385 replies to this topic

[Andi Nagasia]

Sixpack, on 18 December 2016 - 03:20 PM, said:

Because people will just find a new thing to complain about once one perceived imbalance is gone, or has simply been flipped.
There is also the simple fact that things will become obsolete (or already are) with new things being introduced. (hello there SRM 2).

the Imbalance is real, thats why IS have God level Armor and Structure Quirks,
SRM2s have their place they are half the Tonnage of SRM4s and have less Cycle,
(a Players Choice HardPoint for Cycle have lots of M Points ARC then get SRM2s)

Sixpack, on 18 December 2016 - 03:20 PM, said:

Then there is the problem of the quirks being balanced around the differences in hard points, damage output, manouverability and survivability. Changing IS XLs from the current state will basically mean you throw everything in the trash can and need a complete rework. And once that is done people will complain anyway because things are not identical. That and the LFE becomes obsolete.

come Feb the New Skill Tree comes out, most Quirks are disappearing,
so things are already getting reworked so even with out this things are changing,
i just rather that we get the new Skill Tree with this Change so we can get Batter Ballance,
-
STD Engines? Give them an CT&ST Structure Buff to make them matter,
LFE Engines? Give them a CT Structure Buff to make them matter as well,

Sixpack, on 18 December 2016 - 03:20 PM, said:

This simply looks at people seeing a good enough balance and dreaming about the perfect one. The only way that will ever happen is if everything is identical.

things can be Balanced but Different, even if both XLs act the same Clan Still are Smaller and get the penalty,
IS would likely get more of a Penalty, because they have more Options(being the LFE)

[Mystere]

InspectorG, on 18 December 2016 - 11:20 AM, said:

Likely also that they think(romanticize) later BT was 'balanced'?

Shh! You don't want to unnecessarily shatter people's hopes and dreams. That's just cruel.

Sixpack, on 18 December 2016 - 03:20 PM, said:

Because people will just find a new thing to complain about once one perceived imbalance is gone, or has simply been flipped.

Precisely.

[Lykaon]

Frechdachs, on 18 December 2016 - 02:13 PM, said:

No, they should introduce new tech for IS, including Light Engines.

So half weight clan XLs vs 2/3 weight Inner Sphere LFE is balance?

I don't see why it's such a big deal to the Clan players if I.S. XL engines were capable of surviving a single torso destruction.

The clan XL is still smaller still paired with 7 crit endo 7 crit ferro 2 crit DHS lighter more compact ballistics and missiles.

Has it not occured to them what optimizing a mech looks like from the I.S. side?

Clan: XL engine + Endo Steel + Ferro Fibrous + 3 external Double Heat Sinks remaining crit space = 23 of 47 total
I.S. : XL engine + Endo Steel + Ferro Fibrious + 3 external Double Heat Sinks remaining crit spaces = 4 of 47 total

Where the clan tech leaves enough space to load up an Ultra Ac 20 with 5 tons of ammo 2 large pulse lasers 2 medium pulse lasers a Targeting computer class 1 an active probe and two more external double heat sinks (<--- actual MAD IIc build)

The Inner Sphere mech gets to load up well not much with 4 crits maybe 4 medium pulse? (<---- nothing useful on 85 tons)

Edited by Lykaon, 18 December 2016 - 10:19 PM.

[Josh Seles]

Thank you Frechdachs, I think the IS Light Engine is the simplest solution to this problem. The Light Engine was introduced in TT to solve this same problem there, why can't the Light Engine solve this problem here as well?

Giving IS ClanTech XL engines is basically giving IS a better Light Engine anyways.
Doubling up durability quirks won't work because we have durability quirks already and this issue is still afoot.
Dropping IS XL fragility defeats its purpose: a very light engine that allows for high speed and firepower but at the cost of higher death probability

Edited by Josh Seles, 18 December 2016 - 10:47 PM.

[Andi Nagasia]

@Lykaon
its not Clan Players, im a Clan Player and i think IS-XL should survive ST loss,
many Clan and IS players alike think so, but just as much many feel things are fine as is,
for some its about Lore, for some its about Keeping things Asymmetrical,


which is why i made this Topic,
i can understand both sides, but players need the numbers, so i made a poll,
so we can see as a community, how the community feels about IS/Clan XL balance,
as of now 11Pages in, and 7/10ths in Favor of looking at XL balance i think we are getting allot of good information,
i can only Hope that come of the conversations and Ideas here, Make it into MWO and give us a better game,

[Andi Nagasia]

Josh Seles, on 18 December 2016 - 10:43 PM, said:

Thank you, I think the IS Light Engine is the simplest solution to this problem. The Light Engine was introduced in TT to solve this same problem there, why can't the Light Engine solve this problem here as well?


Giving IS ClanTech XL engines is basically giving IS a better Light Engine anyways.
Doubling up durability quirks won't work because we have durability quirks already and this issue is still afoot.
Dropping IS XL fragility defeats its purpose: a very light engine that allows for high speed and firepower but at the cost of higher death probability

LFE would make the STD engine Obsolete with its current implementation,
LFE isnt some Magical solution that will make everyone happy, it has its own peoblems,
the biggest is IS players feeling Clans always have the Advantage(so IS gets Quirks Clan doesnt),
as ive said before in this Topic,

Andi Nagasia, on 16 December 2016 - 08:11 PM, said:

for my my Balance Solution at this point would be:

make IS & Clan XL engines work the same(survive ST loss)
both take a Penalty when they lose a ST(-30% Everything)

then give All STD Engines Structure Quirks, to their CT/STs,
Lets say 1/10 Engine rating to CT & 1/20 Engine rating to ST,
in this case a 300STD would give +30CT & +15ST Structure,
(this allows STD engines to have a use in MWO)

if & When LFE are finally released,
give them +Structure Quirks, to their CTs 1/20 Engine rating,
this Balanced both Techs and makes STD engines usefull in MWO,

[Lykaon]

Destoroyah, on 18 December 2016 - 12:11 PM, said:

They should just introduce the Light Fusion Engine for IS then increase CXL Side Torso loss penalty to compensate for the LFE's Slightly heavier weight. Then buff the other two engine types so they aren't made irrelavent.

IS XL's should stay as they are but apply say a 10% structure increase to side torso's and a 20% increase to Accel/Decel/and turn rates.

Standards apply about a 25% structure increase to all torso sections. This will apply to both IS and Clan Standards and might make clan battlemechs consider STD engines a viable tanky option versus the CXL.

LFE Pros: Lesser side torso destruction penalties compared to CXL. / More weight saving then STD Engine.
LFE Cons: Slightly less weight saving then CXL and IS XL.

IS XL Pros: Greatest weight savings. / Agility Bonuses.
IS XL Cons: Fragility

IS and Clan STD Pros: Greatest durability benefits.
IS and Clan STD Cons: No weight saving resulting in slower speeds and firepower.

If they did something like this then they could remove or tonedown alot of the structure quirks. Some chassis will still need some consideration just because of their profile and weapon placements like the atlas and cataphat.

Have you bothered to actually see what the percentages are for your proposed bonuses in actual numbers?

10% and 25% structure bonuses for side torso by top weight values in mech classes.

Light mechs 35 tons base side torso structure 16 points 17.6 with 10% bonus 20 points with 25% bonus

Medium mechs 55 tons base side torso structure 26 points 28.6 with 10% bonus 32.5 with 25% bonus

Heavy mechs 75 tons base side torso structure 32 points 35.2 with 10% bonus 40 with 25% bonus

Assault mechs 100 tons base side torso structure 42 points 46.2 with 10% bonus 52.5 with 25% bonus

These bonuses are not enough to even briefly contemplate giving up a half engine weight payload bonus for clan pilots. At best they are a consolation prize for the few I.S. mechs that use side torso AC20s. Overall not meaningful nor worth it.

Light fusion engines in the lore are available in 3062. If PGI doesn't do a considerable time jump I doubt I will be waiting for the LFE to eventually appear. Basing any I.S. vs Clan XL engine debate on the existance of a future tech that DOES NOT EXIST in MWo is a waste of time.

Also since when is half weight engine balanced with a two thirds weight engine?

And if we are doing a time jump to 3060's isn't it lore appropriate for clantech to be available to the Inner Sphere houses?

Also if we jump to the 3060s how are all the Smoke Jags gonna take the news that Huntress has fallen to Operation Serpent? Go re-roll as a Novacat or something...

[The Unstoppable Puggernaut]

I still think engine damage would make more sense here. If you are taking engine damage, you should be smoking and slowing down. No one is scared of getting CT critted and they should be.

In MW2 that was the deathsign, once the armour went, your engine speed was reduced in yellow crit straight away. If you made it to red it was extremely slow.

[The Lighthouse]

Just..... seriously.


Seriously, stop "forcing" to put lore of novel/tabletop into a real-time simulation. It just does not work. Even that crappy and incompetent Games Workshop realized this simple truth far long time ago. All the good lore and stuffs are fun and interesting, but in reality a lot of stuffs just do not work and have to be thrown away.


Let me give you an really good example.

Even before we should talk about the fact that omnimechs are supposed to be super rare and able to at least take twice number of IS mechs in the first place, let's talk about weapon location problem, a.k.a hardpoints.

In TT the locations are not problematic. If the part gets damaged, it loses weapon there. Simple.

Now in an actual computer game, it turns out that (surprise!) mechs that have weapons in high places have so much advantage compared to mechs which don't because they can safely cover their entire bodies and hill-hopping like no end.

This fact alone already tosses out any hopes for semi-parity between TT and the real-time computer game out of the window.

And then we have a pinpoint shooting. In TT it really isn't much of the problem because it is randomize chance. But in game where a human can aim, they can relatively easily focus damage on a certain part so they can destroy mechs faster.

No, no amount of ridiculous buff to SP or armor will solve the problem, and only creates additional issues. A lot of things from lore and TT simply do not make any sense in real-time environment.


Seriously, if you really want a game that follows TT and lore perfectly, you are looking at a wrong genre. You should be looking for the upcoming turn-based Battletech game by HBS, not Mechwarrior.


Best solution really is:

1) Let IS mechs not explode when side torso is gone with XL equipped (NO, we don't want to re-grind and gain Light engines. seriously. Stop giving PGI an idea to force people to grind stuffs further.)

2) Unlock the engine choices for Omnimechs. This also solves problems with some clan mechs being underpowered due to locked to too slow or too fast engine such as Dire Wolf and Gargoyle.

If we are really going to balance between Clan vs IS, only way is let everyone using everything from both sides (which happened in the end in the lore.)


Plus:

If you do not like stuffs being obsoleted, simply introduce / re-adjust score system based on performance/c-bill ratio. If you use an expensive mech with tons of clan technology you should be pulling the weight according to how much your mech cost. If someone uses stock, cheap IS mech and does well, give him/her better rewards. If someone uses expensive, customized clan mech and does not well, reduce the rewards.

When a match is ended, calculate total c-bill lost by mech destruction rather than giving win to a side that has more mech left. Even if one side manages to wipe out other side, if the winning side actually lost far more c-bill than losing side, then the winner has to be flipped.

Edited by kwm1800, 19 December 2016 - 03:00 AM.

[Elessar]

kwm1800, on 19 December 2016 - 01:57 AM, said:

...

And then we have a pinpoint shooting. In TT it really isn't much of the problem because it is randomize chance. But in game where a human can aim, they can relatively easily focus damage on a certain part so they can destroy mechs faster.

...

Which actually is part of the problem and could be solved by going away from pinpoint accuracy.
Instead one could have a circle of probabilities around the center of the crosshairs ... with probabilities for the shot to hit the crosshairs or at a distance of x pixels around it (and with the size of the circle depending on the type of weapon (for example, Lasers small circle (due to them being very accurate), Gauss Cannons merdium circle, Autocannons bigger circle (with the circle being bigger, the higher the AC is rated)).
Perhaps also with the circle being dependant on the movement of your own mech (so that, if you move your mech (or even jump) your circle gets higher

This way, mech battles would actually be more prolonged, as you wouldn't as easily hit the same location with every shot ... and there would be no more reason not to introduce critical hit effects for Engines.

You could even apply heat effects to this system (with the circle within which the shot can fall getting bigger, the hotter your mech gets)

(Warthunder, for example, uses such a system ... you don't hit exactly where you aimed at, instead the distance at which the shot falls is randomized to a degree (depending on the gunnery skill of your gunner) ... and I actually like it)

Edited by Elessar, 19 December 2016 - 02:28 AM.

[The Lighthouse]

Elessar, on 19 December 2016 - 02:23 AM, said:

Which actually is part of the problem and could be solved by going away from pinpoint accuracy.
Instead one could have a circle of probabilities around the center of the crosshairs ... with probabilities for the shot to hit the crosshairs or at a distance of x pixels around it (and with the size of the circle depending on the type of weapon (for example, Lasers small circle (due to them being very accurate), Gauss Cannons merdium circle, Autocannons bigger circle (with the circle being bigger, the higher the AC is rated)).
Perhaps also with the circle being dependant on the movement of your own mech (so that, if you move your mech (or even jump) your circle gets higher

This way, mech battles would actually be more prolonged, as you wouldn't as easily hit the same location with every shot ... and there would be no more reason not to introduce critical hit effects for Engines.

You could even apply heat effects to this system (with the circle within which the shot can fall getting bigger, the hotter your mech gets)

(Warthunder, for example, uses such a system ... you don't hit exactly where you aimed at, instead the distance at which the shot falls is randomized to a degree (depending on the gunnery skill of your gunner) ... and I actually like it)

Yes. Cone of fire. I thought about it, and this solution indeed comes up with some videos and comments around the web.

But I really don't think this idea would be good.


1) IS mechs, technically, are still far more fragile... Just less. Well, let's say this is acceptable. Then....

2) Just how are you going to deal with long-range weapons and players who like to snipe stuffs? Possible backlash potential here in the first place.

3) This game is real-time simulation with visible laser beams shown to players. Unlike games like wargaming stuffs that are easy to hide effects (you don't see a flying shell from tank firing, and machinegun fire from planes are chaotic enough), players will be seeing their lasers going different directions from what they are aiming in very apparent fashion. This inevitably will (NOT might) huge backlash from a lot of people if the previous point doesn't.

4) In general, games are really moving away from elements that are chance-based. LoL started it. Dota 2 is following the trend. And you have no longer random chance to attack over-the-hill in Starcraft 2 (in original Starcraft, units have miss-chance to attack units on higher ground.) This solution is really a backward solution in many ways.

5) Finally, now PGI also has to balance regarding the size of the cone of fire... We are literally asking for even more trouble here.

Edited by kwm1800, 19 December 2016 - 03:02 AM.

[Elessar]

kwm1800, on 19 December 2016 - 02:59 AM, said:

...

1) IS mechs, technically, are still far more fragile... Just less. Well, let's say this is acceptable. Then....
...

Yep ... but I always was a proponent of balancing IS vs. Clan not by giving the IS mechs quirks or the like, but rather by giving clans fewer players in a match.

kwm1800, on 19 December 2016 - 02:59 AM, said:

...
2) Just how are you going to deal with long-range weapons and players who like to snipe stuffs? Possible backlash potential here in the first place.
...

That's actually easy ... you would vary the size of the cone/circle.
The cone of an AC-2 would be much narrower than the cone of an AC-20
(perhaps one could balance it in a way that, around the Battletech maximum distance of the weapon, the size of the cone still allows a 75% hit probability (if both mechs were standing still and no heast effects are applied))

But I agree that there would be a backlash by people who like to snipe.
Actually IIRC I made the suggestions with cones/circles of hit probability already during Beta days, several years ago ... and, while there was agreement in some, there was disagreement from others, who liked to keep their pinpoint accuracy.
Well, PGI obviously never evert tried to implement such a system into the game (just as they never ever tried to actually put heat effects (at < 100% heat) into the game).
Which is a pity, as I think that hit cones would actually represent a good adaptation of the Tabletop system into MWO First Person Shooter.

I mean, look at TT vs. MWO distances:
If you shoot with an AC-20 at a target 9 hexes (= 270m) away, in Tabletop, even if both Mechs are standing still, you have a chance of just 42% (rolling 8+) of actually hitting the target (and you don't get to choose the hit location)
In MWO the chance would not only be 100%, but most likely (unless the target does Torso Twists) you would also be able to put all hits into the exact location where you aim at.

kwm1800, on 19 December 2016 - 02:59 AM, said:

3) This game is real-time simulation with visible laser beams shown to players. Unlike games like wargaming stuffs that are easy to hide effects (you don't see a flying shell from tank firing, and machinegun fire from planes are chaotic enough), players will be seeing their lasers going different directions from what they are aiming in very apparent fashion. This inevitably will (NOT might) huge backlash from a lot of people if the previous point doesn't.

Perhaps one could visually represent it by making the weapons always sway to a certain degree (whcih actually is my justification in Tabletop for heat effects on To Hit probability ... i.e. the hotter it gets, the less the weapon system stabilization works correctly)

kwm1800, on 19 December 2016 - 02:59 AM, said:

5) Finally, now PGI also has to balance regarding the size of the cone of fire... We are literally asking for even more trouble here.

Well, they should have done so in Beta already, as I said ... I don't give any hope on them actually implementing such a system at this point, but think that, if it had been implemented this way from the beginning on (and balancing had happened around it), it would have been the superior system of representing Battletech/Mechwarrior (compared to what we have now)

Edited by Elessar, 19 December 2016 - 03:38 AM.

[Andi Nagasia]

Cone of Fire is an Interesting Idea, but thats another Topic,
what ever PGI chooses Consensus seems to be XLs need more balance,
Edit-

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 19 December 2016 - 07:02 PM.

[Tiantara]

- Yes and I post some thoughts about that here.

Edited by Tiantara, 19 December 2016 - 07:35 PM.

[Andi Nagasia]

The Unstoppable Puggernaut, on 18 December 2016 - 11:44 PM, said:

I still think engine damage would make more sense here. If you are taking engine damage, you should be smoking and slowing down. No one is scared of getting CT critted and they should be.

In MW2 that was the deathsign, once the armour went, your engine speed was reduced in yellow crit straight away. If you made it to red it was extremely slow.

would be interesting, but not sure how it would work out, how it would be received,
i would like it, as well as movement Reticle Bounce, to throw off aim as you move,

[Daemonara]

I really think both sides should be able to survive a ST loss, it's just frustrating to play anything but light IS mechs with XL engines. :\

[Jay Leon Hart]

How about a future proof solution that takes care of the "Omnis have no engine choice" problem?

Battlemech XLs = death on loss of ST
OmniMech XLs = death on loss of both STs

Current Clan Omnis aren't affected, future IS Omnis aren't shafted and it even brings (some) Clan top performers down a level of power.

[Chuck Jager]

Andi Nagasia, on 18 December 2016 - 10:43 PM, said:

@Lykaon
its not Clan Players, im a Clan Player and i think IS-XL should survive ST loss,
many Clan and IS players alike think so, but just as much many feel things are fine as is,
for some its about Lore, for some its about Keeping things Asymmetrical,


which is why i made this Topic,
i can understand both sides, but players need the numbers, so i made a poll,
so we can see as a community, how the community feels about IS/Clan XL balance,
as of now 11Pages in, and 7/10ths in Favor of looking at XL balance i think we are getting allot of good information,
i can only Hope that come of the conversations and Ideas here, Make it into MWO and give us a better game,

I like your middle of the road approach, but

• a single poll does not reflect the playerbase and maybe only a part of the community
  
• any in game balance for playability will shaft a portion of lore without a convoluted hal/a*ss approach
  
• forget PGI, I am not sure if the player base is willing to have BT "reboot" universe where some options are streamlined or omitted to make the game more playable. I personally wished the written lore allowed separate translations into TT and MWO without the evangelicals.
  
• Folks like the idea of asymmetric balance just like they like elections, until they are on the loosing side
  
• An XL durability upgrade for IS (weight/speed/firepower) in the 300-600m pug/fw matches would create a massive imbalance in the short range game in IS favor.
  
• We could make all differences cosmetic like many games

PS I do think the is XL balance and crit slot heatsinks (used space not just cooling) makes many is mechs not playable or pigeon holed into one build. I play clan in FW and solo pug. I only play IS when I know my unit is 6+ and wants to push hard in group Q.

Edited by Chuck Jager, 21 December 2016 - 12:14 PM.

[Andi Nagasia]

@Chuck Jager
True that not all players wont visit the forums, but Polls can show us at least some of the numbers,
we can then assume that of those that dont visit the forums they must also have people for and against the idea,

true, in MWO when Clan / Clan Laser Damage numbers where Released there was an imbalance,
personally i was hoping Clan would get -1Damage across the Board, instead Clan got +1Heat to all lasers,
i think and to this day still feel, clan should get (-1Damage -1Heat -20%Duration) for balance,
but thats another Discussion and Topic,

True, but one can hope that if and when change comes those who initially dislike it can see reason,
assuming such a change balances play and increased Fun for those Playing,

i agree, that if PGI gave IS XL survivability it would create an initial imbalance,
but as most Quirks will be going away as to the addition of the New Skill tree,
i feel this would be a better most stable place to balance from,

some games have working asymmetrical balance, and it works for them,
but in this case i dont think it works everything, weapon asymmetry seems to work, XL asymmetry doesnt,
i see ACs Seem balanced, SRM/LRMs Seem balanced, even lasers seem balanced to an Extent,
but the XL kinda stands out, and thats why personally i think things need to change,

and to the who Future Proofing, What about the STD / LFEs? as i said time and time again,
give all STD Engines 1/10 their Engine Rating in CT Structure, and 1/20 their Engine Rating in ST Structure,
and for if and when LFE come out, give all LFEs 1/20 their Engine Rating in CT Structure,
(300STD = +30CT +15ST Structure)(300LFE = +15CT)
Give IS and Clan a reason to Run STD Engines,

[Sixpack]

Andi Nagasia, on 18 December 2016 - 03:58 PM, said:

the Imbalance is real, thats why IS have God level Armor and Structure Quirks,
SRM2s have their place they are half the Tonnage of SRM4s and have less Cycle,
(a Players Choice HardPoint for Cycle have lots of M Points ARC then get SRM2s)

I never said that there was no imblance, that is the reason we have quirks in the first place. But doing a change to what most people want (both clan and IS XL functioning the same) would require the entire quirk system to be reworked, again. Those things require time, effort and testing. That means that the people doing this will not be able to do other things, like working on balancing the introduction of new things like mechs or even equipment.

And the SRM2 is bad because of that, you don't want to face tank and MWO is mostly a cover shooter, which is why high alpha style game play has been so prelevant for so long. Ok, not for so long, it never went away and gaus/erppc is always a good option.

Quote

come Feb the New Skill Tree comes out, most Quirks are disappearing,
so things are already getting reworked so even with out this things are changing,
i just rather that we get the new Skill Tree with this Change so we can get Batter Ballance,
-
STD Engines? Give them an CT&ST Structure Buff to make them matter,
LFE Engines? Give them a CT Structure Buff to make them matter as well,

Yes, but should we not wait and see how the new skill tree works out first and then see what kind of changes might be needed? Starting on this now might again draw resources from other projects and tilt the balance of getting out updates and working on more important stuff, it would be bad if all the work put in to engine differences would ultimately go the way of the dodo (like energy drain by the looks of it)

As for the structure buffs you suggest, that will again be hard work to be just right between being too hard to kill and just dying anyway the second you poke around the wrong corner. Considering the high alpha focus fire meta you usually see these buffs might very well have no real effect except for handing out more cbills for the high end teams.

Quote

things can be Balanced but Different, even if both XLs act the same Clan Still are Smaller and get the penalty,
IS would likely get more of a Penalty, because they have more Options(being the LFE)

Yes, things can be balanced but different, but what I am seeing on the forums right now is everyone wanting things to be identical (either both clan and xl blowing on a st loss or both surviving on a st loss in the current focus). So people want more and more commonality and less and less actual differences. If things continue this might just end up as being another step of everything becoming an indistinguishable pie where all that matters is if the hardpoints are in the right areas to poke-alpha.



So my concerns are reduction in actual differences, people simply complaining about something else to be more identical, wasted work time of the dev team, the large work load required to find that balance should it be done with the quirk system (and please remember not all quirks are going away) and the potential for more equipment becoming obsolete.

I also believe that the real issue behind this is clan battlemechs that have upset the whole thing pretty badly.


On a sidenote I also wanted to thank you for trying to concentrate these kind of topics and putting them up, I assume you will also forward this to the dev team? (you got that color thing in your name). It is good to see that some staff tries to work these things out and gives the community something to discuss in and feel themselves be heard.