391 replies to this topic

[Davegt27]

http://mwomercs.com/...d-for-20dec2016

[Sjorpha]

Davegt27, on 19 December 2016 - 09:35 PM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...d-for-20dec2016

How is this relevant, there is no balance adjustments to clan or IS tech in this.

[Vincent Quatermain]

SlyJJ, on 19 December 2016 - 09:17 PM, said:

Torso twist isnt doing anything when your opponents have the firepower of an IS assault mech in a clan light/medium mech.

The heat cost of that firepower is tremendous. One-on-one Clans are superior, but in a group -- the sustained fire of IS mechs can carry the day -- or at least would if the average MWO pilot wasn't playing peek-a-boo all the time. You keep making isolated comparisons without thinking about the overall flow of the battle.

SlyJJ, on 19 December 2016 - 09:17 PM, said:

Yes, you are a clanner- a merc that goes to clan is just as well. You know why you play clan and I do too. I dont mind not being among the elite in the game- I've got a life that Im quite successful at and gaming is not a way of life for me- I can accept that.

Playing Clan half the time makes me a "clanner"? You are so desperate to confirm your stereotypes of mercs all playing Clan (which is objectively false over the long run) that anyone short of an IS Loyalist is now a clanner to you.

As for your comment about having a life, when I play a game casually I at least have the good sense not to tell more serious players that they are playing the game wrong. Your life outside of MWO doesn't mean a damn thing.

SlyJJ, on 19 December 2016 - 09:17 PM, said:

Every point of evidence supports our claims. EVERY successfull unit plays as clan....because of clan tech. Even IS loyalists that have gone clan mention how incredibly easy it is. I have a clan alt too- its easy mode. Get over yourselves- you're *not* that good- you've got awesome tech.... The fact that we can switch over to clan and duplicate your success, but clanners can *not* switch to IS and duplicate the same success is yet another example proving exactly what we're saying.

At this point I have to conclude you are immune to evidence and reason. Top merc units switch back and forth (or like EVIL maintain two different units to switch at will) all the time. There are Clan Loyalists, but those units are Clan for love of the lore, not because of a conscious choice to farm IS scrubs.

Playing Clan is easier if:
1) You primarily play a peek-and-poke playstyle (a disease that many MWO players are prone to)
2) The IS team fails to be aggressive (which is also common because even many of the "organized" IS teams are a bunch of timid little snowflakes who couldn't push their way out of a wet paper bag).

However, most merc units play IS correctly, at least when they are not getting complacent from crushing pugs too often. They are properly aggressive and win as IS all the time, against organized teams and skittles alike. I know this because I've done it dozens of times.

Finally, you do realize that contracts are a week long and that many of these units are only now getting the opportunity to switch sides since 4.1 dropped?

SlyJJ, on 19 December 2016 - 09:17 PM, said:

You dont understand what a strawman argument is.

Yes, I do. Your tech argument is not where you are strawmanning -- there you're just exaggerating. Your strawman argument is your insistence on calling me a "clanner" when I play Clans half the time, and your false belief that the decision to play Clans is based on wanting to play easy mode, or wanting to farm pugs or any of your other various toxic stereotypes.

SlyJJ, on 19 December 2016 - 09:17 PM, said:

No one is saying we cant {win}, but we DONT CARE about that anymore. We are tired of the game being lopsided.

Yes, and all of your whining has achieved a 25 ton drop deck advantage. Still losing? Might be time to consider the possibility that you're doing it wrong.

[Requiemking]

To OP, like many here, I disagree with the solution. Its a lazy cop-out, and does nothing for the underlying problems. However, merely buffing weapons isn't going to work either. sure, some weapons are pretty simple to balance, but those weapons also have a proper comparable to balance against. What we need is comparable tech bases, which if I've heard correctly is an .xml copypaste job.

[SlyJJ]

Vincent Quatermain, on 20 December 2016 - 10:53 AM, said:

The heat cost of that firepower is tremendous. One-on-one Clans are superior, but in a group -- the sustained fire of IS mechs can carry the day -- or at least would if the average MWO pilot wasn't playing peek-a-boo all the time. You keep making isolated comparisons without thinking about the overall flow of the battle.

You keep makin illogical leaps without considering what you're suggesting. It wouldnt really matter if it one on one or 12 vs 12 because what we are talking about are constants- not variables. Grouped up, a lance of clanners STILL drop greater damage, from a greater range, with greater mobility from better mechs.

The overall flow of the battle makes it quite easy for clanners to set up their firing lines and decimate any ranks of IS that come in from a much greater range. Its literally like shooting fish in a barrel, because theres no danger of IS shooting from afar, at least not without laughable damage. All this talk about "getting to a brawl" is great speculation and all, but we've still got to cover that distance to GET there in the first place. Thats hard to do when you're getting annihilated from a distance and you've already got slow mechs.

Vincent Quatermain, on 20 December 2016 - 10:53 AM, said:

Playing Clan half the time makes me a "clanner"? You are so desperate to confirm your stereotypes of mercs all playing Clan (which is objectively false over the long run) that anyone short of an IS Loyalist is now a clanner to you.

Irrelevant to the argument- I really dont care

Vincent Quatermain, on 20 December 2016 - 10:53 AM, said:

As for your comment about having a life, when I play a game casually I at least have the good sense not to tell more serious players that they are playing the game wrong. Your life outside of MWO doesn't mean a damn thing.

No one is saying anyone is playing the game "wrong" we're merely pointing out the obvious- the game is far from balanced and Clans are OP. Its been that way in the lore, in every game, and was in fact in this one as well admittedly by PGI. They've tried to introduced quirks that have not proven to balance the game out. Clans are overwhelming, IS is underwhelming. Clan tech is superor to IS tech.

The whole reason PGI doesnt want to cross tech is because it'll obsolete IS tech. Thats a small hint, if reading weapon stats was beyond you for some reason....

Vincent Quatermain, on 20 December 2016 - 10:53 AM, said:

At this point I have to conclude you are immune to evidence and reason. Top merc units switch back and forth (or like EVIL maintain two different units to switch at will) all the time. There are Clan Loyalists, but those units are Clan for love of the lore, not because of a conscious choice to farm IS scrubs.

Back and forth? Top merc units do one contract with IS before switching to clan....

You're also contradicting youself here. Dont feed me some BS that the top units are all about "lore roleplay and immersion." They compete to win- period. THATS why they go clan. ALL of them.

Vincent Quatermain, on 20 December 2016 - 10:53 AM, said:

Playing Clan is easier if:
1) You primarily play a peek-and-poke playstyle (a disease that many MWO players are prone to)
2) The IS team fails to be aggressive (which is also common because even many of the "organized" IS teams are a bunch of timid little snowflakes who couldn't push their way out of a wet paper bag).

However, most merc units play IS correctly, at least when they are not getting complacent from crushing pugs too often. They are properly aggressive and win as IS all the time, against organized teams and skittles alike. I know this because I've done it dozens of times.

Dozens of times... thats terrific. You keep making claims, but Im not seeing any of it backed up.

I get it... IS really is the superpower. Thats why all the units go IS to take advantage of the amazing quirks and blast a hole through clan!

Oh wait.... yeah they dont- because they love lore. Riiiigghttt....

Vincent Quatermain, on 20 December 2016 - 10:53 AM, said:

Yes, I do. Your tech argument is not where you are strawmanning -- there you're just exaggerating. Your strawman argument is your insistence on calling me a "clanner" when I play Clans half the time, and your false belief that the decision to play Clans is based on wanting to play easy mode, or wanting to farm pugs or any of your other various toxic stereotypes.

Once again, you dont understand strawman...

Im merely pointing out how obtuse you are. All of my posts are regarding IS vs Clan tech. Everything I posts regarding those two are facts... showing much better numbers for Clan. The only thing you have to offer it are hypothetical situations. You dont know how to look at a situation objectively, or simply refuse to.

Vincent Quatermain, on 20 December 2016 - 10:53 AM, said:

Yes, and all of your whining has achieved a 25 ton drop deck advantage. Still losing? Might be time to consider the possibility that you're doing it wrong.

Sigh.....

Yeah, we dont have clan tech. Theres a very definite reason why our scores and damage easily double and sometimes triple or more when we take a clan mech out....

With the click of a button and the selection of a particular group of mechs we "get good" in a mouse click....

You've been unable to support any claim with any of your arguments. You can only offer hypotheticals, and the evidence is overwhelming against you... and we can duplicate your success when we go clan. Clanners have not proven to duplicate their success as IS.

I have a feeling you're going to regurgitate what I've already refuted several times. Please go back through the other logs before posting the same argument in a different way

Edited by SlyJJ, 20 December 2016 - 08:06 PM.

[Tarl Cabot]

There are at least two things going on, higher percentage of higher tier players and more organized units are Clan, the outlier tech differences. The tonnage difference is simply PGI quick route at applying a used bandaid with additional tape to FP while things are at a minimum coverage during the holidays.

Any equipment/tech changes, if they do occur will not happen until at least Feb 2017. Once order of business would be reviewing the viability of the isXL engine. IS mechs need a durable weight saving engine for several reasons, the primary one is that more IS components ARE heavier while taking up more space while a major Clan components are lighter with less space. A cERML @ 1-ton/slot is closer to the isLL which is 5-tons/2slots than it is to the isML for damage/range. Clans have a higher average speed and longer range weapons, meaning they have the better ability to control distance and location.

For myself, when using isXL (light/med) approx 70% death is loss of side torso. On heavy/assaults, using a STD, thus slower and no actual change in weapons used, I lose a side torso more often then I do the CT by itself, while still retaining ST. That huge game setting needs to be shifted. Not touching the STD "buffing" as too many have a hard-on for that.

As for the merc imbalance, that is an entirely different discussion, one that I do not believe can not really be coded, as that does not reach/touch the human part of us.

Bah, whatever. Force units to really make a decision about staying merc by setting boundaries and what contracts can be renewed. Monetary-wise, whatever fund penalty is appropriate.

• Contract-wise, Clan stint is set for 2-3 weeks max, break contract 1-week penalty . No instant renewal of Clan contract with current Clan or any other Clan. Clans do not use mercs, so Clans like to keep it short and sweet then kicks them out, or merc unit leaves before Clans decide to absorb them.
  
• Merc unit would have to go IS for 4-5 weeks. Break contract 2-week penalty.
  
• When contract ends merc unit can renewal IS contract with any House (for a shorter stint but coding may be a pain) or can go back to Clan again for only 2-3 weeks. Contract ends, back to IS for 4-5 week stint. If a unit really wants to stay Clan, they go as loyalist.
  
• Loyalist desertion - 1.5 week penalty

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 20 December 2016 - 08:58 PM.

[Vincent Quatermain]

SlyJJ, on 20 December 2016 - 07:58 PM, said:

Grouped up, a lance of clanners STILL drop greater damage, from a greater range, with greater mobility from better mechs.

Initially, yes. Not in the long run. But, we've been over this.

SlyJJ, on 20 December 2016 - 07:58 PM, said:

Irrelevant to the argument- I really dont care

If it's irrelevant why do you keep bringing it up?

SlyJJ, on 20 December 2016 - 07:58 PM, said:

The whole reason PGI doesnt want to cross tech is because it'll obsolete IS tech. Thats a small hint, if reading weapon stats was beyond you for some reason...

Citation needed. Also, weapon stats include things like damage per heat, burn duration and number of projectiles which you claim don't matter.

SlyJJ, on 20 December 2016 - 07:58 PM, said:

Back and forth? Top merc units do one contract with IS before switching to clan....

False. 228 did two weeks Clan, two weeks IS all summer long. Here's another example of your "irrelevant" stereotyping getting in the way of your ability to see reality clearly. And 228 just switched to IS yesterday.

SlyJJ, on 20 December 2016 - 07:58 PM, said:

You're also contradicting youself here. Dont feed me some BS that the top units are all about "lore roleplay and immersion." They compete to win- period. THATS why they go clan. ALL of them.

I was talking about two different groups of people. There are Clan Loyalist units who are Clan for love of the lore. There are also merc units that switch back and forth.

And once more, here is your "irrelevant" argument about all of them going Clan all the time.

SlyJJ, on 20 December 2016 - 07:58 PM, said:

Dozens of times... thats terrific. You keep making claims, but Im not seeing any of it backed up.

OK, then I will collect screen shots of FP matches over the next few days.

SlyJJ, on 20 December 2016 - 07:58 PM, said:

Im merely pointing out how obtuse you are. All of my posts are regarding IS vs Clan tech. Everything I posts regarding those two are facts... showing much better numbers for Clan.

Except when I pointed out heat sustainability, burn times, multiple projectiles or any other arguments that you have ignored. Yes the Clans have weight and range advantages. Yes, they have some weapon systems that lack an IS equivalent (although many of those are not meta, particularly the extra ballistics). But Clan mechs run hot and often need more face time to land their damage.

SlyJJ, on 20 December 2016 - 07:58 PM, said:

Yeah, we dont have clan tech. Theres a very definite reason why our scores and damage easily double and sometimes triple or more when we take a clan mech out....

If your damage is increasing that much, I guarantee you are playing peek-and-poke. Stop playing like a clanner.

SlyJJ, on 20 December 2016 - 07:58 PM, said:

Clanners have not proven to duplicate their success as IS.

Again with the "irrelevant" stereotyping . . . but, nonetheless, you will have your proof.

Edited by Vincent Quatermain, 21 December 2016 - 10:56 AM.

[Vincent Quatermain]

Tarl Cabot, on 20 December 2016 - 08:53 PM, said:

Any equipment/tech changes, if they do occur will not happen until at least Feb 2017. Once order of business would be reviewing the viability of the isXL engine.

I would be OK with making the IS XL cause 60% speed on a lost side torso, rather than death. This is not because Clans are OP, but simply because it would increase the variety of viable IS builds and make the game more interesting.

Tarl Cabot, on 20 December 2016 - 08:53 PM, said:

Bah, whatever. Force units to really make a decision about staying merc by setting boundaries and what contracts can be renewed. Monetary-wise, whatever fund penalty is appropriate.

Yes, but it should be rewards reductions, not a time penalty. One of the major reasons why populations remain skewed for a long time is the length of contracts. Making the contracts longer exacerbates the problem, making any situation where merc units stack on one side last even longer.

As for Loyalists, I think the rewards should be significant and escalate with length-of-service. No need for a week long cooldown then -- losing the accumualted Loyalist bonuses would be enough to make people think twice about jumping factions. I think faction specific quirks that add to all your mechs in FP matches would be an awesome Loyalty reward. Maybe even good enough to have some of the merc units consider going loyalist.

Mercs, of course, would just get the baseline c-bill and mc rewards.

[Budoman]

Thank you Dane. I like the hat and the decorations in the video.

Just my idea. A salvage system that lets people unlock opposite side Mechs might be better than ranking and be much more fun. Say every time you get a KMDD on a mech in Faction Play, you can unlock a percent of that mech (as if you salvaged it). Enough KMDDs on that type of mech and you will be able to use one in Faction Play as a salvaged mech.

The most fun of the game is getting to play different mechs - that PGI forces you to only pick one side is just denying the players what they actually want.

To say anything is lore in this game is kind of B.S. The game itself is stripped of most any kind of narrative to be non-existent already, why keep up the pretense only to create other problems. I would love a story and missions that have some meaning. But it is just a team shooter with almost nothing else. The new faction play just stripped out almost half the maps and game modes, so on the whole it is less of a game now.

[Falconic]

You wonder why faction play doesn't see more use. 48 to 12 matches and having to deal with it for 25 minutes. Drop this useless drop deck/cloning nonsense and create modes that work with bringing in one mech.

Also get rid of skirmish because sitting around for 25 minutes for a draw defeats the purpose of playing a game.

[Tiantara]

Quote

Say every time you get a KMDD on a mech in Faction Play, you can unlock a percent of that mech (as if you salvaged it). Enough KMDDs on that type of mech and you will be able to use one in Faction Play as a salvaged mech.

- That nice, but Clan pilot have no use of IS mech... and IS cant win Clan... or we all end in Clan vs Clan mech... without IS.

[Bradigus]

Tarl Cabot, on 20 December 2016 - 08:53 PM, said:

Once order of business would be reviewing the viability of the isXL engine. IS mechs need a durable weight saving engine for several reasons, the primary one is that more IS components ARE heavier while taking up more space while a major Clan components are lighter with less space. A cERML @ 1-ton/slot is closer to the isLL which is 5-tons/2slots than it is to the isML for damage/range.

Or they could review the tonnage costs of the Standard engine and actually make it possible to pick one AND have weaponry on heavies and assaults without completely gimping yourself on speed. Something like 0.5 ton cost per 5 rating between 100 and 300 rating, 1 ton cost per 5 rating above 300 rating up to 400 rating. Even for the Standard 280 and Standard 300 engines, those 3 and 4 tons would go a really long way in enabling inner sphere heavies, not to mention making IS assaults more durable while not being completely gimped with awful engine ratings.

With that there would bee more of a fair choice between XL and STD engines. You could agree to be more vulnerable for a few extra tons or higher engine rating, or you could decide to be more survivable while moving slightly less slow and having less fancy heavy weapons.

Either way, simply making IS XL's just fatter clan XL engines will only serve to negate standard engines completely and create a gap between the c-bill rich and the c-bill impoverished. Not to mention by making IS XL's the same as clan XL's, all IS mechs will need to have their quirks thoroughly re-examined and most likely removed.

[Tarl Cabot]

Quote

Either way, simply making IS XL's just fatter clan XL engines will only serve to negate standard engines completely and create a gap between the c-bill rich and the c-bill impoverished. Not to mention by making IS XL's the same as clan XL's, all IS mechs will need to have their quirks thoroughly re-examined and most likely removed.

STD are made to be upgraded, just like SHS to DHS. Most structural quirks are there due to geometry, etc, to help absorb a few extra points of damage while torso twisting, tis not to protect a torso based on the POSSIBLY of using an isXL engine.

A few Clan OMNIs and several Clan Battlemechs have structural quirks and they ARE using their durable cXL (locked or not). Weapon quirks is itself another thread. Except for a few mechs, have you actually seen the structural quirks? On most mechs it is 1-2 shots from ONE ERML. PGI is changing those structural quirks to armor quirks, which will also mean no more free-tonnage parts, even if it is one shot from one ERML.

On the few mechs I would still use a STD in will be due to low engine cap AND/OR weapon/equipment selection, even with the benefit of a durable isXL, not enough room for the 3slots/side and/or tonnage left that can not be used. The other side of the coin, due to the lack of UAC 2/10/20 ballistics, most IS mechs are primarily energy/missile boats with only a couple of ballistics. A player would have to factor in for a few mechs that are in that sweet spot that a isXL would provide only a small boost in speed, it is worth taking an isXL with a 25-35% heat/movement penalty?

Without a parity between isXl and cXL, any other changes will only compound the issue.

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 21 December 2016 - 04:56 PM.

[Kael Posavatz]

I've seen a lot of people clamoring for 'balancing' IS v Clan XL engines.

Has anyone given any serious thought to how to better balance the standard v XL engines in general?

PGI has done an okay-but-not-great rush to Clan tech that is, my understanding, a hallmark of previous games. One of these factors was no mixed-tech in FW. One option at this point is for PGI to give IS their omnis, but most have fixed XLs (Hauptmann is the lone exception I recall off the top of my head) and so be unplayable re: side-torso-death. Okay, fair point. But the Clans would feel the same about the Kingfisher (or, less likely to be seen, the Stooping Hawk or Battle Cobra) as being unable to carry sufficient weapons for its tonnage.

My point isn't so much that XLs are unbalanced (I will respectfully disagree with most of the posts about the degree to which they are unbalanced). But that the standard engines lack balance with the XLs. MWO lacks the random hit location that was a boon to the standard engine (spreading out the hits meant it was likely a component holding the engine would be hit 12.5% instead of 37.5%) in TT.

[Bradigus]

Well, now that units are starting to shift over to the IS side, think the clans will get their tonnages back and IS will start to lose theirs?

[Stormie]

Yep, IS won the Oceanic attack phase today.

Good to see a ten ish man group formed on the merged FRR/Kurita hub. Not sure where the other clan units scampered off to, we only lost a few games and were barely slowing the IS juggernaut down.

Edited by Stormie, 22 December 2016 - 06:58 AM.

[FallingAce]

Stormie, on 22 December 2016 - 06:58 AM, said:

Yep, IS won the Oceanic attack phase today.

Good to see a ten ish man group formed on the merged FRR/Kurita hub. Not sure where the other clan units scampered off to, we only lost a few games and were barely slowing the IS juggernaut down.

Running full on Kurita/FRR 12 man




Clan +157

I.S. Mercs +3

I.S. Loyalist +1




SRMx/Coma/FRR and friend 4 wins 1 loss last night.

Mech The Dane, Me, you, and Zoose need to work out a payment plan

[Azmaat]

Bradigus, on 22 December 2016 - 04:51 AM, said:

Well, now that units are starting to shift over to the IS side, think the clans will get their tonnages back and IS will start to lose theirs?

it won`t work either

Where is no point to actualy look at toptier players/units distribution. PSR mechanic still focuson damage dealing. In clan mech even if your team lose - u still able to uphold your "skill rating" because you able to inflict a lot of damage due to damage dealing capabilities/survivabilty of mech. Even if you playing drunk and facetank all the time. So "Clan" player will get their Tier 1 much faster vOv.

All these contract payment penalties are not working with droptonnage tweaks.
More tonnage on IS side -> more armor you can evaporate with your superior lasers -> more c-bills you get.

Unit hops to IS side just cause of boredom and/or unit leaders don't want their pilots turn into *******.

Clan mechs are very versatile - you can get almost any hardpoints you want. That is why every cheetah/shadowcat/hellbringer variant gets ECM.

Even C-bills grind gets much easier with clan mechs. Devs fkd up heat balance again - i just switch to my ballistic/missiles hardpoints on same mech. No need to buy another highly specialized IS hero.

If PGI let IS ride Clan mechs - it make most of standart IS mechs obsolete. With Bushwaker on the horizon - we still can hope PGI will add fancy stuff Light Fusion Engines or X-Pulse Lasers. It won`t solve balance problem - just make standart IS stuff obsolete. Sure IS have some descent mechs - but they are not superior to any clantech.

Hope to see normal ISvsIS warfare - hope PGI add multi pilots on one account and roll back all these FW shiet to pre-clan era. Let IS fight IS with IS mechs.

[Sir Poodlington]

Noob here. I want to explain the problem and offer a solution.

I'm playing IS because when I first received cbills the IS mechs looked cheaper. My first purchase was a Battlemaster 2C. My second was a Blackjack 1X. I added the locust Pirates Bane ($) because I thought collecting intel was important and the way to win scouting. Now I largely ignore intel and brawl with the free Centurion NCIX. I have about 1,900,000 cbills right now and would like some XL engines and pulse lasers. And another Battlemaster.

We lose faction play and we lose hard. Last night in two games the clan push killed everyone and we ended up losing 12-48 and 9-26. We are a noob stomp. Clan players simply feed on us, supposedly to the tune of millions of cbills per hour.

Here is the solution to all of this:
1. Give us IS only XL engines as an option. 80% of the performance for 50% of the cost between standard and clan XL.
2. I'm ok with losing to better clan players with better tech BUT there is no incentive to play right now and get stomped. When we are stomped I get about 150,000 cbills. That isn't enough to feed the machine and get 3 of each mech, XL engines etc. Give us the contract base even when we lose. If we win we should get a bonus proportional to the clan IS win loss ratio for that campaign. Call it a clan salvage bonus if you want. Show me a pathway towards building competitive dropdecks and I'll keep playing / be the clan canon fodder.

I've already put $45 of my own money into this game, but last night I just went back to Dota. Tonight I'm going to give Titanfall 2 multiplayer a go. If you want new players to hang around and play the game, you need to stop kicking us when we are trying to stand on our own feet.

[Stormie]

Sir Poodlington, on 22 December 2016 - 09:21 AM, said:

Noob here. I want to explain the problem and offer a solution.

I'm playing IS because when I first received cbills the IS mechs looked cheaper. My first purchase was a Battlemaster 2C. My second was a Blackjack 1X. I added the locust Pirates Bane ($) because I thought collecting intel was important and the way to win scouting. Now I largely ignore intel and brawl with the free Centurion NCIX. I have about 1,900,000 cbills right now and would like some XL engines and pulse lasers. And another Battlemaster.

We lose faction play and we lose hard. Last night in two games the clan push killed everyone and we ended up losing 12-48 and 9-26. We are a noob stomp. Clan players simply feed on us, supposedly to the tune of millions of cbills per hour.

Here is the solution to all of this:
1. Give us IS only XL engines as an option. 80% of the performance for 50% of the cost between standard and clan XL.
2. I'm ok with losing to better clan players with better tech BUT there is no incentive to play right now and get stomped. When we are stomped I get about 150,000 cbills. That isn't enough to feed the machine and get 3 of each mech, XL engines etc. Give us the contract base even when we lose. If we win we should get a bonus proportional to the clan IS win loss ratio for that campaign. Call it a clan salvage bonus if you want. Show me a pathway towards building competitive dropdecks and I'll keep playing / be the clan canon fodder.

I've already put $45 of my own money into this game, but last night I just went back to Dota. Tonight I'm going to give Titanfall 2 multiplayer a go. If you want new players to hang around and play the game, you need to stop kicking us when we are trying to stand on our own feet.

My guess, given that you are reasonably new, is that you are still in a low tier? use all that you learnt playing against people that can actually play to go farm the tier 4/5ers in regular quickplay for the cbills. if you do reasonable damage in the NCIX mech use that as its a cbill bonus mech. (maybe play some games with it and the battlemaster and see which you earn more in, as I guess your raw damage would be higher in the battlemaster). Keep playing the FP gamemode to keep your experience against good players fresh, as others said, identify the good players and watch how they play. treat FP as learning and quickplay for earning. the factionplay stuff comes naturally, but you have to stick it out at the start.