84 replies to this topic

[MechaBattler]

Am I the only one that feels this is unacceptable? PGI has always claimed that they intend to keep balancing the game. But just giving the IS more drop deck tonnage is on the same level as 10v12 balancing.

It means that they admit there is a disparity. It means that at equal tonnage, playing as IS, you're at a disadvantage.

Granted there's also the issue of organized unit play versus pugs. But units want to run with maximum advantage. So that means Clans. So while you can argue organized play is more of an issue. The disparity exists because one faction is better than the other.

Where is our balance!?

Okay. Go ahead, flame away.

[Snazzy Dragon]

You could give IS 500 tons for 4 mechs and they'd still want more tonnage.

In all seriousness though it doesn't help that all the top performing IS chassis got nerfed.. like, way to go. That sure does help balance.

[MechaBattler]

Snazzy Dragon, on 16 December 2016 - 06:02 PM, said:

You could give IS 500 tons for 4 mechs and they'd still want more tonnage.

In all seriousness though it doesn't help that all the top performing IS chassis got nerfed.. like, way to go. That sure does help balance.

That came about when Paul decided that quirks were out of control. With the thinking that structure quirks would make up the difference. Well clearly it wasn't enough.

Edited by MechaBattler, 16 December 2016 - 06:12 PM.

[Mystere]

MechaBattler, on 16 December 2016 - 05:54 PM, said:

Am I the only one that feels this is unacceptable? PGI has always claimed that they intend to keep balancing the game. But just giving the IS more drop deck tonnage is on the same level as 10v12 balancing.

Oh, please, don't even get me started.

On a more (somewhat) serious note, unless PGI starts showing the math they are using to determine how the they are "balancing" the two sides -- and the playerbase accepts it -- discussions like this will just never end.

Edited by Mystere, 16 December 2016 - 06:16 PM.

[Benjamin357]

What I find unacceptable, is that I cannot run four Spiders. 120 Tons min would be good.

[Mcgral18]

Didn't he say it was about population?

[Mystere]

Benjamin357, on 16 December 2016 - 06:24 PM, said:

What I find unacceptable, is that I cannot run four Spiders. 120 Tons min would be good.

I think that is an overreaction on almost everyone's part given that sometime ago light wolf packs terrorized the fattie lovers.

[Kuaron]

Hey, 10 vs. 12 would be great and fluffy!

[Johnny Z]

What I don't like is that the tech disparity is not addressed in quick play. Want to make the most creds? Faster exp? Punish your opponents? Go Clan is the meaning here.

[Jingseng]

i wouldnt mind so much if there were more options for clans... but all of our options are top heavy. We need more options at the lower end, and specifically at 40 and 60 tons.

Given that IS have a 25 ton adv, i'm waiting for IS drop decks to be expanded to five mechs, while clans remain at four. I think the Lore Storm will be absolutely hilarious at that point.

[Novakaine]

Gawd how the cry.

[Xetelian]

I don't feel like the tech is too greatly weighted towards clans.

The godly quirked IS mechs were a bit much, but they toned them down more than they should. The balancing in this game is very heavy handed, nothing is done in increments unless they don't actually want to change things much.

I'd give IS a little bit more tonnage for FW/CW to balance the cXL and 7 crit Endo/FF but not too much because there are some really good IS mechs.

I'd also give 15+ structure or armor across all the mechs in the IS just for side torso's to combat the disparity between XL engines. The black knight was a little over quirked but now I think it is significantly less powerful and should get a touch more in structure. I know people scream "But now that 75 ton mech has the HP of an Atlas" to which I say, so what? We want time to kill to increase TTK but are unwilling to buff the armor up, instead we get bandaid's like energy draw and ghost heat. What I think we really need to do is just give isXL the ability to survive if one torso is taken, it already takes up more slots it shouldn't also kill the mech.

Edited by Xetelian, 16 December 2016 - 07:36 PM.

[El Bandito]

Snazzy Dragon, on 16 December 2016 - 06:02 PM, said:

You could give IS 500 tons for 4 mechs and they'd still want more tonnage.

In all seriousness though it doesn't help that all the top performing IS chassis got nerfed.. like, way to go. That sure does help balance.

Actually, when the IS had 30 more tons than Clans in CW2, Clanners cried a lot. Let alone 200 ton difference.

But yeah, tech difference is still there, and still contributing to the imbalance.

Edited by El Bandito, 16 December 2016 - 07:39 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

Jingseng, on 16 December 2016 - 07:20 PM, said:

i wouldnt mind so much if there were more options for clans... but all of our options are top heavy. We need more options at the lower end, and specifically at 40 and 60 tons.

Performance-wise, the IS are top-heavy, too. It takes an 85 ton Battlemaster to compete 1 for 1 with a TBR, a 75 ton Black Knight or 70 ton Warhammer to compete with the EBJ, etc. That's the logic behind why IS got more tonnage to play with in the first place.

[Valhallan]

Eh PGI Stated that the tonnage is based on population not balance, my take is that this means that as long as everyone is piling in jade turkey the tonnage for IS will continue to go up and the tonnage for clan will continue to shrink up until the point that a bunch of people take the hint and switch sides. Regardless of this though, i do agree that the absolute req for dropdecks should be dropped, let people drop with less than 4 if they want, if you want people to use the lighter chassis then you make them useful enough that people are willing to pay the tonnage rather than forcing it because their other picks are heavy.

[DGTLDaemon]

Valhallan, on 16 December 2016 - 10:03 PM, said:

Eh PGI Stated that the tonnage is based on population not balance, my take is that this means that as long as everyone is piling in jade turkey the tonnage for IS will continue to go up and the tonnage for clan will continue to shrink up until the point that a bunch of people take the hint and switch sides.

And this is IMHO the biggest problem with their current balancing approach. Trying to balance two different techs is one thing, but telling players "hey, stop playing one side and switch to the other 'cause we don't like seeing so many players on one side" is just plain wrong

[Tristan Winter]

They really need to do something about IS vs Clan balance.

[RestosIII]

Hmmm. A GD thread about FW/CW. I wonder how this is going to go.

MechaBattler, on 16 December 2016 - 05:54 PM, said:

Okay. Go ahead, flame away.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

10v12 would be great, but the next best thing would be 250v300. It's proportionally the same as 10v12, and until cXLs are changed somehow there needs to be a difference elsewhere to make up the difference.

[MechaBattler]

RestosIII, on 16 December 2016 - 10:36 PM, said:

Hmmm. A GD thread about FW/CW. I wonder how this is going to go.

That's because people love to hand wave the obvious away.

And it isn't exclusive to FW. It's less obvious in QP because clans on both sides. But come on. Balance has been crap since Paul came back and decided the quirks were out of control. But what they gave us was a smattering of structure quirks and making the meta IS mechs substandard to Clan counterparts. Since then they've been trying to come up with new ways of controlling balance. But they're too concerned with player opinion to implement anything new.