variables based heavily on differentiation/specialization rather than responsible homogenization and characterization.

dervishx5, on 24 August 2016 - 12:19 PM, said:

Okay, throwing that argument aside for now, this thread was about what again? Oh right.

MW4 was balanced when it came to internals and engines. With a similar system with MWO's "flavor" slot limitations, it would be better than anything you've come up with. So your argument was a nice tangent but in the end I win.

ggnore

It very well may have been balanced by being based on the assumption all Mechs had the same internals type, Heat Sinks+Heat Dissipation Mechanic, invisible + limitless critical slots and Engine Class(Clan XL). Pray tell - How would you translate that system to MWO? Details please.

Producing an ambiguous idea and waving it around all "Lala i came up with something and you didnt!" doesnt win you anything but pity... [Redacted]... So congratulations for that, I guess? See, I already gave an idea that was simple, easy to implement and required virtually no explanation... Granted it was extremely [Redacted], it'd fit much better than your yet-to-be-elaborated-upon mystery meat.

Perhaps once you and Quickie over there are done [Redacted] each others 'Like' buttons you'll settle down for some rational thought time.

[Redacted]

Edited by draiocht, 24 August 2016 - 07:38 PM.
inappropriate

[Quicksilver Aberration]

DrxAbstract, on 24 August 2016 - 01:27 PM, said:

Oh that's right, Sized and Specific Weapon Slots!

No, they just didn't have the mech balance. Tech balance was good, mech balance was always a bit off.

DrxAbstract, on 24 August 2016 - 01:27 PM, said:

Hunchie suddenly grow more than 2 Missile Hardpoints did it? Didnt think so--Comparison fail.

Ummm, wtf are you even talking about? Even with quirks, the lurm Treb is trash, the Lurmback has always been better because it can mount a TAG in the head and mount 2 ALRM10s nicely. Hardpoint counts don't mean really mean anything, not all hardpoints are equal.

DrxAbstract, on 24 August 2016 - 01:27 PM, said:

No, not like MWO does now. MWO doesnt force specific weapon sizes on Mechs to specifically hinder them while trying to graduate people to the next heaviest Mech on the ladder in preparation for some fantastical end-game assault mission climax.

First, if you think assaults were the end-all be-all of MW4, you never played it well enough, heavies like the Nova Cat and Timby were dominant, there is a reason Mektek buffed assaults as the mod continued.
Second, this game doesn't do that? Hindering weapon selection is kind of a theme in Battletech because of the construction rules that have sort of an exponential ramp up of free tonnage to put into weapons.

DrxAbstract, on 24 August 2016 - 01:27 PM, said:

So you admit giving the Spider more hardpoints, which would *gasp* further homogenize MWO as being the preferential solution? That's interesting.

No, I'm saying limiting it to 2 CT hardpoints is absolutely moronic, you assume that damage done is the only way to change play style which is a false assumption, how a mech goes about doing damage is definitely changing things. For example, the 3 Ravens all have different playstyles, the 3L has stealth if can use to poke safer, the 4X has JJs it can abuse to get better or unique angles, the 2X is more of a striker because it can mount better firepower. Each one has flavor, it just sucks that it only extend to inter-variant balance and not mech balance.

DrxAbstract, on 24 August 2016 - 01:27 PM, said:

MechWarrior =/= BattleTech/TT, never has, never will.

Who said I wanted that exactly (this makes your next quote quite ironic)? I'm just trying to get new mechs to actually have a point rather than just be pointless wastes of resources in this game.

DrxAbstract, on 24 August 2016 - 01:27 PM, said:

Done with the nonsensical comparisons and assumptions yet?

Oh, you started the hyperbole (its latent throughout all of your argument), I just figured correcting you would not [Redacted].

Edited by draiocht, 24 August 2016 - 07:43 PM.
insult

[dervishx5]

DrxAbstract, on 24 August 2016 - 01:27 PM, said:

It very well may have been balanced by being based on the assumption all Mechs had the same internals type, Heat Sinks+Heat Dissipation Mechanic, invisible + limitless critical slots and Engine Class(Clan XL). Pray tell - How would you translate that system to MWO? Details please.

Producing an ambiguous idea and waving it around all "Lala i came up with something and you didnt!" doesnt win you anything but pity... [Redacted]... So congratulations for that, I guess? See, I already gave an idea that was simple, easy to implement and required virtually no explanation... Granted it was extremely [Redacted], it'd fit much better than your yet-to-be-elaborated-upon mystery meat.

Perhaps once you and Quickie over there are done [Redacted] each others 'Like' buttons you'll settle down for some rational thought time.

[Redacted]

First of all, him and I come from the same background [Redacted].

Second of all, I don't give a **** about balancing IS and Clan XL engines. I think people who want to are among the type ruining the game by forcing PGI to constantly balance stuff instead of putting resources into producing more content outside of mechpacks.

Third, duh, if you want to translate the MW4 system to MWO, do exactly that. Make all components equal and just have the weapons be different. Also allow mixtech. It's not a complex concept that requires excessive thought. The IS vs. Clan argument would more or less disappear.

There you go, done.

Edited by draiocht, 24 August 2016 - 07:48 PM.
inappropriate, Quote Clean-Up

[Quicksilver Aberration]

dervishx5, on 24 August 2016 - 02:06 PM, said:

First of all, him and I come from the same background [Redacted].

Can confirm.

Edited by draiocht, 24 August 2016 - 07:48 PM.
Quote Clean-Up

[DrxAbstract]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 24 August 2016 - 01:44 PM, said:

No, they just didn't have the mech balance. Tech balance was good, mech balance was always a bit off.

Tech balance and even inter-weapon group balance was terrible until MekTek stepped in.

Quote

Ummm, wtf are you even talking about? Even with quirks, the lurm Treb is trash, the Lurmback has always been better because it can mount a TAG in the head and mount 2 ALRM10s nicely. Hardpoint counts don't mean really mean anything, not all hardpoints are equal.

Except I said "SRM/LRM", and the Treb SRMs a lot better than the Hunch specifically because of hardpoints. It's only real comparison is to be made against the Kintaro. Neither is exactly desirable.

Quote

First, if you think assaults were the end-all be-all of MW4, you never played it well enough, heavies like the Nova Cat and Timby were dominant, there is a reason Mektek buffed assaults as the mod continued.
Second, this game doesn't do that? Hindering weapon selection is kind of a theme in Battletech because of the construction rules that have sort of an exponential ramp up of free tonnage to put into weapons.

1. I did not say "I think". That's the way the game was designed: Get the heaviest Mechs and go roflstomp through the last mission. It could be done with any Mech you wanted, really, but the progressive nature of the game pushed people onward and upward. It was even the theme of several missions.

2. I didnt say MWO doesnt do it. I said MWO does it to a lesser degree. MWO at least has quirks and fabricated variants to somewhat compensate for the inherent power creep of tonnage increase... Not that they're doing a spectacular job of managing it, it's not nearly as bad as MW4.

Quote

No, I'm saying limiting it to 2 CT hardpoints is absolutely moronic, you assume that damage done is the only way to change play style which is a false assumption, how a mech goes about doing damage is definitely changing things. For example, the 3 Ravens all have different playstyles, the 3L has stealth if can use to poke safer, the 4X has JJs it can abuse to get better or unique angles, the 2X is more of a striker because it can mount better firepower. Each one has flavor, it just sucks that it only extend to inter-variant balance and not mech balance.

Really, I assume?

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 24 August 2016 - 01:44 PM, said:

No, I'm saying limiting it to 2 CT hardpoints is absolutely moronic

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 24 August 2016 - 01:44 PM, said:

giving the Spider more firepower than 2 CT energy slots

Yeah... no assumption necessary - You said it. However, within the realm of the current game there are no alternative methods of contribution other than damage. So now I'm going to say it: Some Mechs need to do more of it. Some need to do less. Until there is a viable alternative to dealing damage, it's going to be the balancing factor.

As to your Raven examples, yes, they can all be played differently and indeed they usually are... Except that style of play is typically not as contributory as other Mechs and their styles... And this is my point: Damage needs to be relatively homogenized. The method by which its done I really dont give a hoot whereas you do; You want every Mech to be viable via some unique gift set for specific purposes. That's... pretty improbable given the BT universe and what PGI has to work with...which is unfortunate really. It would take a lot of redesigning to make the game more accepting of this: Weapons, Weapon Mechanics, Equipment, Maps, Radar Functionality, etc.

Quote

Who said I wanted that exactly (this makes your next quote quite ironic)? I'm just trying to get new mechs to actually have a point rather than just be pointless wastes of resources in this game.

You did, actually. You want them to have unique equipment and abilities that ultimately leads to performance potential equivalent to other Mechs. And as I've said, the only important factor right here and now, not 4, 6, 12 months from now, but right now, is damage. However they can do it... as long as they're equal. Pretty difficult given BT is filled with carbon-copy Mechs and the moment you introduce a shiny that's shinier than the rest, you've got a problem... That includes 'unique' equipment/abilities... Like quirks! They're already doing what you want, fundamentally. It's not really working so far, giving Mechs quirks to suit unique purposes and all. Why do you think that is?

Quote

Oh, you started the hyperbole (its latent throughout all of your argument), I just figured correcting you would not [Redacted].

Actually you started it. CoD Mechs? You couldnt come up with anything more original than that? And you accuse me of Hyperbolic statements... Hypocrite much?

Here comes the dismissive conjecture... le sigh.

Edited by draiocht, 24 August 2016 - 08:06 PM.
Quote Clean-Up

[Quicksilver Aberration]

DrxAbstract, on 24 August 2016 - 02:35 PM, said:

And you accuse me of Hyperbolic statements... Hypocrite much?

DrxAbstract, on 24 August 2016 - 11:48 AM, said:

MechWarrior is about shooting people in your favorite stompy robbit, not playing Tacto-Commando-Super-Stratago-Mechano-Selecto-for-Scenario... So quite frankly, you can take your "every mech is special" imbalance-causing, source of all evil ideology and shove it.

Oh, you did start it, but I'm done arguing with someone who is gonna try and troll that hard rather than actually have a discussion. Someone who thinks that mektek made balance better just has to be a troll, or ignorant, or both (ok, 2.1a wasn't bad, but 3.x was horribad)!

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 24 August 2016 - 02:46 PM.

[DrxAbstract]

dervishx5, on 24 August 2016 - 02:06 PM, said:

First of all, him and I come from the same background [Redacted].

Now that... is interesting.

Quote

Second of all, I don't give a **** about balancing IS and Clan XL engines. I think people who want to are among the type ruining the game by forcing PGI to constantly balance stuff instead of putting resources into producing more content outside of mechpacks.

So... Dont care about engine balancing but posting engine-balancing idea in engine balancing thread. That's not the least bit contradictory... At all.

Unless PGI manages the whole inter-mech, inter-variant balancing beast, they're going to lose players all the same. What kind of content, though... /curious.

Quote

Third, duh, if you want to translate the MW4 system to MWO, do exactly that. Make all components equal and just have the weapons be different. Also allow mixtech. It's not a complex concept that requires excessive thought. The IS vs. Clan argument would more or less disappear.

Oh, so you're talking about the entire MW4 system, not just the engines and restricted hardpoints... In that case, ew.

Quote

There you go, done.

Was it so hard? Sure beats vague suggestions.

Edited by draiocht, 24 August 2016 - 08:08 PM.
Quote Clean-Up

[DrxAbstract]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 24 August 2016 - 02:44 PM, said:

Oh, you did start it, but I'm done arguing with someone who is gonna try and troll that hard rather than actually have a discussion. Someone who thinks that mektek made balance better just has to be a troll, or ignorant, or both (ok, 2.1a wasn't bad, but 3.x was horribad)!

Did I? Because that's rhetoric, not hyperbole. I can see the confusion, but nope.

I do think MekTek did a decent job balancing out MW4's flaws... While definitely creating some of their own. At the same time, you'll note, I was also denouncing the 'balance' in MW4 entirely. As in against it, seeing it unfavorably and nowhere near an example that PGI should follow...

So... Those [Redacted]...

Edited by draiocht, 24 August 2016 - 08:14 PM.
inappropriate

[Wecx]

Light XL for IS would really get me excited! At the moment i dont even run XL. Light XL would be awesome!