160 replies to this topic

[Bud Crue]

Karl Streiger, on 16 January 2017 - 05:23 AM, said:

I still don't get why we try to have a pilot skill based matchmaker and not a Mech based matchmaker.

When low performer like Panther, commando, Vindicator and Mist Lynx only drop on their own - those Mechs can be played and not settle dust in everybodys mech hangar.

Because PGI honestly doesn't think the mechs you mentioned are "low perfomers". A little fragile perhaps (see recent armor buffs to mechs like the Panther, etc.) but other than that, in PGI's eyes these mechs are not any worse, or at least not significantly worse, than any other mechs in the game. Since the mechs are all pretty close (in their eyes) there is no need to consider mech to mech disparities since such disparities aren't a factor. If it were otherwise they would significantly buff them, but they don't, so they must be fine.

Now excuse me while I go wipe the tears from my Locust 3v's eyes, and give some words of encouragement to my Panthers.

[Lily from animove]

Karl Streiger, on 16 January 2017 - 05:23 AM, said:

QFT


And there is the problem

I still don't get why we try to have a pilot skill based matchmaker and not a Mech based matchmaker.

When low performer like Panther, commando, Vindicator and Mist Lynx only drop on their own - those Mechs can be played and not settle dust in everybodys mech hangar.

because the performance of a mech depends on the pilot, a highr skilled pilot can use the full potential of the mech. that is also the area where you see the differences between mehcs because porper loadout, proper piloting.

in lowskill puglandia mechs work equally bad/good.

just look at some matches you can see even Kodiaks with below 100damage. Now think about the idea matching chassis with chassis, that would make those poor below 100damage kodiaks meet those 1300 damage people in kodiaks. This would surely not be a better matchmaker. Also who is then the one able to judge which chasis gets which "strength" for MM decided to be pooled against which other? We don't have the population to filter for every chassis and all skills. That would work, giving the rating for pilots and the rating for mechs would be done correctly. But it would require a load more people online at the same time. But then this all would only apply for QP and not change these issues in FP.

[Buster Machine 0]

Everyone here might be getting salty over "balance", but keep at it PGI, you have the statistics and the numbers for all the chassis and components, I'm sure you are trying to find the best ratio for component balance in the game.

[Karl Streiger]

Lily from animove, on 16 January 2017 - 05:58 AM, said:

because the performance of a mech depends on the pilot, a highr skilled pilot can use the full potential of the mech. that is also the area where you see the differences between mehcs because porper loadout, proper piloting.

in lowskill puglandia mechs work equally bad/good.

just look at some matches you can see even Kodiaks with below 100damage. Now think about the idea matching chassis with chassis, that would make those poor below 100damage kodiaks meet those 1300 damage people in kodiaks. This would surely not be a better matchmaker. Also who is then the one able to judge which chasis gets which "strength" for MM decided to be pooled against which other? We don't have the population to filter for every chassis and all skills. That would work, giving the rating for pilots and the rating for mechs would be done correctly. But it would require a load more people online at the same time. But then this all would only apply for QP and not change these issues in FP.

we danced this dance a couple of times didn't we?

Who decide? The Players decide. What is good will be run, what is bad won't - update the database with every patch.
Maybe guys decide they want to level up the Mist Lynx - almost only the mist lynx is run as light mech. It get a huge "bonus" for MM and in the next patch/season it is matched vs Locusts and Cheetas (whatever is good actually dunno)

Maybe the system can be gamed but any "advantage will only work for a month at maximum" - about the player.
Learn from the best or die with the rest - when you run a KDK you know that you meet the best players - same as in other games like WoT run the Maus and you are matched with the most expensive tanks and most seasoned players - reason why its stupid to buy at first a T8 heavy tank and think you become a god on the field

[Thorqemada]

Well, imho, as a Clan Mech usually loses half the armament when losing a ST a 40% reduction in Heat Efficiency is still an increase of Heat Efficiency at the cost of reduced armament practically...

[Lily from animove]

Thorqemada, on 16 January 2017 - 06:22 AM, said:

Well, imho, as a Clan Mech usually loses half the armament when losing a ST a 40% reduction in Heat Efficiency is still an increase of Heat Efficiency at the cost of reduced armament practically...

extreme comparison would be a Nova and a Kodiak, NVA with laserboating and Kodiak with the usual meta Ballistics. Now the additional 20% heatpenalty will be felt a LOT on the NVA, but it won't change any on the KDK. It is simply the way how differently this change adresses on the mechs that is not ok, as it does not really balance anything.

[Darky101]

Changes again....

I'm just so happy on my MWO break!
Replaying the other Mech games right now.
I just keep checking the forums, hoping for a new feature or positive that draws me back, but I just keep getting frustrated.

How about just finaly finishing the game?
Giving us a finished balanced game?

Maybe give every mech acces to every tech? Maybe give every faction access to every mech?
Would that be lore firendly? I don't know.
Would that fix balance? Yes.
Would it encourage using the top mechs even more? Yes! But that is the only down side I see to it and everybody would have the same options.

Well see you in..... dont know when.
Have fun!

Edited by Darky101, 16 January 2017 - 06:59 AM.

[Alan Davion]

Sjorpha, on 16 January 2017 - 02:36 AM, said:

Also IS Omnis will come sooner or later, they need to be as good as clan omnis without needing extra quirks.

There simply is no good reason for unbalanced equipment in this game. Everything else, including omnimechs on both sides, becomes easier to balance if the basic IS and Clan equipment is equally good, as it should be.

BAH-HAHAHAHAHAHA!

You talk about there being no good reason for unbalanced equipment, and then mention IS Omni mechs in the same breath?!

IS Omnimechs are STILL inferior to Clan Omnimechs because of the imbalance between the IS and Clan XL engines. They would die just as easily as normal IS Battlemechs running XL engines.

Not to mention many early IS Omnimechs come with locked SINGLE heat sinks, so unless PGI skips those entirely, which is probably not going to happen as I've seen people asking for several of those early IS Omnis, then that's a second strike against IS Omnis "bringing balance" on both sides.

So unless PGI makes IS XL immune to death upon a side torso loss, which is unlikely given the engines will still be 3 crit slots, unless they bring it down to 2 slots per side torso, its impossible for IS and Clan XL engines to be balanced.

Neither of the above options are likely to happen anytime soon either.

[Lily from animove]

Alan Davion, on 16 January 2017 - 06:59 AM, said:

BAH-HAHAHAHAHAHA!

You talk about there being no good reason for unbalanced equipment, and then mention IS Omni mechs in the same breath?!

IS Omnimechs are STILL inferior to Clan Omnimechs because of the imbalance between the IS and Clan XL engines. They would die just as easily as normal IS Battlemechs running XL engines.

Not to mention many early IS Omnimechs come with locked SINGLE heat sinks, so unless PGI skips those entirely, which is probably not going to happen as I've seen people asking for several of those early IS Omnis, then that's a second strike against IS Omnis "bringing balance" on both sides.

So unless PGI makes IS XL immune to death upon a side torso loss, which is unlikely given the engines will still be 3 crit slots, unless they bring it down to 2 slots per side torso, its impossible for IS and Clan XL engines to be balanced.

Neither of the above options are likely to happen anytime soon either.

yes and until then all those badly shaped hitbox IS omnis with XL's are indeed going to be DoA. it's like XL forced dragons.

[Mawai]

Lily from animove, on 16 January 2017 - 06:38 AM, said:

extreme comparison would be a Nova and a Kodiak, NVA with laserboating and Kodiak with the usual meta Ballistics. Now the additional 20% heatpenalty will be felt a LOT on the NVA, but it won't change any on the KDK. It is simply the way how differently this change adresses on the mechs that is not ok, as it does not really balance anything.

Agreed that it won't make any difference to the Kodiak or most ballistic meta boats. However, the nova will lose half its weapons with the ST so even with a 40% reduction in heat dissipation, the heat management on the nova will actually get easier with the loss of the ST unless it was an asymmetric build with most of the weapons on one side. It may not be as easy as a 20% reduction but it is still manageable.

On the other hand, I agree with you that a 40% heat reduction only affects heat intensive builds and doesn't address all clan builds ... on the other hand a 40% reduction in max speed and turning (rather than the current 20%) would affect all clan builds ... but might be wildly unpopular since it would be noticeable whereas the heat is likely meaningless.

By the way ... reading the roadmap ... it sounds like PGI may try to balance things by introducing 3060+ tech to the game which might allow them to close the gap but at the expense of making all current IS weapons obsolete. I may be wrong, but if I recall, most of the tech advances after the invasion where on the IS side trying to catch up.

[JohnnyWayne]

As much as I defend clans and I don't see this nerf justified, I have to admit that the better players in the game are drawn towards clans. Because they are stronger? Maybe, but not much. What is it that makes clans more appealing to better players?

It is the extended range. More range makes it easier to maneuver, be ahead of your enemy while the meatbag team takes a beating. You are just in the back trading as good as you can.

What else? The a lot discussed power creep. Many IS mechs have fewer hardpoints. Not to forget the lack of light fusion engines.

Personally I think considering the better mechanics IS weapons have, the LFE could balance clans and IS together with some over the board present range adjustments. No more quirking for specific mechs.

[Mcgral18]

Lily from animove, on 16 January 2017 - 06:38 AM, said:

extreme comparison would be a Nova and a Kodiak, NVA with laserboating and Kodiak with the usual meta Ballistics. Now the additional 20% heatpenalty will be felt a LOT on the NVA, but it won't change any on the KDK. It is simply the way how differently this change adresses on the mechs that is not ok, as it does not really balance anything.

The change affects TrueDubs only

10 in both cases, cooling of 2 H/s, down to 1.2H/s
Externals unaffected
Your "lucky" Sword and Board Nova would have 5 in a ST, and 2 in an arm, still 7 externals, at 1.05 H/s

So, starting at (w/21 DHS) 3.65 H/s (4.2 w/ efficiencies) you drop down to 2.25 (2.58 H/s)

A...39% drop
Huh, I expected less.



It'll hurt alright, and Sword and Board builds will suffer a fair bit, dropping down from DHS to SHS, essentially.

[Lily from animove]

Energy builds like those overamazing Gargoyle which terrorizes in dozens in FW will surely get the needed nerf, while those poor once in ablue moon kodiaks finally get a appearance again.

Mcgral18, on 16 January 2017 - 07:47 AM, said:

The change affects TrueDubs only

10 in both cases, cooling of 2 H/s, down to 1.2H/s
Externals unaffected
Your "lucky" Sword and Board Nova would have 5 in a ST, and 2 in an arm, still 7 externals, at 1.05 H/s

So, starting at (w/21 DHS) 3.65 H/s (4.2 w/ efficiencies) you drop down to 2.25 (2.58 H/s)

A...39% drop
Huh, I expected less.



It'll hurt alright, and Sword and Board builds will suffer a fair bit, dropping down from DHS to SHS, essentially.

sure and it should hurt, the issue the way how building a emhc works, all those ballistic kodiaks which ar ecurrently the most meta will also lose alot heat, in % at least. but the efficient effect is 0. so that change affects some mechs a lot and others not at all. And balance would mean makign the strong and too strong ones waker and the weaker ones stronger. But this change simply doesn't. It will change people now utilizig more pokeback mechs than goig into sword and board with energy weapons. What this change does is just pushign the more cheasy stuff to appear and I doubt this is improving the situation.

[Kael Posavatz]

The thing is...actually, there are a lot of things that people have been saying. The actual thing is that PGI has been listening to...very few of them.

40% heat penalty. Okay, it dials back the TBR/Ebon Jag some. The Meta-dakka Kodiak already has a good heat curve and if you lose a side torso you also lose half the guns so it isn't going to feel a thing. Meanwhile, mechs that are already marginal (or at least I haven't seen anyone recently extolling the virtues of the Mist Lynx or seen many Vipers in play) will be pointlessly hampered. I suppose some of those underperformers could be the mechs getting quirk adjustments, but then why not say so? All this does is needlessly antagonize players, and imply that 78% (actually more, counting variants) of one side's mechs are problematical (also that the KDK is not a problem because it can run a standard engine and thus not be affected), rather than the handful or so that may need to be dialed back some.

On the other hand, what does it not do? Well...it doesn't make IS XL engines more survivable, with some nasty implications for when IS Omnis hit the deck. It also doesn't make the standard engine more practical (which is, frankly, unfortunate as hell given PGI's moderately successful effort to give every weapon/piece of equipment a place on the battlefield).

There is also the effect on the playerbase. Nerfs are generally taken negatively (especially by those most affected), resulting in decreased enjoyment of the game, which in turn results in less tiem spent playing the game and an increased reluctance to spend money on the game. Buffs, on the other hand, generally increase enjoyment, time spent playing, and revenue.

So...one of the things PGI could be trying to address is populations. But if that's the case, I question why they pitch it as "we're going to pressure you to stop playing clans" instead of "here's a shiny new reason to play IS".

The bigger issue is one of trust. There was the whole fiasco over 3pv. And then what CW was billed as (compared to what we got, and how long it took to come). I remember how stupidly powerful the wave I omnimechs were. And there were more than a handful of insane quirk combos when they were put in to give the Inner Sphere 'balance' against the Clans. The revamped assault was announced in late 2015 and it's still coming 'soon' but...honestly, I felt good enough about this game following MechCon to put money in for the first time in over a year. But I have...very little confidence that NewTech will happen with anything close to being reasonably balanced.

Edited by Kael Posavatz, 16 January 2017 - 09:46 AM.

[Sjorpha]

Alan Davion, on 16 January 2017 - 06:59 AM, said:

BAH-HAHAHAHAHAHA!

You talk about there being no good reason for unbalanced equipment, and then mention IS Omni mechs in the same breath?!

Exactly, there is no good reason why the IS XL should be inferior to the clan XL.

I'm not arguing it isn't inferior, I'm arguing that it shouldn't be. I want it to be buffed to be equally good.

Surely making IS XL as good as clan XL would help IS omnis be useable?

Edited by Sjorpha, 16 January 2017 - 09:50 AM.

[The Zohan]

Dr Genocide, on 16 January 2017 - 06:07 AM, said:

Everyone here might be getting salty over "balance", but keep at it PGI, you have the statistics and the numbers for all the chassis and components, I'm sure you are trying to find the best ratio for component balance in the game.

They try huh? Where I come from, we call that 'swing and miss'.

[FupDup]

Sjorpha, on 16 January 2017 - 09:49 AM, said:

Surely making IS XL as good as clan XL would help IS omnis be useable?

It would be a great start, but some like the Strider and Owens are supremely gimped by having hardwired SHS and other pointless equipment.

Either PGI has to loosen the hardwired restrictions on IS Omnis a bit, or release "Mk II" versions that were actually designed by competent engineers. For example, a Strider Mk. II that uses an XL engine, DHS, and no hardwired CASE.

[Sjorpha]

FupDup, on 16 January 2017 - 12:19 PM, said:

It would be a great start, but some like the Strider and Owens are supremely gimped by having hardwired SHS and other pointless equipment.

Either PGI has to loosen the hardwired restrictions on IS Omnis a bit, or release "Mk II" versions that were actually designed by competent engineers. For example, a Strider Mk. II that uses an XL engine, DHS, and no hardwired CASE.

Or they could balance single heatsinks vs double heatsinks as well, so that DHS aren't strictly better. There should be builds that are better with single heatsinks, and so on for everything else.

If standard engine, standard structure and single heatsinks etc. were competitive choices that people actually used a lot you wouldn't be thinking that way about the Strider.

It would also make building normal battlemechs much more diverse and fun.

Edited by Sjorpha, 16 January 2017 - 01:25 PM.

[Snazzy Dragon]

Sjorpha, on 16 January 2017 - 01:24 PM, said:

Or they could balance single heatsinks vs double heatsinks as well, so that DHS aren't strictly better. There should be builds that are better with single heatsinks, and so on for everything else.

If standard engine, standard structure and single heatsinks etc. were competitive choices that people actually used a lot you wouldn't be thinking that way about the Strider.

It would also make building normal battlemechs much more diverse and fun.

44 SHS banshee laser vomit. gg clothes

[FupDup]

Sjorpha, on 16 January 2017 - 01:24 PM, said:

Or they could balance single heatsinks vs double heatsinks as well, so that DHS aren't strictly better. There should be builds that are better with single heatsinks, and so on for everything else.

If standard engine, standard structure and single heatsinks etc. were competitive choices that people actually used a lot you wouldn't be thinking that way about the Strider.

It would also make building normal battlemechs much more diverse and fun.

The thing about SHS balancing is that it would be pretty hard to make them equal to DHS on the low-tonnage end of the spectrum. At the high end it's much easier to pull off thanks to saving so many critslots, and big gundams need all the slots they can get. Lights on the other hand generally have all the slots they need and then some.

Even making all engine sinks into TruDubs wouldn't cut it because the Owens and Strider would have to mount external SHS if they wanted any more sinks than the base 10.


Beyond that, another thing to remember is that a mech's effectiveness isn't just a simple sum of its parts. Even if each individual part is balanced, those parts might be used in a combination that doesn't work. The Owens is the main example here, with too much hardwired equipment (and lack of Endo) to achieve an effective amount of firepower.


For the Strider, it's just a poor design choice to have double hardwired CASE when:

1. Not every build will even use ammo-based weapons at all.

2. There are plenty of other places to put ammo other than the side torsos.

3. Even if you do use side torso ammo, you might only put the ammo in one side instead of both.

Edited by FupDup, 16 January 2017 - 02:25 PM.