DoctorDetroit, on 23 December 2016 - 07:59 AM, said:
Completely wrong here man. Your drop deck budget wont work. IS needs to equal clans, not zerg them in your imaginary clan rpg fiction. Quirks are the answer. They just need to be carefully used with the goal of creating more specialized roles for underperformers which the atlas is definitely classified as. You could give the atlas 2 to 3x it's structure quirks and people will still take it down, it will just be able to fill the tank role at a barely acceptable level.
From where do you get the dellusion that asymmetrical balance does not work?
Is 4 Zerglings vs. 1 Zealot wrong? No, it is not.
Is 1 Starship Trooper against 43543 Bugs wrong? No, it is not.
Is 4 Colonial Marines vs. 1 Predator wrong? No, it is not.
Asymmetrical balance in an asymmetrical designed conflict DOES work and it even is the only way to make it work properly.
It just has to be done right so that both sides require equal player counts.
In Battletech, this can be easily done by:
- Give an IS player more waves than a clan player has. 1 vs 1 player, but more "spare lives" for IS
- Give clans penalties of some sort if they don't minimize their fighting force.
- Give IS more tactical options like UAVs, artillery, consumables, etc.
There are a ton of ways to achieve asymmetrical balance.
The only thing that will NOT work is to magically quirk up some intentionally low tech unit to be on par with a high tech unit.
IN the long run, it ruins everything from consistent equipment behavior to understandable game mechanics for new players.
I would LOVE to play is when I have a real tactical, characterist set of options to "play dirty" and stomp clan mechs despite their technological superiority.
I think the actual problem of non-argumentions like yours is that you have complexes towards the clan lore and you MUST have that one single IS mech that can beat every clan mech on a technological level.
My advice is to seek psychological help for that.