30 replies to this topic

[Lehmund]

There is a lot of talk about balance on the forums, pretty much all the time. One of the elements that is talked about here and there is the difference in cost between Clan and IS mechs of same size.

Clan mechs, in particular Omnimechs, cost a lot more to buy than IS mechs. My understanding, since I'm not a TableTop fan and don't do comparisons on Sarna.net, is that PGI uses the actual costs in C-Bills from TT/Sarna to set their own prices and their relative cost counterparts in MC.

My understanding is that the costs for Clan mechs are higher on TT because they are superior mechs, with higher Battle Values etc....

However, in MWO, the mechs of the same weight class have been balanced somewhat to equality (or at least there is an attempt to do so).

Question is then, why not balance the cost of the mechs too? I.e. if a 65 ton Clan mech is supposed to compete head to head with a 65 ton IS mech 1 v 1, shouldn't their purchase cost be similar?

I don't mind this, as a clan player. I prefer the game feel of Clan mechs and tech and don't mind the higher cost, but for new players, it could be a big factor and apparently, following the complaints about the pugs in FW currently, many more lower tier players buy IS mechs, perhaps because they are cheaper, if you don't decide to buy new engines of course.

So I would indeed recommend that PGI look into this while balancing mech for mech. The outright costs for mechs should also be adjusted to be similar if the power of mechs are also similar.

Players can then choose to upgrade and change engines, or upgrade by buying new omnipods to customize.

That's my 2 cents. Discuss.

[kesmai]

Then add dhs, endo or ferro and an xl engine to is mechs.
End of price difference.

[El Bandito]

Lehmund, on 03 January 2017 - 05:01 AM, said:

However, in MWO, the mechs of the same weight class have been balanced somewhat to equality (or at least there is an attempt to do so).

Question is then, why not balance the cost of the mechs too? I.e. if a 65 ton Clan mech is supposed to compete head to head with a 65 ton IS mech 1 v 1, shouldn't their purchase cost be similar?

1. Clan mechs, when purchased, come with pre-built DHS, endo and/or ferro, and most come with XL engines, while IS mechs are not. Hence the price difference. Once you buy the appropriate XL engine, DHS, endo/ferro, a IS Spider for example, can be more expensive than a Clan Cheetah.

2. Due to how omnimechs and omni pods work, you only need one omnimech to boat missiles/lasers/ballistics, and you can sell the other two variants--thus gaining back C-Bills. Meanwhile you must keep THREE IS mechs to have a missile boat, a laser boat, and a ballistic boat. This also means IS players in average must buy more mechbays than Clan players.

3. No matter how you look at it, it is bloody unfair for IS players to pay the same C-Bill costs for inferior IS XL engine and inferior Endo/Ferro. Therefore IS mechs should have cheaper upgrades, as long as current imbalance remains. Ideally base tech should be balanced ASAP.

Edited by El Bandito, 03 January 2017 - 08:37 AM.

[Bud Crue]

Given how much time I like spending playing mech legos in the mech lab one thing that always strikes me is the absurd cost of engines, particularly XL-engines. Every time I drop several million c-bills on one, it always brings me back to the balance debate:

Does a clan XL engine provide clear benefits over an IS XL engine? Yes. 12 slots vs 8. Clan isn't an insta-kill when you lose a torso. Now compare costs between the two. Hint: they are the same.

Why does my fragile as hell, oversized IS XL engine costs me exactly as much as the smaller and tougher clan XL engine. How is that in any way balanced? What offsetting factors am I missing here?

[Snazzy Dragon]

El Bandito, on 03 January 2017 - 05:20 AM, said:

1. Clan mechs, when purchased, come with pre-built DHS, endo and/or ferro, and most come with XL engines, while IS mechs are not. Hence the price difference. Once you buy the appropriate XL engine, DHS, endo/ferro, a IS Spider for example, can be more expensive than a Clan Cheetah.

2. Due to how omnimechs and omni pods work, you only need one omnimech mech to boat missiles/lasers/ballistics, and you can sell the other two variants--thus gaining back C-Bills. Meanwhile you must keep THREE IS mechs to have a missile boat, a laser boat, and a ballistic boat. This also means IS players in average must buy more mechbays than Clan players.

3. No matter how you look at it, it is bloody unfair for IS players to pay the same C-Bills costs for inferior IS XL engine and inferior Endo/Ferro. Therefore IS mechs should have cheaper upgrades, as long as current imbalance remains. Ideally base tech should be balanced ASAP.

As much as I like the sound of cheaper upgrades for IS mechs (I'm trying to expand my IS deck for when I start switching sides again), I do not think that will happen under the Paulconomy. I mean, we have to pay MC to get more drop decks.. MC to use mechs we already own??? 10/10, PGI..

[Wil McCullough]

as a space bucks starved warrior, i like to window shop in my mech bay for my IS mechs.

i build them the way i want them, laugh at the ridiculous amount of cbills needed, click on "home" and click on "yes".

then i cry myself to sleep.

[xTrident]

Aside from the facts discussed pertaining to the difference in cost I also believe Clan mechs are better. This is just from personal use/feel.

What bugs me on the cost of the Clan mechs is the difference from say a Kodiak to a Hellbringer which I just compared. I recently bought a Kodiak for ~16/17 million cbills. I want to get a Hellbringer now... Cost of one is right around 13M cbills. 35 tons less but still costs nearly as much as a Kodiak. That's a little ridiculous to me.

The cost difference between IS and Clan mechs though, worth it.

[CK16]

Although refitting an IS mech with everything needed to make it "viable" the issue I feel stems more from a new player perspective. If no faction loyalties are there for the new player to consider he probably will gravitate towards the IS cause on the out side they look cheaper. So they see it they get more for thier starting bonus C-bills, instead of a single Clan mech they can get several IS mechs (again upfront wise). This then expands into hey I want to do FW but I only have IS mechs, well ok I will go IS and we'll you should know the rest of the story here.

[Battlemaster56]

[Trollfeed]

This thread shows pretty well why some people have so hard time grasping this games innate balance problems for FP. Go buy some IS mechs, kit them out and play around. You will be surprised and be better player after it.

IS mechs aren't cheaper just because they're IS mechs. Mech price is calculated from the tonnage and the equipment they mount, so clan battlemech with identical engines and equipment costs same. Big price gap for clan omnimechs comes from big XL engines they mount and few million c-bills from omnipods in addition to possible endo+ferro and double heatsinks. And that IS mech pays full price for that useless engine unless it's some lucky chassis that can use stock engine, at least you can sell it.

Edited by Trollfeed, 03 January 2017 - 07:09 AM.

[Bombast]

As others have said, Clan mechs basically come fully finished. Even if they require engine swaps to be 'meta,' the one's they come with are usually alright to start out with. Plop in and out a few weapons and you're good to go.

Most Inner Sphere mechs, on the other hand, require a new engine to be anything other then a slightly mobile targets, and that one upgrade alone can often skyrocket an Inner Sphere mechs price above it's Clan equivalent.

Maybe how each individual Clan item should be re-evaluated for cost, but overall, it's fair that their more expensive. It's the difference between buying an already restored classic car, and a rusted out, engineless frame - Even if the end result is the same, one of them requires a lot more effort and work, so it's a lot cheaper to start.

Edited by Bombast, 03 January 2017 - 07:11 AM.

[Vanguard836]

TT cost of a Timber Wolf : above 24 millions
MWO cost of a Timber Wolf : a little above 15 millions

The prices are allready lower than what they "should be" (according to the old TT values)

[Kanil]

If you want an example of how IS and Clan stuff aren't priced differently, compare Orion and Orion IIC costs. The IICs are all a little more expensive, but that is entirely due to Clan lightweight weapons allowing more weapons to be fitted on -- 10 tons of Clan LRM-20s cost twice as much as 10 tons of IS LRM 20s, because there's two of them...

Each faction even has a standard and XL engined Orion, so you can also see why Clan Omnis cost so much -- they all come with big XLs.

Edited by Kanil, 03 January 2017 - 07:36 AM.

[CK16]

It does bring up an interesting fact thought, BV cost and mech cost. In a game where the price of the mech has little to do with performance it does kind of lop side somethings. Mechs that may be cheap in TT/Lore and meant to be cost effective for a campaign,unit, ect could come in as a better mechs than the expensive mechs that in TT/Lore were some of the best developed mechs. Now I get it no one wants to play the cheap mechs ect, and no one wants to have any mech they buy perform badly (though yes some do suck currently). Now I do not want any mech to be horrible, just wish they would make an economy that would benefit cost effective mechs, instead of making price irrelevant to most mechs. I get it though the way this game is set up there is no reason though to take a cheaper "inferior" mech though, and I am sure confuses some players that probably have the mindset more C-bills = better mech, to find out they spent, what 25mil or so on a DWF and find out its welll....

[xTrident]

Vanguard836, on 03 January 2017 - 07:19 AM, said:

TT cost of a Timber Wolf : above 24 millions
MWO cost of a Timber Wolf : a little above 15 millions

The prices are allready lower than what they "should be" (according to the old TT values)

The only reason a price tag of 24 million would matter is because of the current payout PGI has set in place. If players were making 250k+ cbills for pedestrian performances even in losses without premium time 24 million really wouldn't be that bad.

So yeah... Great that it's lower than TT but what's the reward money like in TT?

[Bombast]

xTrident, on 03 January 2017 - 08:17 AM, said:

So yeah... Great that it's lower than TT but what's the reward money like in TT?

Depends on the guy running the game. Generally, from my experience though, the TT campaigns where money made matters usually run more on salvage rights (In using salvage equipment, or selling it for C-Bills) than anything else, the mission rewards being bare minimal to carry you forward.

Salvage doesn't really work in this kind of game though.

[Spheroid]

Trial mechs cost nothing. The potatoes could have signed a seven day contract and gone Clan, yet they did not for some reason.

[xTrident]

Bombast, on 03 January 2017 - 08:23 AM, said:

Depends on the guy running the game. Generally, from my experience though, the TT campaigns where money made matters usually run more on salvage rights (In using salvage equipment, or selling it for C-Bills) than anything else, the mission rewards being bare minimal to carry you forward.

Salvage doesn't really work in this kind of game though.

Salvage in the way of salvaging a mech in some cases? If so, I'd say it's pretty obvious the rewards in the TT version are much greater just in that respect. Hell, even if weapons were salvaged it's a much greater reward.

[Dremnon]

Lehmund, on 03 January 2017 - 05:01 AM, said:

My understanding is that the costs for Clan mechs are higher on TT because they are superior mechs, with higher Battle Values etc....

However, in MWO, the mechs of the same weight class have been balanced somewhat to equality (or at least there is an attempt to do so).

Question is then, why not balance the cost of the mechs too? I.e. if a 65 ton Clan mech is supposed to compete head to head with a 65 ton IS mech 1 v 1, shouldn't their purchase cost be similar?

So real life application, I acknowledge that the Ferrari (clan mech) is a superior car to a Honda Accord (IS mech), but I can buy a kit (quirks) for my Honda Accord to make it look like a Ferrari, and therefore it should perform like a Ferrari, and my resale value of said Kitted Honda should now be that of a Ferrari.

The fact is the IS mechs are never meant to compete with the Clan mechs because of the price point difference and it being a superior mechs, and if you ever wanted it to to compete you would have to put almost as much money into the IS mechs to make it even close, which as someone above noted is the Ferro, DHS, XL engines. Even after that, it does not mean you have something that should or can compete 1 vs 1, if it ever gets close you see it get hit with the dequirking events.

Edited by Dremnon, 03 January 2017 - 08:35 AM.

[xTrident]

Spheroid, on 03 January 2017 - 08:27 AM, said:

Trial mechs cost nothing. The potatoes could have signed a seven day contract and gone Clan, yet they did not for some reason.

How would they know to do any of this? That's why.

Dremnon, on 03 January 2017 - 08:34 AM, said:

So real life application, I acknowledge that the Ferrari (clan mech) is a superior car to a Honda Accord (IS mech), but I can buy a kit (quirks) for my Honda Accord to make it look like a Ferrari, and therefore it should perform like a Ferrari, and my resale value of said Kitted Honda should now be that of a Ferrari.

The fact is the IS mechs are never meant to compete with the Clan mechs because of the price point difference and it being a superior mechs, and if you ever wanted it to to compete you would have to put almost as much money into the IS mechs to make it even close, which as someone above noted is the Ferro, DHS, XL engines. Even after that, it does not mean you have something that should or can compete 1 vs 1, if it ever gets close you see it get hit with the dequirking events.

The problem is trying to implement this into a game. Isn't IS's strength, strength in numbers? So it should be more IS mechs/pilots vs. Clan. Well it's hard to implement even that because it's a game and the game developers would be relying on the players to play even more as a team in order for the game to work. So instead we're left with inferior IS mechs with quirks which still arguably fall short.

Hard to compare TT game to this. If instead MWO was a strategy type game it'd probably compare a lot better.

Edited by xTrident, 03 January 2017 - 08:43 AM.