153 replies to this topic

[Battlemaster56]

El Bandito, on 15 November 2016 - 06:54 AM, said:

That's a big difference. And once you factor in the fact that chassis mounting CGauss has pre-built free CASE preventing CGauss explosion from affecting adjacent sections (even on the arms!), and has single ST death proof XL engine, it snowballs.

Out of curiousty how many ppl will mount IS XL when using guass or AC20, literally I see no other reason to mount those if you have a IS XL equipped. TBH make IS XL function like Clan XL they get a 60 or 65% heat and movement speed penalty since we gonna Normalize things why not take on that issue first rather than weapons because it seems like that's the root of the problem, and once that dealt everything else seems simple to fix but hey I don't deal balance issues because it's like politics everyone get's riled up and stuff.

[Tremendous Upside]

As someone that's been here from the start - and seen this all before, over and over... trust me (Trump voice implied) - these changes have little if anything to do with actually "balancing" the game. They never have. If PGI truly wanted to balance UACs, they'd simply remove the jamming mechanics entirely and change the ROF or damage/burst size on them to the values they want them to have so their DPS levels are where they want them to be. Jams have never been "fun" or even remotely "interesting". They're frustrating and the only "flavor" they add to the game is akin to that of a poo sandwich... Now with the increased jam rates and cooldowns, they're just throwing an extra pickle on top.

So why do they do things like this? Nerf the crud out of weapon systems to the point of making them laughable? Adding absurd quirkage to mechs then removing them or slashing them? It's not because Paul's an idiot. Its done to change the meta. Meta changes make the company money and make the players more likely to spend space bux. Fewer space bux in the economy means more people stroke checks for new "content" instead of waiting them out for c-bill releases. They spend space bux and MC/GXP to buy new modules, more camo's, colors and decals for the mechs they change into etc... The bottom line for Paul is that the company needs to pay the bills. If people don't spend money, they can't pay their employees. When they can't pay their employees, they'll in turn start taking sick days to hunt caribou or pick berries (or whatever it is they eat in Canadia) to feed their families instead - and the game suffers. It's a necessary evil. If this game were ever "truly" balanced and left that way, we'd all settle into a handful of mechs with a handful of builds we like/are good in, and that'd be that. Then eventually we'd get bored and move on to something different...

Bottom line is that if you enjoy the game, embrace the change! Or don't and stubbornly twist and turn about for half a minute while that favorite weapon of yours gets "unjammed" - often just to jam again the moment it clears. The way I see it? The additional time is a great way to compensate for the lousy hit detection in the game. If you can't fix hit detection? Just give the other guys an extra volley to put people out of their misery till they rage to the point of assimilation. PPC/Gauss is back folks... it'll be glorious just as it was the last time around

[El Bandito]

Battlemaster56, on 15 November 2016 - 07:03 AM, said:

Out of curiousty how many ppl will mount IS XL when using guass or AC20, literally I see no other reason to mount those if you have a IS XL equipped.

It is also worth noting that IS XL mechs can't even equip AC20 on the torso in the first place because there is not enough slots. Clanners can equip CUAC20/CLB20, 2xCUAC10 just fine on their XL engine.

Battlemaster56, on 15 November 2016 - 07:03 AM, said:

TBH make IS XL function like Clan XL they get a 60 or 65% heat and movement speed penalty since we gonna Normalize things why not take on that issue first rather than weapons because it seems like that's the root of the problem, and once that dealt everything else seems simple to fix but hey I don't deal balance issues because it's like politics everyone get's riled up and stuff.

Both sides' XL engine difference plays a big part of the current tech imbalance, yes, though there are plenty of difference in opinions on just how to balance them.

Edited by El Bandito, 15 November 2016 - 07:48 AM.

[Sjorpha]

Battlemaster56, on 15 November 2016 - 07:03 AM, said:

TBH make IS XL function like Clan XL they get a 60 or 65% heat and movement speed penalty since we gonna Normalize things why not take on that issue first rather than weapons because it seems like that's the root of the problem, and once that dealt everything else seems simple to fix but hey I don't deal balance issues because it's like politics everyone get's riled up and stuff.

Since the IS XL is already decently balanced against the standard engine, while the clan engine is unbalanced both in relation to IS XL and standard engine, why not go the other way and change the one that is actually the balance problem: make the Clan XL function like the IS one.

That seems much more reasonable design wise to me. It limits the need for changes to one engine, and it gives Clan battlemechs a reason to sometimes choose a standard engine. Also removes the need to have structure quirks on all the IS mechs. Go ahead and let the omnis switch between XL and standard too if they want to have loosable STs.

If the Clan XL stays as it is both IS XL and standard engine need huge buffs to be equal, that seem much more convoluted and inelegant to me.

Edited by Sjorpha, 15 November 2016 - 07:54 AM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Sjorpha, on 15 November 2016 - 07:51 AM, said:

Since the IS XL is already decently balanced against the standard engine

No, even that is not balanced especially given the BESM, very few mechs mount standard engines, and some of them are forced to because they have no real other options (Mauler and IS Hunchback are a couple of examples).

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 15 November 2016 - 07:55 AM.

[Templar Dane]

El Bandito, on 15 November 2016 - 06:10 AM, said:

Except all the big mercs traditionally went for the Clan side--gee I wonder why--nevermind that Clans having Mercs is a huge huge blow to lore in the first place. Also, it is not a failing to assume mostly Clanners are crying about this change.

They went clan for the same reason I did. The hallmark of CW has always been long wait times. If you join the underdog you have MUCH shorter wait times.

[Sjorpha]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 15 November 2016 - 07:54 AM, said:

No, even that is not balanced especially given the BESM, very few mechs mount standard engines, and some of them are forced to because they have no real other options (Mauler and IS Hunchback are a couple of examples).

Well, true. But it's not as imbalanced as the clan XL. There are still IS mechs that are better with standard. Making the IS XL as good as the current clan one seems like it would remove standard from even it's current niche amirite?

The clan XL is the one that is actually the big balance problem when it comes to engines, so fix the problem. Nerf the clan XL to IS XL power level and remove the IS structure quirks. Don't change everything else around one overpowered piece of gear, make the one piece not overpowered. Much better design principle.

[Mystere]

All I can say is:

Expand the balancing repertoire.

Use lore as a guide.

Make the technological differences between IS and Clans really different and not superficial.

And finally, get rid of mixed drops and use numbers as part of balancing.

This is just a game, not rocket science.

Edited by Mystere, 15 November 2016 - 08:04 AM.

[Battlemaster56]

Sjorpha, on 15 November 2016 - 07:51 AM, said:

Since the IS XL is already decently balanced against the standard engine, while the clan engine is unbalanced both in relation to IS XL and standard engine, why not go the other way and change the one that is actually the balance problem: make the Clan XL function like the IS one.

That seems much more reasonable design wise to me. It limits the need for changes to one engine, and it gives Clan battlemechs a reason to sometimes choose a standard engine. Also removes the need to have structure quirks on all the IS mechs. Go ahead and let the omnis switch between XL and standard too if they want to have loosable STs.

If the Clan XL stays as it is both IS XL and standard engine need huge buffs to be equal, that seem much more convoluted and inelegant to me.

So on death side torso's, well need an excuse to play less Timberwolves,or most of the clan omni line up that will sooner or later will be irrelevent since clan battlemechs eventually will sonic sprint pass omnimechs because the benefits htey have over omni's is way to much.
Also changing a lock engine to standard will be more harmful than it seems, since A: the said omni mech will be stuck with the engine rating they have and will be most likely to bring energy based builds to keep themselves somewhat relevant. B: You already threaten mechs who barely get their name out on the battlefield rather than being a complete joke. C:I suggested giving IS XL's side torso heat and movement penalty most like 55-60%, but if you have something else come at me i'm open. And Std.Engines will also be a problem, you can only do so much with them.

[Duke Nedo]

Sjorpha, on 15 November 2016 - 07:59 AM, said:

The clan XL is the one that is actually the big balance problem when it comes to engines, so fix the problem. Nerf the clan XL to IS XL power level and remove the IS structure quirks. Don't change everything else around one overpowered piece of gear, make the one piece not overpowered. Much better design principle.

Unfortunately you can't really do that since lots of omnis are stuck with XLs, that would be very harsh... I think the only way to do it is to instead buff the IS engine to survive ST loss and instead give the STD engines on both factions serious amounts of structure, like 50+ or so.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Sjorpha, on 15 November 2016 - 07:59 AM, said:

There are still IS mechs that are better with standard.

This is only due to engine limits or because of hardpoints (Mauler requires a standard engine to mount enough ballistics for example), if they could run an XL, they probably would.

Sjorpha, on 15 November 2016 - 07:59 AM, said:

Making the IS XL as good as the current clan one seems like it would remove standard from even it's current niche amirite?

Considering the standard engine is also a part of the Clan arsenal, sounds more like standard engines need to be buffed.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 15 November 2016 - 08:29 AM.

[Y E O N N E]

Sjorpha, on 15 November 2016 - 07:51 AM, said:

Since the IS XL is already decently balanced against the standard engine, while the clan engine is unbalanced both in relation to IS XL and standard engine, why not go the other way and change the one that is actually the balance problem: make the Clan XL function like the IS one.

That seems much more reasonable design wise to me. It limits the need for changes to one engine, and it gives Clan battlemechs a reason to sometimes choose a standard engine. Go ahead and let the omnis switch between XL and standard too.

If the Clan XL stays as it is both IS XL and standard engine need huge buffs to be equal, that seem much more convoluted and inelegant to me.

There are a lot of Omni's that depend on cXL as it is to not suck, the Timberwolf being one of them. The Dire Wolf and Warhawk, too.

Really, if we do this we end up having to do more structure quirkiness to fix what it breaks. If that is the route we have to take, we come right back around to where we started. Since I enjoy the differences between the two factions, I would rather we provide each engine type with its own built-in quirks using the cXL as the measuring stick.

[Xmith]

Gas Guzzler, on 13 November 2016 - 11:15 PM, said:

Alright, many of you may remember when Clan mechs came out, there was only one weapon that was really worth putting into ballistic slots: Gauss. Gauss has been nerfed, UACs were buffed and now there is some semblance of balance between Gauss and UACs, each having a more specific roles.

With this latest nerf package on UACs, we are legitimately going to see a trend of mechs switching back to Gauss rifles only. This is BAD. Please test the UACs on release and provide feedback to show that balance suffers from this round of changes. Perhaps a softer hand is necessary to tone down the DPS slightly, while still leaving the ability to sustain a push so they are more than just an inferior poke weapon.

What buff to UACs are you referring to?

[Sjorpha]

Xmith, on 15 November 2016 - 09:49 AM, said:

What buff to UACs are you referring to?

There has been significant buffs to uacs in the past, reduction in number of projectiles and the time to fire each burst.

Edited by Sjorpha, 15 November 2016 - 10:38 AM.