338 replies to this topic

[AphexTwin11]

Wow, more forum whine because the KDK-3 hurt someone's feelings. Who would've thought?

Edited by AphexTwin11, 28 October 2016 - 12:57 PM.

[Col Jaime Wolf]

Fox the Apprentice, on 28 October 2016 - 12:42 PM, said:

I await your argument.

anecdotal evidence and paper tiger theory crafting. again go look at the scores top teams are getting in the MRBC and world championships for hard evidence.

did you also know that the F4 Phantom was supposed to be so superior to everything that came before it (paper tiger) that they didn't even think to put a cannon on it?

guess what was one of the first things they did after it had been combat tested?

also you are conflating my stance with that of someone.... not me. Kodiak is good, best assault? yes, I would say so. OP? maybe a bit but not so grossly as some would suggest, at least not compared to heavies vs literally everything else.

should it be nerfed? maybe, but not in any traditional way, its unique abilities are such that anything short of massive nerfs will not bring it sufficiently in line with other crap-assaults.

And any massive nerfs, i would imagine, would result in myself and im sure many others demanding a refund. such a course of action is not favorable to PGI, not that i think they have any proper understanding of balance.

#buff under performers instead of making more victors.

[Deathlike]

Col Jaime Wolf, on 28 October 2016 - 12:54 PM, said:

#buff under performers instead of making more victors.

The problem with buffing underperformers in this instance is that the KDK-3 is the gold standard mech IN THE GAME.

There's a difference for asking all Lights be buffed to the Arctic Cheetah's level (since Lights are already underpowered AND underplayed) instead of buffing the strongest class to being even stronger.

When our balance overlord nerfs, he overnerfs. It doesn't mean the Victor can't be fixed, but so many things that came with nerfing the Victor (mostly in the form of Hoverjets™) are part of the problem.

[Marquis De Lafayette]

These cheating (dropping in groups to farm one another,etc) or gaming the system (a tier 1 using a tier 5 alt account to play bad competition) arguments against comparing leaderboard data, don't hold up. Especially when you look at the Assaults event.

The simple reason: If you are going to try to cheat or game the system, you do it in such a way as to ensure (or nearly ensure) your end result. Playing the Kodiak in either of these manners, would not even ensure a top 5 finish. Too many other players were putting up ridiculous scores that the pilot attempting this couldn't be sure he had really done enough.

Either method would work far better to ensure a top 5 (and the rewards) on a Zeus or a Victor. A Zeus can farm damage off his co-conspirators as easy as an KDK-3 can.. Likewise, I think a tier 1 on his tier 5 alt account drIving a Victor would have little trouble putting up numbers in that sub-par chassis when faced with a bunch of tier 5 opponents.

Using cheating or gaming the system would have a far more certain result (ensure top 5) on those chassis vs. the KDK-3. So, why would folks use only the KDK to cheat and not the other chassis? Now, if there were cheaters on every chassis (chasing the MC) scores on those mechs would be boosted and the gap between them and the Kodiak would be closer. However, if there were guys cheating on the Victor or Zeus leaderboards, they couldn't even outdo (match score wise) the 75th ranked Kodiak.

To be clear.. I am not doubting people using Alts to game things. There are probably a few outright cheaters as well. However, you would have to believe they only boosted the KDK's results (and not other mechs results as well) to discount the spread in match scores.

[Dee Eight]

Col Jaime Wolf, on 28 October 2016 - 12:54 PM, said:

guess what was one of the first things they did after it had been combat tested?

As a stop-gap they hung one in a centerline pod under it that miss-aligned itself whenever it was used. Navy/Marine F-4s never got the internal gun, only the air force versions did.

[Col Jaime Wolf]

Deathlike, on 28 October 2016 - 01:04 PM, said:

The problem with buffing underperformers in this instance is that the KDK-3 is the gold standard mech IN THE GAME.

There's a difference for asking all Lights be buffed to the Arctic Cheetah's level (since Lights are already underpowered AND underplayed) instead of buffing the strongest class to being even stronger.

When our balance overlord nerfs, he overnerfs. It doesn't mean the Victor can't be fixed, but so many things that came with nerfing the Victor (mostly in the form of Hoverjets™) are part of the problem.

so you see my fears, the Hoverjets™ nerfs were so far reaching that many mechs that couldn't even poptart to begin with were hit hard when good JJ's were about their only selling point.

they are gonna nerf it (kodiak 3), and when it happens my prediction is that either the whole lineup of kodiaks will be relegated to the dust bin, or clan UAC's/gauss/erppcs will be nerfed into near uselessness.

if JUST the kodiak 3 gets nerfed (via quirks) it will be hit so hard that many will just outright sell them or ask for a refund.

and once again our heavy overlords will be the supreme masters of the battlefield... except if clan weapons are nerfed then whole swathes of clan mechs will be hit over just one mech.

this is why i say traditional nerfs will not do, re-arranging hardpoints isn't really an option because well... go look at sarna pictures of the kodiak, it is build for trading, even in TT it had wicked high mounts.

nerfing its agility? it might work but it would again have to be some pretty massive agility nerfs to the point that an xl400 feels like an xl300 or worse.

cant nerf its engine cap because it comes with an XL400 stock.

give it reduced ballistic velocity/cooldown/increased jam chance? you have got to be ******* ******** me that's literally saying "this, this mech here we are just gonna make it garbage because reasons"

so that leaves us with what?

you literally need to change the dynamics/mechanics of the game to make the kodiak 3 "balanced" or you just accept, its probably going to be THE best assault for a long ******* time.

[Deathlike]

Col Jaime Wolf, on 28 October 2016 - 01:18 PM, said:

so you see my fears, the Hoverjets™ nerfs were so far reaching that many mechs that couldn't even poptart to begin with were hit hard when good JJ's were about their only selling point.

they are gonna nerf it (kodiak 3), and when it happens my prediction is that either the whole lineup of kodiaks will be relegated to the dust bin, or clan UAC's/gauss/erppcs will be nerfed into near uselessness.

if JUST the kodiak 3 gets nerfed (via quirks) it will be hit so hard that many will just outright sell them or ask for a refund.

and once again our heavy overlords will be the supreme masters of the battlefield... except if clan weapons are nerfed then whole swathes of clan mechs will be hit over just one mech.

this is why i say traditional nerfs will not do, re-arranging hardpoints isn't really an option because well... go look at sarna pictures of the kodiak, it is build for trading, even in TT it had wicked high mounts.

nerfing its agility? it might work but it would again have to be some pretty massive agility nerfs to the point that an xl400 feels like an xl300 or worse.

cant nerf its engine cap because it comes with an XL400 stock.

give it reduced ballistic velocity/cooldown/increased jam chance? you have got to be ******* ******** me that's literally saying "this, this mech here we are just gonna make it garbage because reasons"

so that leaves us with what?

you literally need to change the dynamics/mechanics of the game to make the kodiak 3 "balanced" or you just accept, its probably going to be THE best assault for a long ******* time.

The easiest nerf to the KDK-3 that most people are asking for is complete removal of quirks on the KDK-3.

The difference between that and the original Victor nerfs was that the Victor had the agility of an Atlas (lots of visibly obvious negative quirks).

People are overreacting when nerfs are being asked for... when these things should be done ITERATIVELY in the first place.

Edited by Deathlike, 28 October 2016 - 01:23 PM.

[Fox the Apprentice]

Not asking for crazy nerfs. But if you wish to think that the kdk3 is balanced, think again!

Edited by Fox the Apprentice, 28 October 2016 - 01:25 PM.

[Col Jaime Wolf]

Marquis De Lafayette, on 28 October 2016 - 01:10 PM, said:

These cheating (dropping in groups to farm one another,etc) or gaming the system (a tier 1 using a tier 5 alt account to play bad competition) arguments against comparing leaderboard data, don't hold up. Especially when you look at the Assaults event.

The simple reason: If you are going to try to cheat or game the system, you do it in such a way as to ensure (or nearly ensure) your end result. Playing the Kodiak in either of these manners, would not even ensure a top 5 finish. Too many other players were putting up ridiculous scores that the pilot attempting this couldn't be sure he had really done enough.

Either method would work far better to ensure a top 5 (and the rewards) on a Zeus or a Victor. A Zeus can farm damage off his co-conspirators as easy as an KDK-3 can.. Likewise, I think a tier 1 on his tier 5 alt account drIving a Victor would have little trouble putting up numbers in that sub-par chassis when faced with a bunch of tier 5 opponents.

Using cheating or gaming the system would have a far more certain result (ensure top 5) on those chassis vs. the KDK-3. So, why would folks use only the KDK to cheat and not the other chassis? Now, if there were cheaters on every chassis (chasing the MC) scores on those mechs would be boosted and the gap between them and the Kodiak would be closer. However, if there were guys cheating on the Victor or Zeus leaderboards, they couldn't even outdo (match score wise) the 75th ranked Kodiak.

To be clear.. I am not doubting people using Alts to game things. There are probably a few outright cheaters as well. However, you would have to believe they only boosted the KDK's results (and not other mechs results as well) to discount the spread in match scores.

pilots literally were sync dropping in group que and letting one guy piece apart the whole enemy team. like i said im sure its not EVERY SINGLE LEADER BOARD but the fact that it did happen, and likely still does to some extent means we should look for better more concrete results, hence why i point towards using top competitive teams as the bar, since they often stream, and are indisputably using the mech to its potential.

Deathlike, on 28 October 2016 - 01:22 PM, said:

The easiest nerf to the KDK-3 that most people are asking for is complete removal of quirks on the KDK-3.
The difference between that and the original Victor nerfs was that the Victor had the agility of an Atlas (lots of visibly obvious negative quirks).
People are overreacting when nerfs are being asked for... when these things should be done ITERATIVELY in the first place.

as it stands its only quirks are.....

+15 CT structure
+5 LA structure
+5 RA structure
+5 LL structure
+5 RL structure

somehow i don't think losing them will stop the demand for nerfs, nor will it dethrone the kodiak 3 as top assault. It WILL take heavy handed measures (IE red text) to bring it down to the level of other assaults.

17 pages of pilots asking to remove a grand total of 35 structure points? and they are gonna stop calling for nerfs when it loses those 35 structure points? right.....

Edited by Col Jaime Wolf, 28 October 2016 - 01:30 PM.

[Deathlike]

Col Jaime Wolf, on 28 October 2016 - 01:23 PM, said:

as it stands its only quirks are.....

+15 CT structure
+5 LA structure
+5 RA structure
+5 LL structure
+5 RL structure

somehow i don't think losing them will stop the demand for nerfs, nor will it dethrone the kodiak 3 as top assault. It WILL take heavy handed measures (IE red text) to bring it down to the level of other assaults.

17 pages of pilots asking to remove a grand total of 35 structure points? and they are gonna stop calling for nerfs when it loses those 35 structure points? right.....

First off, let the comp community figure out if that was too much. People are allowed to reevaluate their positions when things change.

There would still be campaigns for Victor buffs (and other sub-par Assaults and other mechs too), but as I've said before... these things go unheeded by PGI for long periods of time when it comes to balance and our balance overlord.

[Fox the Apprentice]

Now that I'm on a computer instead of a cell, let me respond more properly.

Col Jaime Wolf, on 28 October 2016 - 12:54 PM, said:

anecdotal evidence and paper tiger theory crafting.

Thousands of players' experience is neither anecdotal nor paper anthing!

Col Jaime Wolf, on 28 October 2016 - 12:54 PM, said:

again go look at the scores top teams are getting in the MRBC and world championships for hard evidence.

A good idea. My concern with using comp teams is that you are taking a medium-sized player base, and only using a few of those people to balance. I don't feel there is sufficient numbers for these event teams. Games that do balance based on their competitive teams would probably have a larger player base (though I don't know that, it's just a guess).

That said, where can I go to see these stats? Since you've brought them up, I am curious to see what they say!

Col Jaime Wolf, on 28 October 2016 - 12:54 PM, said:

did you also know that the F4 Phantom was supposed to be so superior to everything that came before it (paper tiger) that they didn't even think to put a cannon on it?

guess what was one of the first things they did after it had been combat tested?

Also, the price of tea in China at the time was... just as irrelevant. The data I quoted was real-world data of actual players and any supposed (and unproven) cheating, would not have had 15% more of an effect on the KDK queue than all the others. Unless, of course, the KDK queue was chosen specifically because it was already the best mech...

Regardless, it isn't related to the F4 looking good on paper, and finding that the reliability of Air-to-Air missiles was overrated.

Col Jaime Wolf, on 28 October 2016 - 12:54 PM, said:

also you are conflating my stance with that of someone.... not me. Kodiak is good, best assault? yes, I would say so. OP? maybe a bit

PGI is known for letting balance issues go on for a long period of time. I'm not stopping the nerf cry until I see results. But yes, I suppose I grouped you in with the people saying it was 100% balanced, and I shouldn't have. Sorry .

Col Jaime Wolf, on 28 October 2016 - 12:54 PM, said:

but not so grossly as some would suggest, at least not compared to heavies vs literally everything else.

should it be nerfed? maybe, but not in any traditional way, its unique abilities are such that anything short of massive nerfs will not bring it sufficiently in line with other crap-assaults.

And any massive nerfs, i would imagine, would result in myself and im sure many others demanding a refund. such a course of action is not favorable to PGI, not that i think they have any proper understanding of balance.

KDK isn't OP because of it's legendary survivability. What I'd like to see is the turn angle nerf already proposed, possibly alongside a turn rate nerf. Good luck with that refund; not my concern.

Col Jaime Wolf, on 28 October 2016 - 12:54 PM, said:

#buff under performers instead of making more victors.

Which would mean not just assaults, but also lights, meds, heavies. OR just (MODERATELY!) nerf the one mech (one variant?) that stands head and shoulders above the rest.

Col Jaime Wolf, on 28 October 2016 - 01:23 PM, said:

[...]
as it stands its only quirks are.....

+15 CT structure
+5 LA structure
+5 RA structure
+5 LL structure
+5 RL structure

somehow i don't think losing them will stop the demand for nerfs, nor will it dethrone the kodiak 3 as top assault. It WILL take heavy handed measures (IE red text) to bring it down to the level of other assaults.

17 pages of pilots asking to remove a grand total of 35 structure points? and they are gonna stop calling for nerfs when it loses those 35 structure points? right.....

You are correct on my part, at least. Its mobility is better than many heavies. Unless its armor is also brought down that low (not recommended, and not what I'm asking for/advocating!), then I would keep crying for a nerf.

Edited by Fox the Apprentice, 28 October 2016 - 02:31 PM.

[Marquis De Lafayette]

Col Jaime Wolf, on 28 October 2016 - 01:23 PM, said:

pilots literally were sync dropping in group que and letting one guy piece apart the whole enemy team. like i said im sure its not EVERY SINGLE LEADER BOARD but the fact that it did happen, and likely still does to some extent means we should look for better more concrete results, hence why i point towards using top competitive teams as the bar, since they often stream, and are indisputably using the mech to its potential.
..

Cheaters often are clever and I realize you weren't saying every leaderboard would be impacted. I would counter that I you are throwing out a fairly large data set because of the likelihood of few bad data points (the cheaters). It would like saying a national election doesn't tell us anything about the will of the people, because we know there is always some voter fraud (and we don't know which way they voted). When the gulf in votes is small this can be valid to worry about. However, (even though we don't know exactly which leaderboards the cheats influenced the most) in the KDK's case they scores show a landslide victory. It would take a concerted effort to cheat on that chassis (and that chassis alone) to push scores that much higher than its peers. As I said above. It actually makes less sense to take the time to cheat on the Kodiak than on other mechs.

You are advocating to ignore the data we have (I don't mind looking at other things in addition), when the reason for doing so is far from rock solid.

[Baulven]

Fox the Apprentice, on 28 October 2016 - 02:27 PM, said:

Now that I'm on a computer instead of a cell, let me respond more properly.


Thousands of players' experience is neither anecdotal nor paper anthing!


A good idea. My concern with using comp teams is that you are taking a medium-sized player base, and only using a few of those people to balance. I don't feel there is sufficient numbers for these event teams. Games that do balance based on their competitive teams would probably have a larger player base (though I don't know that, it's just a guess).

That said, where can I go to see these stats? Since you've brought them up, I am curious to see what they say!


Also, the price of tea in China at the time was... just as irrelevant. The data I quoted was real-world data of actual players and any supposed (and unproven) cheating, would not have had 15% more of an effect on the KDK queue than all the others. Unless, of course, the KDK queue was chosen specifically because it was already the best mech...

Regardless, it isn't related to the F4 looking good on paper, and finding that the reliability of Air-to-Air missiles was overrated.


PGI is known for letting balance issues go on for a long period of time. I'm not stopping the nerf cry until I see results. But yes, I suppose I grouped you in with the people saying it was 100% balanced, and I shouldn't have. Sorry .


KDK isn't OP because of it's legendary survivability. What I'd like to see is the turn angle nerf already proposed, possibly alongside a turn rate nerf. Good luck with that refund; not my concern.


Which would mean not just assaults, but also lights, meds, heavies. OR just (MODERATELY!) nerf the one mech (one variant?) that stands head and shoulders above the rest.



You are correct on my part, at least. Its mobility is better than many heavies. Unless its armor is also brought down that low (not recommended, and not what I'm asking for/advocating!), then I would keep crying for a nerf.

So your plan is you want it to be a slightly tested whale that can't turn of maneuver to save its life?

[Dee Eight]

Baulven, on 28 October 2016 - 02:44 PM, said:

So your plan is you want it to be a slightly tested whale that can't turn of maneuver to save its life?

Apparently that is the end goal for all these kodiaks nerf threads. Turn it into a taller dire wolf.

[Fox the Apprentice]

Baulven, on 28 October 2016 - 02:44 PM, said:

So your plan is you want it to be a slightly tested whale that can't turn of maneuver to save its life?

No, it will still have better mounts. And faster speed. And probably faster rotation. And still be all-around better.

On second thought, maybe the armor quirks should go, too - but not in the initial pass; slow and steady prevents over-nerfs!

Dee Eight, on 28 October 2016 - 02:48 PM, said:

Apparently that is the end goal for all these kodiaks nerf threads. Turn it into a taller dire wolf.

Nope, just bring it closer to the proper level. Please tell me you've at least admitted it's too powerful; we've definitely presented enough evidence...

Edited by Fox the Apprentice, 28 October 2016 - 03:10 PM.

[Aiden Skye]

As I most play clan mechs, I usually try to keep enemies outside of 450m. I usually don't think KDK's are that bad....unless they are goose PPC KDK's that's an entirely different story. Really hard to trade with these monstrosities at any range unless their pilots are completely inept.

The true horror of the Dakka bear is revealed when you are playing at shorter ranges / have to close distance on them and just get opened up and shredded.

KDK3 can use a twist nerf as it's huge arms are basically shield arms that absorb tons of damage.

Edited by W A R K H A N, 28 October 2016 - 03:30 PM.

[GoatHILL]

W A R K H A N, on 28 October 2016 - 03:22 PM, said:

As I most play clan mechs, I usually try to keep enemies outside of 450m. I usually don't think KDK's are that bad....unless they are goose PPC KDK's that's an entirely different story. Really hard to trade with these monstrosities at any range unless their pilots are completely inept.

The true horror of the Dakka bear is revealed when you are playing at shorter ranges and just get opened up and shredded in no time cuz you found yourself in the gun-sights of the Dakka bear well inside it's optimal range.

There are a lot of builds that require you to be under 450m. Most IS builds infact since only 5/6 IS weapons have an optimal range over 450m.

[Fox the Apprentice]

GoatHILL, on 28 October 2016 - 03:38 PM, said:

[...] since only 5/6 IS weapons have an optimal range over 450m.

I think you got that reversed...
That, or I'm even worse at this game than I thought

Edited by Fox the Apprentice, 28 October 2016 - 03:50 PM.

[draiocht]

[mod]Due to the frequency of insulting language
and discussion towards exploits in the past several pages,
this thread is now closed.[/mod]