391 replies to this topic

[Gunner Kisiel]

"Captured mechs"

I plan to watch this after work tonight, but based on the comments I gather the final suggestion is a free for all on mech selection? I agree balance it out between the IS and Clans. However I like that both sides have a different feel and wouldn't enjoy an entirely normalized approach.

Why not allow "Captured Mechs". An IS drop deck would be able to use 1 or 2 clan mechs. A Clan Drop deck would be able to use 1 or 2 IS mechs.

Otherwise I fear only some sort of big buff to IS XL engines would suffice.

[Myantra]

Gas Guzzler, on 16 December 2016 - 08:28 AM, said:

Wow I didn't know there were so many people that didn't realize balance favors Clan mechs. Come on people, get your head out of the clouds. They need to dial back some.of the quirk nerfs, maybe not ALL the way, but IS mechs do need a little bit of help right now.

Personally, I have no problem with the suggestion to make IS XL behave like Clan XL. Of course, that is only if they are removing the structure quirks intended to harden the existing IS XL some.

[Sarsaparilla Kid]

Hunter Tseng, on 16 December 2016 - 04:32 AM, said:

This balance issue will always be an issue as long as it is battletech... but this is a fps with giant stompy robots, online against people not AI controlled cannon fodders, so in my opinion translating TT rules directly to this platform doesn't really apply properly... the IS XL is the best example, for IS v IS the compromise does make sense... durability for agility, but IS v clan, it is a clear disadvantage...
I don't think we can expect any major rebalancing before the introduction of the new skill tree, but the IS XL can be changed instead of 3 crit slot in the ST, why not have 2 crit slot in ST and 1 crit slot in the legs... still kinda "lore" but not insta death from ST loss

Or, leave the 3 slots in the side torsos, but require 4 slots total to be destroyed on an IS XL...same thing, it requires a second location to be critically hit or destroyed if not the CT, but they wouldn't have to reprogram crit slot locations that way, just the number required to be destroyed. Besides, with an engine crit slot in the leg as well as side torsos, there goes the extra ammo storage...

[Novakaine]

M A N T I S, on 16 December 2016 - 07:36 AM, said:

Well, it's not disingenuous at all. I prefer my Grasshoppers to my Ebons, because the torse twisting is quick, the cooling is great, it has JJs, good armour, nice hardpoints and mine runs 83.5... so I like it. I don't know what else I can say. Those mechs make up the core of my decks, but keep calling me liar. Thanks!

Naw man I only claimed "most."
I simply can't trump someone else's personal experiences or likes.
But that's stark contrast to what I've seen on in FW the past few years.
That all I'm saying so apologies I guess.
We're all here trying to get some enjoyment.

[M A N T I S]

Novakaine, on 16 December 2016 - 09:14 AM, said:

Naw man I only claimed "most."
I simply can't trump someone else's personal experiences or likes.
But that's stark contrast to what I've seen on in FW the past few years.
That all I'm saying so apologies I guess.
We're all here trying to get some enjoyment.

Thanks Novakaine. I know people get dug deep into their opinions, we're obviously on opposite sides of the fence on this. I appreciate the gesture. I'll tone it down some, too.

[Gas Guzzler]

Myantra, on 16 December 2016 - 09:04 AM, said:

Personally, I have no problem with the suggestion to make IS XL behave like Clan XL. Of course, that is only if they are removing the structure quirks intended to harden the existing IS XL some.

Some mechs would still need structure quirks dude to bad geometry or other maladies, but that is no different than Clan mechs. See: Summoner, Gargoyle, Linebacker, Orion IIC, Highlander IIC, etc.

[Big Tin Man]

FWIW, if I could take a clan assault to FW, I'd probably buy a MADIIC pack + hero today.

[nehebkau]

ladiesman712, on 16 December 2016 - 12:31 AM, said:

Always?
I remember times were Clan factions got dominated by IS factions in CW, so please don't try to spread untrue things..kk? thx!

I love how a clanner equates "dominated" with "on equal footing".

[Hanky Spam]

nehebkau, on 16 December 2016 - 10:42 AM, said:

I love how a clanner equates "dominated" with "on equal footing".

Dunno if you were the last 12 months in hibernation, but around ~9-12 months ago Clans had a pretty tough time, with the only minor exception of maybe CJF due to KCom and even back in this time CJF wasn't that, what it was the last 6 months.

****, Clans also had no useful Assaults back in this time. Well, circumstances changing...eh?

[Vincent Quatermain]

SlyJJ, on 16 December 2016 - 07:48 AM, said:

You need to check your math. The heat is higher in clan weapons in proportion to the damage they deal.

What matters is how fast they hit the heat cap. Clan mechs run hotter than IS mechs, at least for any of the good builds on either side. This means that when Clanners need to cool down, the IS boys keep firing and knock another Clan mech or two out of the fight -- advantage gone. Now the reason this often fails, is that the vast majority of MWO pilots have learned a timid peek-and-poke playstyle that gives the Clans the opportunity to cool off.

SlyJJ, on 16 December 2016 - 07:48 AM, said:

And did you not watch the video? Talking about limited customising options when compared to battlemechs? Jeez with omnipods you've got more options than one could hope for.

Not with engine size which leaves most Clan mechs with an entire dimension of customizability that is gone. As for omnipods, most of them are junk anyway, so all that mechanic really does is hide the "true" hardpoint variants.

SlyJJ, on 16 December 2016 - 07:48 AM, said:

And please explain how a uac that has +50% on range and can deal DOUBLE damage is "inferior" to my AC20?

The multiple projectiles, which means that at longer distances and/or shots with a wide angle-of-attack, the Clan weapons hit multiple locations. That is inherently inferior because pinpoint damage beats spread. To make a 1:1 comparison, the IS UAC5 is superior to the Clan UAC5 in every way.

SlyJJ, on 16 December 2016 - 07:48 AM, said:

"Weaker quirks" thats so adorably cute- Iget -10% heat and only on certain mechs whereas you get +25% range in the weapon- and omnipods allow you to do whatever to any mech.

How about structure and twist quirks? Those make IS mechs live longer and accquire targets faster. These are almost always better on the IS mechs.

SlyJJ, on 16 December 2016 - 07:48 AM, said:

Considering how "superor" IS mechs are, surely if we had clan tech none of us would use it, because its not "really" incredibly better, right? If you honestly thought that, you'd have no problem with mixing tech.

First, I have stated many times that Clan tech is easier to play for the peculiar style that most MWO players have gotten used to. Maybe we need to widen the tonnage gap until that meta breaks (for the slow players) and then dial it back once people learn how to push.

Second, I would be fine with mixed tech. It's dumb, and completely out of lore, since only a handful of IS units could field Clan tech well over a decade post-Clan invasion. I just find it hilarious that the grognards' last cry for help is to set fire to one of the few remaining lore friendly aspects of FP.

[Vincent Quatermain]

Novakaine, on 16 December 2016 - 12:53 AM, said:

The drop tonnage increase only partially and inadequately address the issue. That extra 15 tons means almost nothing not even equivalent to a extra locust in my deck.

So then how much would be enough? The gap is now 25 tons. Give us a number. How big does the gap have to be?

Yes, yes, you want 10v12 -- not gonna happen. PGI has said as much many times, and it carries plenty of new balance issues. Get over it and give us a tonnage difference.

Novakaine, on 16 December 2016 - 12:53 AM, said:

Which brings up another issue - mercs.
Sound like a great and fun idea but this ability to jump between IS and Clans whenever the advantages are better that season.
That needs to stop.

OK, but then you need to let everyone have a split account, otherwise there are plenty of whales out there who have spent hundreds of dollars putting Clan and IS mechs on the same account who will be seriously angry.

If I can assign my Clan mechs to one sub-account and the IS to another sub-account, then fine, sure.

I know what you're thinking -- all that would do is mean that merc units would have alts for each faction. So what? That would mean that if the queues were short on one side, the mercs could instantly flip sides instead of waiting a week. That would improve wait times.

[MischiefSC]

Count Zero 74, on 16 December 2016 - 05:17 AM, said:

Lets go full Lore then, everytime u press fire a RNG decides if and where u hit.

Even better -

Only the absolute best players get Clan tech and you only get mech tonnage based on your 'rank' among the handful of Clan players.

Everyone gets 1 mech and 1 mech only as regular people could rarely even afford 1 mech, not even the rulers of Houses had stables of 100+ personal mechs.

IS is only stock builds.

Repair and rearm.

Oh, and cbill earnings cut by 1/100th to represent what mechwarriors actually made in lore.

That'd be awesome.... right?

[Harper Steel]

As I posted I would really like to hear Danes take on IS Omnimechs?

It seems that the Clan IS imbalance is due to the Clans Omnimech technology ( not totally, I did watch the Video)
So instead of opening all the tech to everyone,, Why not give the IS 6 or 8 new IS Omnimechs..
The stats posted are from Sarna.net and set to the table top game.. PGI could easily make them MWO ready and on a par with Clan Omnimechs..
PGI could also begin by putting out Clan 2nd Line mechs.. ( just IS mechs with Clan Paint job)

this solution give the IS Omni on a par with Clan, It gives the Clans the IS mechs ... you would also now have some Omni-pride on the IS side as their Omnis would be on a par with Clan and unavailable to Clan..

I would really like to hear Danes take on adding IS Omnimechs..

and thank you Dane

[Count Zero 74]

Because an IS Omnimech will still be an IS mech, stupid.

Stll uses IS weapons and IS XL Engines which I can't even change then. But hey!! I can switch Hardpoints now!! Watchout Clanners!! I can put Lasers instead of Missiles in my sidetorse, omg am I OP now!!

[Violent Nick]

Cyrilis, on 16 December 2016 - 02:33 AM, said:

Do you think a Tier depandant drop deck tonnage value would be a good idea? Explanations: there would be the need to introduce a PSR / Tier system into FW that runs parallel (!) to the one from Quickplay (so the FW Tier cannot be influenced by QP matches). FW Tier 5 players have a drop deck limit of 260 tons FW Tier 4 playser have a drop deck limit of 250 tons FW Tier 3 playser have a drop deck limit of 240 tons FW Tier 2 playser have a drop deck limit of 230 tons FW Tier 1 playser have a drop deck limit of 220 tons or something like that. What do you think of that? Worth an own threat or is the idea for the drain?

Now THAT'S an interesting thought...! I do like a challenge..

[TKSax]

Sarsaparilla Kid, on 16 December 2016 - 09:13 AM, said:

Or, leave the 3 slots in the side torsos, but require 4 slots total to be destroyed on an IS XL...same thing, it requires a second location to be critically hit or destroyed if not the CT, but they wouldn't have to reprogram crit slot locations that way, just the number required to be destroyed. Besides, with an engine crit slot in the leg as well as side torsos, there goes the extra ammo storage...

Except MWO does not track engine Crtis. The XML's show XL engine = 1 side torso destroyed CXL=2 sides torso destroyed

[SlyJJ]

Vincent Quatermain, on 16 December 2016 - 11:05 AM, said:

What matters is how fast they hit the heat cap. Clan mechs run hotter than IS mechs, at least for any of the good builds on either side. This means that when Clanners need to cool down, the IS boys keep firing and knock another Clan mech or two out of the fight -- advantage gone. Now the reason this often fails, is that the vast majority of MWO pilots have learned a timid peek-and-poke playstyle that gives the Clans the opportunity to cool off .

Well... no. What matters is the damage they're dishing out. Clan weapons generate more heat, but their heat sinks only require 2 crits compared to three-not to mention all the extra heat sinks you can stuff in your XL engine. Naturally you generate more heat with more damage- but you'e not generating any more or less per damage done, and then your extra heat sinks allow you to cool faster.

So you still generate just as much heat, but do more damage, do it quicker, and do it from further away. You're not fooling anyone- most of us also run clan mechs, we just cant in CW.

Vincent Quatermain, on 16 December 2016 - 11:05 AM, said:

Not with engine size which leaves most Clan mechs with an entire dimension of customizability that is gone. As for omnipods, most of them are junk anyway, so all that mechanic really does is hide the "true" hardpoint variants. .

Oh how heartbreaking- you mean you cant intentionally make your mech slower. This is what we're talking about- you've got a tactical nuke slung over you shoulder and we've got muskets and you're complaining that the weight of your nuke puts you at a disadvantage...

Omnipods are anything but junk. You can absolutely change what you want any mech to do in any drop. A griffin is only good for srming and doing it at 270m. Your stormcrow can run streaks, can laser boat, can combine- you've got such a significant amount of options. Just because YOU cant do anything with the options doesnt take those options away from the mechs.

For the IS guys- could you imagine being able to swap hardpoints to run an atlas with 2 AC20s or 4 LBX10s? Howabout a warhammer with the ballistics in the arms and not the torso? Jeez man, we'd have field days if we could change our hardpoins at will.

Vincent Quatermain, on 16 December 2016 - 11:05 AM, said:

The multiple projectiles, which means that at longer distances and/or shots with a wide angle-of-attack, the Clan weapons hit multiple locations. That is inherently inferior because pinpoint damage beats spread. To make a 1:1 comparison, the IS UAC5 is superior to the Clan UAC5 in every way.

You know why? Because of the "Ultra" quality! You're starting to get it, but so far away....

The uac5 has the option to double tap and therefore double damage. Every other ac the IS has cannot do this. If we had ultras on al of them, then it becomes a trade off of range vs pinpoint. But this really doesnt matter, because with single click you double your firepower in an instant and you do it wih +50% range. If I had the option to run an AC20 or a UAC20 in my atlas, I'd take the UAC every time, and so woul everyone else. When all is said and done, sure maybe you hit the ct AND the LT with your shots, but you end up doing 20 damage to EACH... and against from a greater range.

Yeah those UAC's are such a disadvantage, thats why kodiaks dont boat with them right?

Vincent Quatermain, on 16 December 2016 - 11:05 AM, said:

How about structure and twist quirks? Those make IS mechs live longer and accquire targets faster. These are almost always better on the IS mechs.

Suddenly we can twist our turrets and you think its working against you? IS mechs do not live longer because clans dish out twice the damage (as stated above). How this affects acquiring targets is beyond me- you're stretching too much to find anything that could possibly help support you claim.

So *some* IS mechs twist faster if they've got the quirk. Still have less range, and significantly less speed. The only targets we "aquire" are the clan mechs that can hit us from 900m away.

Your quirks are on your weapons- ours are on our chassis. We get +10% range, on our mech but your weapon gives you +33% range, and it does more damage....

Next!

Vincent Quatermain, on 16 December 2016 - 11:05 AM, said:

First, I have stated many times that Clan tech is easier to play for the peculiar style that most MWO players have gotten used to. Maybe we need to widen the tonnage gap until that meta breaks (for the slow players) and then dial it back once people learn how to push.

Second, I would be fine with mixed tech. It's dumb, and completely out of lore, since only a handful of IS units could field Clan tech well over a decade post-Clan invasion. I just find it hilarious that the grognards' last cry for help is to set fire to one of the few remaining lore friendly aspects of FP.

Of course you would- these changes balance the game by taking away the high cards that only YOU can hold....

Edited by SlyJJ, 16 December 2016 - 12:09 PM.

[Harper Steel]

so you don't want your own Omnis??
you want everyone to have the same mechs??

You really dont think PGI wouldnt make them as powerful as Clan its an obvious way to balance the Game.. they could give the IS light and heavy Gauss and MRM missles..

[Vxheous]

Harper Steel, on 16 December 2016 - 12:26 PM, said:

so you don't want your own Omnis??
you want everyone to have the same mechs??

You really dont think PGI wouldnt make them as powerful as Clan its an obvious way to balance the Game.. they could give the IS light and heavy Gauss and MRM missles..

The only thing the IS omni would have going for them is the ability to adapt the same chassis to changing meta without buying a new mech. Locked IS XL engines would be a nightmare in omni's that do kot have the hitbox geometry to utilize them properly. It was really the Clan Battlemech that skewed things more than Clan Omnimechs. Both the Kodiak and Hunchback IIc sit at the apex of their respective weight classes with the Jenner IIc just below the Arctic Cheetah light apex. The Orion IIc would be as well if its hitboxes/hardpoint # and placements were better

Edited by Vxheous Kerensky, 16 December 2016 - 12:34 PM.

[Aiden Skye]

All these balance threads are like the same 10-15 hotheads going round and round typing the same thing over and over. Makes me wonder how much time some of you actually spend playing the game.