25 replies to this topic

[Mawai]

This is probably common knowledge for most ...

There has been a lot of debate on the balance of clan weapons vs IS weapons. For the most part, it terms of damage vs heat, they don't seem too bad to me at the moment.

However, one aspect of balance that tends to get ignored is the critical space and tonnage requirements of clan weapons. Doesn't seem like a big deal does it ... so they aren't as heavy and don't take as much space ... doesn't seem like much of an issue.

Clan ferro and endo take 1/2 the critical spots of IS version.
Clan heat sinks only need two critical spots.

The result of this is that, even considering fixed equipment, the clan mechs will often have significant pod space and tonnage available for weapons.

Which leads to the following ... at the moment, I have exactly the same weapon loadout on my 55 ton Stormcrow as I do on my 85 ton Stalker. The Stormcrow moves at 100kph, while the Stalker is about 60kph. The Stormcrow has an XL engine while the Stalker has a STD one (since it would die much too quickly with an XL). Obviously the Stalker has more armour .

The observation is that even if the weapons are balanced, the lower weight and critical requirements for clan weapons means that ton for ton the clans can generally carry more firepower.

Some clarifications ...
1) I do not want the clans to be the same as IS
2) I do want to see a reasonable balance

The best way to achieve that would seem to me to be an across the board buff to IS mech structure (on the order of 5% to 10%). IS mechs would then be more durable while clan mechs would have the firepower advantage. Underperforming clan and IS mechs could be further tweaked either using quirks or other approaches.

Thoughts?

[El Bandito]

Blanket change by PGI always ends badly. You should know that by now.

IMO, instead of simply blanket buffing IS mechs, PGI should do a 1:1 different-but-equal balancing of every single Clan/IS weapon/equipment.

IS CASE for example should be buffed, to account for its weight and slot requirements, as well as its inability to protect the limbs. Either that, or nerf Clan CASE. Oh wait, you can't nerf Clan CASE cause it comes absolutely for free!

Same deal with BAP vs. CAP, and GECM vs. CECM, IS Endo/Ferro vs, Clan Endo/Ferro--where Clan tech is offering all the benefits without a single drawback. So buff the IS side, or nerf the Clan side.

Same deal with ERPPC vs. CERPPC and Gauss vs. CGauss, LBX vs CLBX--where Clan tech is offering all the benefits without a single drawback. Again, buff the IS side, or nerf the Clan side.

There used to be a time where omnimech fixed slots somewhat balanced things, but with the release of Clan battlemechs, the rules have changed. Just look at Kodiak and HBK-IIC and you see what I mean. Bottom line is, unless we do the balancing of equipment and weapons on an individual basis, no amount of mech tweaking will create better Clan vs. IS balance.


And introduce IS SSRM4/6, UAC10/20 already!

Edited by El Bandito, 06 October 2016 - 08:40 AM.

[Mystere]

El Bandito, on 06 October 2016 - 08:24 AM, said:

IMO, instead of simply blanket buffing IS mechs, PGI should do a 1:1 different-but-equal balancing of every single Clan/IS weapon/equipment.

People have always said that, but I still cannot remember anyone giving a detailed presentation of how exactly to do that without eventually making Clan mechs and equipment nothing more than re-skinned versions of IS mechs and equipment differing only in shape, color, and visual effects.

So in the meantime, I'm going to go by the source material's method: numbers -- X Clan Mechs vs. Y IS Mechs and/or X Clan Drop Weight vs. Y IS Drop Weight. It's much much easier to do and much much easier to tweak.

Of course, player psychology is a different matter altogether.

it's shame really.

Edited by Mystere, 06 October 2016 - 08:41 AM.

[El Bandito]

Mystere, on 06 October 2016 - 08:41 AM, said:

People have always said that, but I still cannot remember anyone giving a detailed presentation of how exactly to do that without eventually making Clan mechs and equipment nothing more than re-skinned versions of IS mechs and equipment differing only in shape, color, and visual effects.

Mostly because even if people did, PGI wouldn't listen anyway.

IS CASE for example, can be buffed so that on top of its current ability, it will also reduce ammo crit receiving by 40% on section it is equipped, which can warrant its use.

IS BAP for example can have a bit more detection range, and/or slightly faster paperdoll read time, compared to lighter and more compact CAP.

GECM can have slightly bigger bubble than CECM to account for its bigger weight and bulk.

IS NARC can have slightly faster velocity and/or longer duration than CNARC to account for its bigger weight and bulk.

IS Gauss can have its explode chance reduced to 45%, half that of CGauss, to account for its 3 tons more weight and bigger slot requirement.

IS LBX can have smaller spread, and/or slightly bigger damage compared to CLBX. Kinda like current IS SRM vs CSRM.

IS Ferro for example can add 20% more protection on each armored section, while saving 12% weight, while Clan Ferro adds 12% more armor protection while saving 20% weight. That way people might even pick Ferro sometimes, instead of Endo.

Numbers are subject to change, but such balancing can be done, without making both techs exactly the same.

Edited by El Bandito, 06 October 2016 - 08:57 AM.

[Lostdragon]

The game is set during a period when, by lore, the Clans are supposed to be technologically superior. PGI decided to try to make the tech bases equal but different while sticking to lore values for crits, weight, and in some cases damage/heat. Anyone with two brain cells to rub together saw this was going to be a huge mess.

We have wound up with a system where battlemechs are way more flexible than omnimechs, omnimechs with the right combo of upgrades, engines and fixed equipment are beastly while those that lost that lottery are mediocre to terrible, weapons are imbalanced both between and within tech bases, and IS mechs need quirks to keep up with clans.

It would have been a lot easier if the game was set a little further in the future when the IS had closed the tech gap. The timeline is meaningless anyway since there is no story. The Tuk events were hardly memorable because CW is so bad and doesn't even make any basic attempts at lore integration. I think it would be better for the game to do a timeline jump sloner rather than later and implement new tech that makes bqlancing easier. Better weapon and engine options would help the IS a lot and could justify opening up some more flexibility that will make underperforming omnis better.

[Bud Crue]

My view is that IS v Clan balance is fine with two caveats:

First caveat: Kodiak-3 is an outlier to both Clan and IS in terms of balance. It is superior to 'everything' so I don't see it as a problem of IS v Clan balance but an over all outlier. Because it is the best mech in the game and happens to be Clan, people will inevitably say "see! Clan Mechs OP!" They aren't though, its just that the Kodiak is nearly perfect. PGI will eventually do another balance pass or they will introduce something like an over quirked Fenris type mech to restore that overall "balance". Point is, is that the presence of the Kodiak, with nothing else close to it performance-wise, throws everyone off when the IS v Clan comparisons are made. So just forget the K-3 or purposes of the overall discussion and I think balance is pretty good. It still favors clan in top performers, but that is where caveat #2 comes in:

Second caveat: As to using quirks, such as a buff to all IS structure values as suggested by the OP, I think it unnecessary and maybe inadvisable. I think quirks should be applied selectively to make under performers of both the IS and Clan a bit more playable/desirable. Example: Remember when the second quirk pass w made and the IS had near universal 10% energy range boost among many other bonuses? The subsequent howls of clanner outrage? Yeah, lets not go there again but instead help mechs on an individual basis that need help. Things like:
- Letting a poor performer and seldom run mech like the Dragon fit 2 UAC5s instead of just 1.
- Fixing the missile count, jump jets and maybe some armor bonuses to mechs like the Victor and Highlander.
- Some slight structure bonuses to the 35 ton IS mechs other than maybe the Raven.
- Armor and/or structure bonus to the arms of the Phoenix Hawks (the most recent buffs were insufficient).
- Do whatever is needed to make the Mist Lynx more than a "support mech".
- Give the Dire a bit of abilty to twist a little.
-Etc.

-Oh and give back my Quickdraw 4G and 4H and 5K structure and weapons quirks not for any balance reason, but merely because I am asking nicely and because I miss them.

I think with such selective application of quirks many perceived imbalances could be more readily and reasonably addressed than with an over all nerf or buff to any group. Example: I think with a little fiddling it ought to be possible to make the Wolfhound, Firestarter or even the Panther comparable to an Arctic Cheetah again, but each in different ways.

Edited by Bud Crue, 06 October 2016 - 10:02 AM.

[El Bandito]

Bud Crue, on 06 October 2016 - 10:01 AM, said:

My view is that IS v Clan balance is fine with two caveats:

First caveat: Kodiak-3 is an outlier to both Clan and IS in terms of balance. It is superior to 'everything' so I don't see it as a problem of IS v Clan balance but an over all outlier. Because it is the best mech in the game and happens to be Clan, people will inevitably say "see! Clan Mechs OP!" They aren't though, its just that the Kodiak is nearly perfect. PGI will eventually do another balance pass or they will introduce something like an over quirked Fenris type mech to restore that overall "balance". Point is, is that the presence of the Kodiak, with nothing else close to it performance-wise, throws everyone off when the IS v Clan comparisons are made. So just forget the K-3 or purposes of the overall discussion and I think balance is pretty good. It still favors clan in top performers, but that is where caveat #2 comes in:

Second caveat: As to using quirks, such as a buff to all IS structure values as suggested by the OP, I think it unnecessary and maybe inadvisable. I think quirks should be applied selectively to make under performers of both the IS and Clan a bit more playable/desirable. Example: Remember when the second quirk pass w made and the IS had near universal 10% energy range boost among many other bonuses? The subsequent howls of clanner outrage? Yeah, lets not go there again but instead help mechs on an individual basis that need help. Things like:
- Letting a poor performer and seldom run mech like the Dragon fit 2 UAC5s instead of just 1.
- Fixing the missile count, jump jets and maybe some armor bonuses to mechs like the Victor and Highlander.
- Some slight structure bonuses to the 35 ton IS mechs other than maybe the Raven.
- Armor and/or structure bonus to the arms of the Phoenix Hawks (the most recent buffs were insufficient).
- Do whatever is needed to make the Mist Lynx more than a "support mech".
- Give the Dire a bit of abilty to twist a little.
-Etc.

-Oh and give back my Quickdraw 4G and 4H and 5K structure and weapons quirks not for any balance reason, but merely because I am asking nicely and because I miss them.

I think with such selective application of quirks many perceived imbalances could be more readily and reasonably addressed than with an over all nerf or buff to any group. Example: I think with a little fiddling it ought to be possible to make the Wolfhound, Firestarter or even the Panther comparable to an Arctic Cheetah again, but each in different ways.

If PGI continues to ignore the fundamental disparity between current IS tech and Clan tech, there will be even more outlier mechs like that of the Kodiak pop up in the future. Bane, for example.

Clan tech has such superiority, that most Clan battlemechs that are big enough and have high mounted hardpoints will automatically stand on the very top--even if they have little or no quirks. Currently we have the Kodiak, but there will be more.

Which is why I am suggesting what I wrote above.

Edited by El Bandito, 06 October 2016 - 10:15 AM.

[Andi Nagasia]

Even if IS and Clan Weapons are Balanced in every way but Tonnage and Crit Slots think of the Quirks,
IS weapons usually get -10% Heat Gen, +20% or more Velocity Quirks, as well as better Agility / Structure than Clan,
in most cases Quirks even it out, even though many of us dont like the Excessive use of Quirks,

Perhaps you should take a look at this,
(Is / Clan, Tonnage / Crit, Balance Concept!(Please Vote))
Please Post your Thoughts, and Vote! thanks

[process]

Clan mechs do have higher damage potential, but a lot of that is mitigated by heat and spread damage (AC pellets, beam time). I don't particularly like some of these weapon mechanics or think there's a good philosophical basis for the current balance, but at least things feel pretty even these days.

[Bud Crue]

El Bandito, on 06 October 2016 - 10:12 AM, said:

If PGI continues to ignore the fundamental disparity between current IS tech and Clan tech, there will be even more outlier mechs like that of the Kodiak pop up in the future. Bane, for example.

Clan tech has such superiority, that most Clan battlemechs that are big enough and have high mounted hardpoints will automatically stand on the very top--even if they have little or no quirks. Currently we have the Kodiak, but there will be more.

Which is why I am suggesting what I wrote above.

At my low level of play balance seems alright. That, and I just think the pendulum swings; and while the Kodiak is the outlier of the moment, in the past it has been various IS mechs (at least in their weight classes) that have been the OP mech o the moment. Remember the over quirked Black Jack? The Black Knight? PGI made them "OP" for a time too. The Kodiak 3 is going to get nerfed or replaced by some other flavor of the month eventually; it all depends on PGI and what they choose to do. But no matter what they choose, history has shown that the next OP mech might just as easily be an IS one. When that happens...and it will happen eventually...will that new OP monstrosity mean that the IS over quirked and unbalanced compared to the Clans? Perhaps in some peoples eyes, but to me the overall picture is not one of total imbalance, and one where what imbalance that is present could be addressed with some selectively applied love to some of the terrible and even close to borderline mechs.

Edited by Bud Crue, 06 October 2016 - 11:08 AM.

[SmokingPuffin]

Mystere, on 06 October 2016 - 08:41 AM, said:

So in the meantime, I'm going to go by the source material's method: numbers -- X Clan Mechs vs. Y IS Mechs and/or X Clan Drop Weight vs. Y IS Drop Weight. It's much much easier to do and much much easier to tweak.

This is an appealing method for balance in theory, but in practice it means you need to have teams of all-clan versus all-IS. In turn, this means long queue times for whichever faction is more popular than the ratio suggests it needs to be. It also makes designing new game modes more challenging and limits what mechs people can play with their friends.

I think it more practical to try to balance ton for ton, largely by means of using quirks for underperforming mechs.

[Mystere]

SmokingPuffin, on 06 October 2016 - 12:09 PM, said:

This is an appealing method for balance in theory, but in practice it means you need to have teams of all-clan versus all-IS. In turn, this means long queue times for whichever faction is more popular than the ratio suggests it needs to be. It also makes designing new game modes more challenging and limits what mechs people can play with their friends.

I think it more practical to try to balance ton for ton, largely by means of using quirks for underperforming mechs.

Actually, it should be forced [1] Clan vs. IS, [2] Clan vs. Clan, and [3] IS vs. IS drops, depending on player availability at time of matchmaking. Done properly, it should not add much to wait times.

As for friends wanting to drop with mixed Mechs, well, all I can say is that PGI should have foreseen and implemented this on Day 0. As such, doing this now means there will be "pain" involved for some people. Alternatively, use private matches.

Edited by Mystere, 06 October 2016 - 12:17 PM.

[SmokingPuffin]

Mystere, on 06 October 2016 - 12:16 PM, said:

Actually, it should be forced [1] Clan vs. IS, [2] Clan vs. Clan, and [3] IS vs. IS drops, depending on player availability at time of matchmaking. Done properly, it should not add much to wait times.

Good point. This should work.

Mystere, on 06 October 2016 - 12:16 PM, said:

As for friends wanting to drop with mixed Mechs, well, all I can say is that PGI should have foreseen and implemented this on Day 0. As such, doing this now means there will be "pain" involved for some people. Alternatively, use private matches.

I feel like this pain is unnecessary. We can balance the mechs ton for ton, and indeed we're closer to this balance point today than the "Clantech is superior, so IS gets numbers" balance point.

I admit that I like the nice fluffy feel you get from Clan mechs being obviously better.

Edited by SmokingPuffin, 06 October 2016 - 12:33 PM.

[Monkey Lover]

They don't want IS v Clan balance they want clans to be slightly better. This makes it easier to sell 25 dollar hero mechs.

[Warglbargl]

On the subject of clan vs IS balance, I tried the HBK IIc trial mech for luls the other day.

I immediately sold the 4 mastered IS HBKs I owned. They really have no reason to exist with the IIc around.

[Monkey Lover]

Warglbargl, on 06 October 2016 - 02:55 PM, said:

On the subject of clan vs IS balance, I tried the HBK IIc trial mech for luls the other day.

I immediately sold the 4 mastered IS HBKs I owned. They really have no reason to exist with the IIc around.

4sp is still good of course it takes super quirks to make it that way lol

I'm kind of surprised clanners havn't started up posting to get it nerfed. It's one of the last mechs with the mega quirks.

Edited by Monkey Lover, 06 October 2016 - 03:06 PM.

[Tarl Cabot]

The one outlier component is the isXL vs cXL, where cXL survives the loss of one side torso where as isXL does not survive the loss of one side torso. Eventually PGI have introduced penalties with the cXL loss without outright putting the Clan mech down, penalties that could be applied to isXL while surviving the loss of one side torso.

Structural quirks are not necessarily there to protect an isXL engine, many of the Clan battlemechs have structural quirks.

[Y E O N N E]

Tarl Cabot, on 06 October 2016 - 03:42 PM, said:

The one outlier component is the isXL vs cXL, where cXL survives the loss of one side torso where as isXL does not survive the loss of one side torso. Eventually PGI have introduced penalties with the cXL loss without outright putting the Clan mech down, penalties that could be applied to isXL while surviving the loss of one side torso.

Structural quirks are not necessarily there to protect an isXL engine, many of the Clan battlemechs have structural quirks.

I want nothing to do with isXL behaving like cXL. I would rather a +20% ST (tor thereabouts) structure be built into the engines themselves because that is more interesting.

And honestly, the larger outliers are the 2-slot DHS, the greater damage-per-ton, and the ridiculous number of hard-points available to most Clan 'Mechs (even if I could fit 12 small lasers on an IS 'Mech, it would still be shite because that's only 36 damage...once...to the 60 you can spit out in the same time on a Nova).

But you can balance all of this using heat, rate of fire, etc. But PGI doesn't do it. They have cERML behaving like isML, but with more damage, more range, superior damage-per-tick, and superior total cyclic DPS. Like, what?

[Deathlike]

Any changes to even remotely "balance" between the tech bases will be considered Lostech™ by PGI.

At least it would take 60 to 90 days... minimum.

[S 0 L E N Y A]

none of this matters unless we band together against the tyrant known as Energy Draw.