181 replies to this topic

[Kodiak Jorgensson]

Aaron DeChavilier, on 14 December 2011 - 11:16 AM, said:

but see you're doing two things: one poking holes into the customization system itself consider: If one can make an I.S. battlemech from scratch, is it not possible to make a clan secondline battlemech with all the toys given to the clans? second; you're ignoring stock/variant rules for IS Battlemechs are harder to customize than omnimechs yes? well again, logically if you are limiting which omnimechs one can choose, you are also limiting which battlemechs one can take and applying customization restrictions on those designs because they are battlemechs. you can't enforce canon on one side (clans) then compare it to non-canon hypothetical enemies (your PPC analogy) outside of the Fafnir, show me a stock mech or a variant of a stock mech that packs 2 HGR? one more thing i noticed, you're mentioning higher-end lvl 2 tech for the IS; stuff that wasn't available until very recently in the time line, Also the vast majority of these parts were not uniformly available to all factions all the time; clantech is available to all clans all the time my conclusion is this: for what they are, the clans are unbalanced as is. None of their items have any real deficit built in. If you want to use the omnimech 'restriction' rule then you must also remember to restrict IS players to available variants, parts, and mechs as well. Now when given the choice between the two tech bases, especially in a video game; which would you rather take? vast majority want the good guns, and everyone is clamoring to 'follow canon to the letter' so that means in 3050 the good guns are the clans. Their power-to-weight ratio tops most anything the IS can bring to bear. apologies for the error kudzu; the CERPPC = 15 heat, but when all clan mechs have DHS that are 2 crits apiece, its not really a problem - case in point Warhawk Prime - can fire all ERPPCs at once slaved to a targeting computer and only overheat by 5...

For starters. Battlemechs. There are at least 2 or more models of one single Battlemech heres 4 models of a Catapult
.
Model CPLT-C1
Chassis Standard
Armor 10 tons of Standard
Engine Standard Magna 260
Jump Jets Anderson Propulsion 21
Armament

• 2xLRM-15
  
• 4xMedium Lasers

Model CPLT-C1
Chassis Endo Steel
Armor 10 tons of Standard
Engine XLMagna 260
Jump Jets Anderson Propulsion 21
Armament

• 2xLRM-15s
  
• LB2-X AC

Model CPLT-K2
Chassis Standard
Armor 10 tons of Standard
EngineMagna 260 Speed64.8 km/h
Jump Jets Anderson Propulsion 21
Armament

• 2xPPC
  
• 2x MG

Model CPLT-H2
Chassis Standard
Armor 10 tons of Standard
EngineMagna 260 Speed64.8 km/h
Jump Jets Anderson Propulsion 21
Armament

• PPC
  
• 2xML
  
• 8xRocketLauncher 20’s

1 Battlemech 4 models (stock configurations) so even limiting the battlemechs to fixed hardpoints they can still get other models that allow for diffrent customization possabilites.

yeah it would be possible to build a secondline clan mech, but you should know. that clan tech is often built on the clan homeworlds soo thats like what? sevral months in production and sevral months travel time form a clan production facilty to the clan occpuied territory. wouldnt really be worth it until after the invasion.

Ok so heres my point most of the weapons in CBT(clan/I.S) already share stats some examples.

LRM 1 point damage per missle ( 5 10 15 20)
SRM 2 point damage per missle
SSRM 2 point damage per missle

I.S/CLRM range 23 (630M)
I.S ELRM range long range 38 (1140M) extreme range 44 (1320M) (accessible 3054) 18tons 8 criticals 12 heat might be heavy but its I.S only and outranges both standard LRMs.

AC UAC LB-X LightAC RAC all share damage heat and ammo per ton values

Both standard Gauss rifles share damage heat and range stats. So what if clan get a -2 Tons and -1/-2 critical space on some ballistics’. Clan prefer energy to ballistics.

A mech that isn’t a faffnir carrying dual heavy gauss ok done...

ANH-2AX Annihilator 2x improved Heavy Gauss, 19 tons laser Reflective Armour 2x CASE, 8 tons i-HGauss ammo + Armoured components. (life support sensors cockpit)

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Annihilator

ok so again, if clan have clone tech with there limited space and weight on there omni mechs, whats going to happen when 3060 rolls in and I.S get small lighter weapons that clearly arent really needed?

[Aaron DeChavilier]

who says the game devs are going to say that IS gets all this? you're worrying about
something that may change. I'm worrying about something that already exists and is
unbalanced. So what the Catapult has 4 variants?
want to see what the clans can do for 5 tons less?
http://www.sarna.net...d_Dog_(Vulture)
go ahead, use IS tech only and build a vulture like that, has to have the same speed,
armor, firepower...oh you can't? something's gotta give?

I don't know what you're complaining about! each clan omnimech has 4 prebuilt
variants using clantech that are comparable or even better than IS mechs in their
weightclass.

As for the Anni? yeah who makes that: Arc-Royal for Kell Hounds - who BUT the
kell hounds would have one!? Dracs? no Caps? no Leaguers? no

but who gets clan tech no matter where they're from? clans

the anni is also a moot point because Improved HG fall under 'experimental' tech and isn't
tournament legal.

Personally I don't want clan tech to be a clone of IS tech but neither do I
want it to be the be-all end-all for anything.

All I proposed was one stat drop, take your pick out of:
Damage, Range, Weight, Crits, or Heat
but when i did that, everyone just exploded into a Slippery Slope argument
how that would end the clans as we know them forever!!!11!

[Kodiak Jorgensson]

moot arguement, you didnt specify any conditions, you didnt say it had to be widely used or tournament legal but there it is. my point is I.S use mainly battlemechs and they have the weight and space capacity to cope with the 2-4 ton diffrence.

ecnomys playing a role in MWO? clan tech will be incredibly rare even for clan players (it can be fixed to work like this) and when acessible it will be expenssive. or maybe even acessible for a limited peroid.

worried. no but why are other worried aobut the small improvment clan tech have? its only a small improvemnt, not like tlike its a 200% better then I.S tech. people talk about it as if it where a massive improvement and i'm simply stateing that there are other balance method then just nukeing the stats that are already in place.

Econmy. clan tech = expenssive.
Cycle clan tech sould cycle longer then I.S (MW4 did this and it was a fair balance)
Rarity this would work. might not think it but it would
perks not sure how, but tieing perks into clan tech might work.
B.V Clan BV is pritty high that would also help limit the use...

simple balance methods better then nerfing imo

Edited by Kodiak Jorgensson, 14 December 2011 - 07:28 PM.

[Kudzu]

Alex Wolfe, on 14 December 2011 - 02:43 PM, said:

You make it sound like the original rules were created by benevolent, omniscient gods and it's not to mortal men to undermine Their work.

Lack of change for the sake of lack of change, "if it's newer than two decades old, I don't want it". Knock yourself out, like what you like and stuff, but there doesn't seem to be any actual reason or basis for discussion there but nostalgia-reinfocred stubbornness. The guy Aaron quoted has had the keys to the house for fifteen years, been doing it for a living, it seems reasonable that his musings warrant a thought besides your "bah! Humbug" directed at anything past a certain date, the only fault of which may be "you weren't there". Of course, it's your prerogative all the same.

Being "the guy who made it" doesn't automatically validate all the past and future decisions, case in point: George Lucas.

You're really going to compare the succession wars era and the clan invasion era to jihad and dark ages and tell me newer is better? We've seen what he's done in comparison to what came before him... and I (and many others) find it lacking.

[Slepnir]

Quote

How do we level the playing field as it were, without swinging the nerf bat so hard that the Clans lose the feel, the elegance that they have?

Habokku are we talking TT or MWO here?

If we are talking TT then your spending alot of time making things way more complex than they should be.
Ive been playing CBT TT for 20+ years (we use 3d terrain miniature rules).
as it is nothing in the way of weaponry or mechs needs changing. its already in the rules.

Our group finds that BV is a waste but it is a system you can go to, however what we find works most effectively is a 2:1 odds when IS fight clans. two lances is a good match and usually a close fight against a single clan star. understanding that most clan mechs do 1:1 damage to tonnage ration where as IS usually come in close to .5:1. factor in the pilot skill and you end up with a pretty fair fight....we alway run stock vet pilots 4/5 for IS and 3/4 for clan with each lance/star comnmander being 1 skill level higher(3/4 & 2/3).

To add an additional angle to the fight i highly recommend getting ahold of the old field manuals that have unit specific special rules. it really adds flavor to a fight, showcasing special combat tactics .

[Dihm]

Kodiak Jorgensson, on 14 December 2011 - 07:28 PM, said:

moot arguement, you didnt specify any conditions, you didnt say it had to be widely used or tournament legal but there it is. my point is I.S use mainly battlemechs and they have the weight and space capacity to cope with the 2-4 ton diffrence.

I'm not sure what version of Battletech you play, but show me ANY IS mech from the same era that can compare with a Clan omni at the same weight.

For fun, let's go with the Invasion era and use the Kit Fox. 30 tons. ER Large Laser, Small Pulse, LB-5X, Stream SRM-4. Give me a 30 ton IS mech that has the "weight and space capacity to cope with the 2-4 ton difference".

30 tons too restrictive? Okay. Give me an IS mech comparable to the Timber Wolf at 75 tons. There is nothing that can match it in armor, maneuverability, and firepower on the IS side.

I don't know where you think the IS has all this "weight and space capacity" available, perhaps you have things reversed?

[Habokku]

Slepnir, on 15 December 2011 - 01:45 AM, said:

Habokku are we talking TT or MWO here?

If we are talking TT then your spending alot of time making things way more complex than they should be.
Ive been playing CBT TT for 20+ years (we use 3d terrain miniature rules).
as it is nothing in the way of weaponry or mechs needs changing. its already in the rules.

Our group finds that BV is a waste but it is a system you can go to, however what we find works most effectively is a 2:1 odds when IS fight clans. two lances is a good match and usually a close fight against a single clan star. understanding that most clan mechs do 1:1 damage to tonnage ration where as IS usually come in close to .5:1. factor in the pilot skill and you end up with a pretty fair fight....we alway run stock vet pilots 4/5 for IS and 3/4 for clan with each lance/star comnmander being 1 skill level higher(3/4 & 2/3).

To add an additional angle to the fight i highly recommend getting ahold of the old field manuals that have unit specific special rules. it really adds flavor to a fight, showcasing special combat tactics .

Greetings there Slepnir

I'm proposing a change to the overall rules of the tabletop game that make sense and bring Battletech into the new millennium while at the same time maintaining the overall superior feel of clan weapons and tech. As they should have a technological edge as I've stated.

I want these (sensible!) changes to be simple, basic, and with a firm basis in logic. I then want that to carry over (Hopefully) into the design philosophy of MW:Online, and future Mechwarrior titles. Just because something was created out of balance doesn't mean we as the community can't facilitate a change for the better. I'd like the choice between Clan vs. I.S. to mean something, and not be so obvious to new members of the Battletech and Mechwarrior community.

As Alex Wolfe has proposed, tweaking one stat on clan weapons, Be it range, damage, heat, or weight (As I've said, it should be weight in my opinion), would do just that.

Have Clan weapons hit harder, have longer range and take up a little less space, but with a much steeper heat curve to deal with (and deal with it rather well, with their awesome double heat-sinks) with similar weight profiles to the I.S. counterparts. The LRM launchers being tweaked to include a built in FCS similar to Artemis IV to keep them suitably advanced and unique from there I.S. equivalent. Have their 'mech selection be more limited (fewer overall 'mechs) but more flexible overall due to being Omnimechs. (Very very flexible options for modification)

Have I.S. weapons be shorter ranged, and with less overall punch, taking up more space, but with a much more forgiving heat curve and a wider selection of available chassis to choose from but with less flexibility with each individual 'mech due to the immense cost in both time and money to modify your average Battlemech. (Meaning much more restrictive modification options for each individual 'mech but a wider variety of 'mechs to use and by extension modify)

If the weapon weights are brought more in to line, it actually makes the choice less of an obvious one. I'd like for both available choices to have tangible benefits and drawbacks. Do you opt for lower overall technology level (weapons hitting less hard, shorter ranged, etc) but that's on a much wider pool of available 'mechs that run cooler on average; or, do you choose the more advanced, but narrower tech pool and enjoy the benefits of better (harder hitting, longer ranged) tech that can heat you up much more quickly that's more easily applied to the less diverse selection of 'mechs?

Also, just saying "two vs. one odds" works just fine, but even with the changes I'm (and also Alex Wolfe, among others such as Dhim) are proposing the tech level would still be enough to require two to one odds the vast majority of the time.

I don't want to change the Clans, I want them to be deadly and viciously effective in battle. I want that challenge, and the thrill of fighting against a superior 'mech with better weapons than my own, but not to the point of ludicrousness as it feels to me now. The examples abound for this in this thread. You can still be better, and be balanced at the same time. The Battle Value system that is in place just doesn't cut it in my view, and that's why I'm looking to find an alternative with the help of the rest of the community.

I want the new players that we as a community will welcome to this universe to not simply go "Oh, wow the Clan's tech is so much better! Why would anyone play Inner Sphere?". My goal is to keep that from happening, as I think it will with the vast majority of newbies who will be coming in and that I want to welcome with open arms, be they Clanner, or Spheroid.

Also, in closing, it makes me happy that Mr. Randall Bills has a similar opinion on Clan Tech. I agree with his sentiment on the topic. Having more powerful, but shorter ranged lasers and having them be beastly mid-to-close in warriors that revel in the visceral whirlwind of in-your-face single combat and are able to savage any single enemy in short order... that screams Clans to me.. at least in my view.

Hopefully that clarified my stance.

<S> See y'all soon.

-Havoc
A.K.A. Habokku

[Aaron DeChavilier]

Starters; totally agree Habokku, just fixing the weight would be fine but I think some ranges need to be reconsiders:
things like pulse lasers

now Kodiak;

Kodiak Jorgensson, on 14 December 2011 - 07:28 PM, said:

moot arguement, you didnt specify any conditions, you didnt say it had to be widely used or tournament legal but there it is.

Well, if I was going to play someone I didn’t know too well at a con, would you allow custom designs? Or just go with stock/vars and Lvl2 tournament legal? Which opens the door for
Munchkinism and game breaking?

Kodiak Jorgensson, on 14 December 2011 - 07:28 PM, said:

my point is I.S use mainly battlemechs and they have the weight and space capacity to cope with the 2-4 ton diffrence.

I don’t really know what that means, sry

Kodiak Jorgensson, on 14 December 2011 - 07:28 PM, said:

ecnomys playing a role in MWO? clan tech will be incredibly rare even for clan players (it can be fixed to work like this) and when acessible it will be expenssive. or maybe even acessible for a limited peroid.

Ok how does that make sense? Clans can’t provide ample supply to their units? Now you’re swinging around and nerfing the clans out of nowhere.

Kodiak Jorgensson, on 14 December 2011 - 07:28 PM, said:

worried. no but why are other worried aobut the small improvment clan tech have? its only a small improvemnt, not like tlike its a 200% better then I.S tech. people talk about it as if it where a massive improvement and i'm simply stateing that there are other balance method then just nukeing the stats that are already in place.

This is where you are wrong, just flat out wrong. Clan tech is better either by parts – aka their tech is smaller, hits harder, lighter, and weighs less or by designs – all omnimechs have DHS built in, XL engines built in, and ¾ pilot stats.

Another way to look at this is; weren’t they supposed to be better? Again you’re swinging around
Trying to make this look like you’re some kind of picked-on minority when in fact you sound almost like a pool-shark; ‘oh I’m not that good at this game’ as you sink all your billiard balls on the fourth turn….

Kodiak Jorgensson, on 14 December 2011 - 07:28 PM, said:

Econmy. clan tech = expenssive.
Cycle clan tech sould cycle longer then I.S (MW4 did this and it was a fair balance)
Rarity this would work. might not think it but it would
perks not sure how, but tieing perks into clan tech might work.
B.V Clan BV is pritty high that would also help limit the use...

These are acceptable solutions; but then you’d have the majority of the clan players whining about why they can’t have their nice toys on a consistent basis or why new players can’t play with the better tech.

Kodiak Jorgensson, on 14 December 2011 - 07:28 PM, said:

simple balance methods better then nerfing imo

But the process of balancing is nerfing and boosting items; it is for any game you can’t avoid it
And a lot of things about Clantech need fixing. When you need RP elements to ‘balance’ a faction then you’ve already failed at balance.
Key to all of this is compromise and at some point clan players will have to understand that.
Again I repeat my idea: one stat drop, take your pick

Oh and a final note: 2:1 is not a good balancing system at all and just as bad a stop-gap as the BV system. 2:1 requires both players (or teams) to know the enemy’s load out in order to prevent something like this:
2:1, eh? Ok, we’ll play on Friday….
Then Friday came
Oh hey John you’re playing clan, what’d you bring?
John: I brought 2 Dire Wolfs, 1 Kit Fox, 1 Hellbringer, 1 Nova
Me: oh…I brought 1 light lance, and 1 medium lance…

^---the scenario is 2:1 but notice the lopsidedness?
2:1 takes away the surprise element and turns force choosing into a subtle negotiation with a player.

again, as with Habokku, I'm pushing this because with a new game coming out I'm hoping we can get
some longstanding errors of the game fixed like clan tech - and I will keep pushing this and hopefully
we can pull the clantech kicking and screaming into the 21st century where they are just as deadly
but not broken

Edited by Aaron DeChavilier, 15 December 2011 - 07:25 AM.

[Hayden]

I've read over a lot of the back and forth, and I find myself coming to the same conclusion: this is the wrong era for this type of game. A game set in the 3rd or cusp of the 4th Succession war would be best for this kind of warfare, period. The various powers are on an equal footing in terms of weaponry, there is no need to worry about "premium technology" because it simply doesn't exist. There are other reasons, mostly having to do with balance of power and territory, but I digress.

The easiest answer to questions of technology is to base the game in the first three decades of the 31st century.

[Dihm]

That's been my feeling too Hayden, but, the Clans are a big draw for people so I guess they went that way for marketing reasons.

[Evgeny Bear]

Dihm, on 15 December 2011 - 07:52 AM, said:

That's been my feeling too Hayden, but, the Clans are a big draw for people so I guess they went that way for marketing reasons.

They went in because I cant identify miself with those spheroids... all those plots, politics and "You killed my Daddy, now I have to kill you *sob sob*"

[Dihm]

So, marketing.

Edit: And you know what... politics is HUGE in the Clans, so you lost me there.

Edited by Dihm, 15 December 2011 - 08:45 AM.

[Evgeny Bear]

Maybe, but they do not poison their enemies, rather fight in a Duell.

[Dihm]

They did completely annihilate a clan to make a point because they stepped out of line and questioned all-mighty messiah Nicholas.

[Evgeny Bear]

Thats served them right =P

[Dihm]

Just sayin', shady stuff goes on in both "Realms".

That's the fun of Battletech.

[Terick]

Habokku, on 12 December 2011 - 05:24 AM, said:

I disagree, respectfully. As Alex Wolfe said in the above post, where were their research facilities? Where were their raw materials to design lighter components that held the same structural integrity? They left the I.S. on a 'flotilla' of jumpships and dropships. Sure they had 300 years, granted, but a large portion of that was spent in space looking for habitable planets, probably used to terraform said planets at least to some degree to allow for life to exist without the use of atmospheric contained structures, (Which I assume also existed) building the required living areas and 'towns' plus the agricultural areas as well.. It's an (understandably) monumental task to colonize one planet, let alone all of the clan home worlds that were colonized. I'm just thinking critically about it is all, not saying they couldn't have had the time, energy, or know-how to make such improvements on the existing technology, but when I think about what else was going on, it tends to make me think that they perhaps spent their time developing new (omni)'mechs, etc. Just my thoughts on that.


My thoughts, thanks for your input Diablo!

<S>

-Havoc
A.K.A. Habokku

I get the feeling you haven't done the research.

The clans aren't 'stuck' with 5 worlds and a handful of worlds in the Kerensky Cluster. They colonized, and they made a lot of colonies. I have never seen a 'complete' map of clan space but it is not a small area. The Cloud Cobras took over the Tanite Worlds (three worlds already inhabited by people).

They did spend a great deal of resources on making habitable worlds at first. But once the tech is there to do things effectively, they don't need to reinvent the wheel every time they want to terraform. They use domes on some worlds. This also drove weapon platform development, the Battle Armor came from deep sea exoskeletons used to mine.

However these things DRIVE research. First if you have limited resources you want to get the most from them. You do the research on making them better and more efficient.

In addition WAR drives research. The clans might not have had the huge wars of the IS but did have constant warfare and their society being driven by warriors that proved them selves meant that no clan could afford to not find better weapons and weapons platforms (mechs).

Your logic is faulty on it. Even real life (which using it compared to battletech is usually folly) proves that things do advance quickly. If anything I would say the advancements the clans made were STUNTED because of their challenges. Why are there systems so terrible after three hundred years of being able to research them? Really, we shrunk a lot of electronic components to the extent that in 300 hundred years every clan sensor suite should work as a beagle probe with ECM built in and ECCM built in to the point they ALWAYS jam IS mechs and keep their mechs from being jammed. Free, no tonnage needed.

Artemis IV shouldn't take any extra tonnage or space. Tell me why you think a laser needs to stay the same size for all these years? The Artemis system is a laser designator.... which I dont' understand it being jammed in the first place... We have shrunk lasers to the point we can put them in our pocket. If it is a sensor picking up a specific wavelength of light, a small LED with some focus lenses will work, so a big flashlight would be the right size.

Needless to say I can go on and show that every weapon and weapon platform the clans have shold be better then what they have. But that is what a GAME is about.

For game balance, Clans aren't balanced one on one, they weren't meant to be. The expectation was that 8 IS mechs of similar wheight would be a fair fight against 5 clan mechs of the similar weight. Where did you get the notion that 1 on 1 was supposed to be fair? This isn't Solaris VII.

The changes that need to be made is maybe a slight increase in clans damage vs IS systems and no change in weight/space of clan systems. a Clan ER PPC doing 50% more damage then an IS system... not good, both have the same range, but the clan system is lighter and smaller.

Some weapons need to be redone and made more like their description, pulse lasers need to either fire a burst of beams, each beam doing little damage or very fast rate of fire. MW2 had it best I think. Range on clan pulse should really be reduced also, since they can do so much at such a long range... hit as hard as a IS PPC for better range and better chances to hit.... The cheese is the clan Large Pulse laser really.

Personally I'm an IS man. I prefer being able to use complete combined arms. LRM carriers behind the hill with INF spotting, mines laid, VTOLs making runs, Manticore tanks in hull down firing their weapons with a few Demolishers in hiding for people that close on the tanks. My mechs serving as a mobile reserve for the charge to win the day or to blunt the enemies charge.

I do have to say your choice of a highlander as a mech... ick. Give me a Rampage and I'll curb stomp you.

Edited by Terick, 15 December 2011 - 10:34 AM.

[Terick]

Clan tech isn't all broken.

In fact I consider the XL engine a stupid design, so being in the vast majority of clan mechs makes them much easier to destroy. Yes, they are easier to destroy then some IS mech. How? Well in most IS mechs when you lose one torso, you keep fighitng with half a mech. The front line Omnis (as of most 3050) you lose a side torso and your out a mech. Through armor criticals really can cost players mechs. What? You dont' play with TACs? Your problem.

I have to say for pulse I agree with you. Every thing else, I don't completely agree.

Clan Gauss rifle = 12 tons 6 crit vs IS Gauss being 15 tons and 7 crit, same damage and same range. Yes three tons and one less crit spot is an advantage. Leave it alone.

Clan ER PPC = same range as IS ER PPC, 50% mroe damage and one less ton and crit. 50% more damage is a bit much... but even 12 allows for a head cap. I woudl maybe reduce damage a bit, but not make it 10 damage. I would add a min range of 4 to ALL ER PPCs. Really... a weapon like the PPC now gets more range and loses the min range? That makes sense how?

Clan ER lasers, Small and Medium have more range and damage with same tonnage but cause more heat. ER LL lot more range and more damage with same heat and less tonnage and crits then a IS ER LL. I would decrease damage maybe one point. I woudl add a min range to ALL ER lasers. You want extra range, you lose some close in combat.

LB, they are lighter and have less space then all IS models, they ahve the same range bracket, and damages as the IS models. Leave them alone.

Ultra, same as LBs, lighter and less space, leave them alone. (Ultras are waste of space in my experience, but I'm a bit Scottish so wasting more then 50% of your ammo is stupid to me.)

Streaks, Clans are lighter and every thign else is the same. Leave them be.

LRMs, put back on the min range of LRMs, other then that leave them alone. I dont' know why IS systems wheigh as much as they do... For All LRMs they need to balance out the LRM 5 efficiency vs the bigger launchers, if you dont' use Art IV it is better to go with more LRM 5s then with one bigger launcher. Especially when using vehicles. Since I use NARC... many LRM 5s is better then a few big launchers. Artemis doesn't help with Indirect firing, NARC does.

Special gear, (ECM, Probes, NARC, and Artemis) They are fine. I might have to agree that the clans wouldn't have worked on NARC since it is a team concept weapon and not a solo weapon system. I would say remove it from them completely, they don't make/use it. Like the C3 system from the DCMS. Making the clan LRMs required to have the ART IV on them might be a good idea, since they would increase damage per volley and clanners don't like to waste resources.

Pulse Lasers.... where to begin... Lets start with making them hit like an LB autocannon shooting cluster ammo. The IS Large Pulse laser, it fires nine beams, maybe some beams miss, so have to roll to see how many hit, each 'hit' does one point of damage, and each beam can hit a different place. Yes this takes mroe rolls for this weapon, infact that means instead of one roll on where a pulse laser hits it will be seven more rolls on average for a large pulse laser. But it is a lot more balanced

Clans have to much range of an advantage over IS on this weapons, the clans get more range, more damage for the small and mediums and for the large they also get less tonnage and less crits. I would cut clan ranges to being only 30 meters (1 hex ) better then IS pulse lasers. Regardless they don't do concentrated damage.

Yes this would change the use from hole puncher to crit seeker, but it fits the description and balances vs the -2 to hitting.

Clan Ferro armor, Endo and extralight engines. Leave them alone. Like I said extralight engines are a big handicap. I ahve lost count of the number of Warhawks I ahve killed because I got a hit on the ammo in the side torso... TAC or no TAC. Sure, CASE saves the mech n the long run... but it isnt' fighting me any more right now and I can pick it up and sell it later if I win.

Edited by Terick, 15 December 2011 - 10:34 AM.

[Aaron DeChavilier]

Terick, on 15 December 2011 - 10:29 AM, said:

I agree with all this wonderous thinking

but notice Terick, you're an IS player by nature so you can tell that things are...skewed..to put
it nicely.

As of the XL engines; uhm they're not a risk as a whole
here's why:
3 engine hits kills a mech in TT
IS XL engine has 3 crits in each torso and 6 in the center
CLan XL engine has 2 crits in each torso
the point? even the loss of one torso doesnt mean the death of the mech, add the fact that FF is on every model,
the range and damage of weapons is godly = on average, engine crits aren't going to be the way you stop a clanner
and minimizes the chance of luck giving you a quick kill.

IS mechs with XL are a gamble: CASE + XL engine isn't going to save you
Clan mechs with XL are a stable platform : CASE + XL engine will hurt, but wont kill

and while we're at it; if you understand applying Real World Logic to btech is folly (it really is) then don't think in terms
of "oh the clans have better, lighter, more damaging wweapons cause x,y,z," and start looking at it as "the clans have
better, lighter, more damaging weapons because the original game devs said so"
this changes the tone of the stats for clantech, turning it into as some one else already note: game power creep
with no true canon justification.

Also, if XL+CASE was such a terrbile config option, why are the clans using it so extensively instead of
CASE + STD engine which is the most stable platform there is

remember, Ammo explosion kills clan and is mechs equally, it matters not the mech blowing up; what does matter
are the chances of such an explosion and how the difference of one crit means a lot.

overall, I think you have some good ideas Terick and glad to see we agree on some things like pulse lasers and whatnot

[Volume]

First of all, I have not read every post in this thread, but I've read two and a half and I'm disgusted enough.

Here's a few of my QUICK QUICK QUICK opinions that I may elaborate on later when I have more time to post.

Obvious statement here: Clan tech is overpowered and better than everything else but that was the "idea" so to speak. In Mechwarrior 2, and MW2:GBL, you and your opponents were both using clan tech, so it was "balanced" so to speak, because everyone had it. In the single-player portions of Mechwarrior 2 Mercenaries, Mechwarrior 3, MW3: Pirate's Moon, etc, you started without it, and it became available as the game progressed as part of the escalation that these games have. Start out alone in a Bushwhacker, end up with a Dire Wolf, a Sunder, and an Annihilator on the same lance, against opponents that vastly outnumber you. This works well in single-player for a variety of reasons, including the fact that people love being the hero who can fight off 20 enemies alone, and the CPU AI doesn't have "feelings" or ragequit the game because his numbers are smaller than the other guy's numbers. But I digress.

My point is it worked out in single-player and made sense as you progressed, and then "beat" the game. I do NOT want this game to have a World of Tanks style "grind" until everyone is running around in 90-100 ton 'Mechs. I am incredibly thankful that the developers have been designing it to have a role for every unit on the battlefield, and for a light, medium, heavy, and assault to all have their place and usefulness. Rather than "Everyone is in lights because they're trash until everyone gets assaults" (a la WoT), it seems like "Everyone will have a distinct and useful role." That's good, but here's the problem: Clan tech will ALWAYS be better at any role, at least canonically.

Take the Puma. It has firepower that no 35 ton light 'Mech should ever have, more armor than most light 'Mechs, and a low silhouette that makes it hard to hit. Or the Cougar. Fast, powerful, ridiculous armament for its size (2 LARGE PULSE LASERS and 2 CLRM10 ***), strong torso twist, etc. I could go on. We all know how ridiculous clan 'Mechs are and if you were to pick one Inner Sphere or one Clan to pilot of similar class or weight, the "better" choice will always be a Clan 'Mech.

The only deficiency that they might have could be electronic warfare. It seems that plenty of Clan 'Mechs don't have ECM in Mechwarrior 4, but I don't know how canonical that is. Some of them also can't mount active probe, or beagle active probe, but again, I don't know how canonical that is.

Anyway, clan 'Mechs are faster, stronger, have greater range, CASE everywhere for free, endo-steel, ferro fibrous, whatever. Ridiculous.

That said, I repeat: It works fine in single-player games, because you have something to work for, something to be proud to find or have, something more rare or more expensive to maintain (MW4 Mercs, say) or simply "balanced" because the battles were clan vs clan (MW2).

In MULTIPLAYER, we've all seen poptart Shadowcats, Supernovas with 7 ERLL's, etc. It's a "problem" I guess if you can't all focus some guy who's hanging in the air for 6-7 seconds (plenty of time to blast him), but what can I say? By making this game in 3048, the developers obviously have planned for the Clans to be put in at some point, with Lostech, Clan double heatsinks (which facilitate boating and whatnot), Timber Wolves wrecking everything, etc.

If you ask ME there should be NO Double heatsinks, only a few choice loadouts (see MW:LL as an example, but even they have Shadowcats with an cER PPC, cGauss, and JJ's...), game should be in like 3025, but that's just personal. Who cares. I like the clans, I started with MW2, but there are only a few ways

1: Clan vs. Clan only. This doesn't fix the equipment, it just fixes the player experience.
2: Battle value with a set number of players on each side. Example: 8v8 battles, with 10000 BV or something. Can't have 8 people in Warhawks vs. 8 people in Jenners - maybe one or two people on each side have Clan tech, make sure amount of Clan mechs are equal. This doesn't fix the equipment, and it can make the player experience not so good. At least people will be able to gang up on the "big guy" (again, WoT style when you get 1-2 heavies in a tier 5 match. Not good, but playable at least.)
3: No changes, use ECM and tactics to win. Picture one lance of inner sphere heavies fighting a point of clan heavies. No chance, right? What if you give the inner sphere heavies a fire support lance of a longbow, catapult, dervish, whatever... on a hill while a Raven runs around and NARCs the clanners, allowing artillery fire... ARROW IV support or something. Who knows.
4: Zellbrigen (LOOOL WOULD NEVER WORK IN A MULTIPLAYER GAME)
5: NERF CLAN TECH (Not canonical but BAME GALANCE is more important)
6: make clan tech a TRADEOFF (see: PPC, cER PPC in MW4, ER Large Pulse vs Large X-Pulse, etc) - make them more heat, higher recycle time, whatever, more burst damage than IS. I don't want to say "OH IT HAS 15% CHANCE TO JAM RANDOMLY AND ***** YOU" because we all hate RNG (at least non-tabletop players do. Rolling a 12 with an urbanmech's AC is totally fair).
7: Make it incredibly rare (This doesn't FIX it either, it might fix the gameplay a BIT but not really. Salvagable and expensive just makes the game pay2win which we don't want.)
8 and my solution: DON'T INCLUDE IT.

Seriously though, they'll have to figure something out and do it RIGHT if they are to include the clans. That SAID, I think they should have, say, simulator battles, clan vs clan, and like IS tech 1 vs IS tech 1...Sort of having a simulator battle of the first succession war or something...But I'm getting really offtopic now.

Suffice to say clan tech is not balanced, will not be balanced, can not be balanced unless every single loadout was tweaked (and I mean "tweaked" not "butchered" a la MW4), unless every weapon was tweaked, every stat was modified, whatever. ASSUMING that all of this is done, then it lowers the canonical impact of the Clans, which undermines all of the history that's already been written and done and whatever. Changing numbers will also mess some things up - AC20 vs UAC20 vs LBXAC20 vs HVAC20, vs RAC20, vs clan versions of the applicable ones, most people would just get clan UAC20s unless they like spreading damage over several target areas. Assuming we're still using the "RT/CT/LT" model, we want to maximize damage to one location as much as possible in order to remove the criticals (assuming we're still using that system) from the hardpoint.

If everything is changed to make an inner sphere UAC20 just as good as a clan UAC20, what the hell is the point of having a clan UAC20? Different bore? Ammo types? If one is different than the other it isn't inherently imbalanced, but what exactly are the differences that will be changed? recycle time? Attack speed/damage? Even if it has the same DPS, in urban fighting, I think you would want to fire one shot that does 20 damage, not 20 shots that do 1 damage, assuming armor works the same that it has in previous games and the TT.

I honestly believe that there is NOT A WAY to make this balanced. Obviously the Clans can't be a playable faction unless fighting other clans, but even if the Clan tech is rare, hard to get, hard to maintain, it's still a distinct advantage over everything else. Hopefully we won't have to worry about it for over a year if it's December 15th 3048 right now, but color me afraid/surprised/worried about how they add it, if they add it, when they add it, how broken it will be, whatever. I am assuming this game has no PvE or PvM or "AI CONTROLLED ENEMIES" or whatever (except maybe base turrets in certain game modes?), so it would be impossible to say "Oh we'll stand together as the inner sphere united and fight against them" or something.

I admire the efforts of some people in this thread to "try" and balance it but every attempt seems incredibly restrictive, severing the heart and soul of the ideas created by FASA (which to be honest WEREN'T THAT GOOD IN MY HUMBLE OPINION), and I know people will complain no matter WHAT happens. I am hopeful that this is all figured out before everything is said and done...Imo make the heat generation ridiculous and make the penalty for shutting down significant...That should help balance most of the designs as is.