160 replies to this topic

[Snazzy Dragon]

FupDup, on 16 January 2017 - 02:22 PM, said:

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.


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.

SHS are really just there to please the loremongers at this point, I think.

[FupDup]

Snazzy Dragon, on 16 January 2017 - 02:23 PM, said:

SHS are really just there to please the loremongers at this point, I think.

It's really more a case of placeholders and mandatory upgrade taxes.

[MischiefSC]

Lily from animove, on 16 January 2017 - 02:12 AM, said:

no what will happen is that those new players see the still strong clanemchs succeed and then buying those. or they will buy crappy IS mechs with lrm's because thats what they lerned to work in t5.

Newbies and potatoes tend to buy what they lern works. And they lern this in t5. this balance change will not change much amongst the potatoes level. But it will erase peoples chocies in mid skill and top skills. Because those of mid/top skill sacrificing some performance for a chassis they like over meta will probably now end up wiht a too bad performance and the choice flips from like >meta to meta > like.



it would break many of the omnimechs balance comapred to the clanmechs and is mechs. If thesy want to equalise engines, they also need to unlock clanomni construction rules, otherwise the majority of clanomnis is just left in a inferior state. How good a clanomni is, depends on the broked fixed equip and the lore coincedence well chosen enginesize as well as ESFFbeing there or not. It would need a buttload of quirks to prevent many of the inferior clanomnis form being bad afte such a change.



I really would like to know how that "internal review, refinement, and testing" thing works.because those people surely have no idea how the playerbase reacts to the changes done. Thats why hardly a change PGI does has the effect they want it to have. Thats why the informationw arfare attemp failed, thats why heatscale failed. Not because they were basically bad ideas, mostly because their implemention was not adding anything that mattered, and the way the change hould affect the game was not how it affected players. Someone there is bad/unexperienced in knowing or guessing how MWO gamers adapt to the changes they implement.

I can not stress enough how important the observations you made here are. Building or breaking habits takes a good 6 weeks of consistent experience - however impressions are created very quickly and they strongly color our perceptions for a very long time.

The biggest problem with wide tier separation is that bad players only have other bads to learn from. It literally teaches people to be bad at the game.

We really, really need a coop training environment. We also need a 'mentor' program that lets players who qualify (likely with a request to PGI) to intentionally drop in the newbie tiers and offer help and direction and when they find people who want to learn or want help they can just grab them right there in the match so after the match they are already grouped up and can drop in a coop training ground. Heaven forbid a sort of shared mech bay; that's dark sorcery and too much to dream for but at least the ability to collect new players who want some help and direction and be able to give it to them.

The system we have right now is an environment where people learn bad habits that 'work' only because they're playing against terribads. When they encounter skilled players and get crushed they have to reconcile their own (largely erroneous) experience vs the reality they're facing. The brutal truth is that the players who've been here a long time or play FW a lot have a *huge* advantage, not by total matches played but because they've played so much in environments with no MM (old mixed group/pug queue, FW, etc) and had most of their introduction to the game in an environment where they saw and experienced first hand good v bad players and play styles.

The more we curate the environment to shelter new/inexperienced/bad players the more we cement the new/inexperienced players into habits learned from bad players. It's like having your schools taught by dropouts and felons. What do you expect them to learn?

[AphexTwin11]

MischiefSC, on 16 January 2017 - 02:37 PM, said:

I can not stress enough how important the observations you made here are. Building or breaking habits takes a good 6 weeks of consistent experience - however impressions are created very quickly and they strongly color our perceptions for a very long time.

The biggest problem with wide tier separation is that bad players only have other bads to learn from. It literally teaches people to be bad at the game.

We really, really need a coop training environment. We also need a 'mentor' program that lets players who qualify (likely with a request to PGI) to intentionally drop in the newbie tiers and offer help and direction and when they find people who want to learn or want help they can just grab them right there in the match so after the match they are already grouped up and can drop in a coop training ground. Heaven forbid a sort of shared mech bay; that's dark sorcery and too much to dream for but at least the ability to collect new players who want some help and direction and be able to give it to them.

The system we have right now is an environment where people learn bad habits that 'work' only because they're playing against terribads. When they encounter skilled players and get crushed they have to reconcile their own (largely erroneous) experience vs the reality they're facing. The brutal truth is that the players who've been here a long time or play FW a lot have a *huge* advantage, not by total matches played but because they've played so much in environments with no MM (old mixed group/pug queue, FW, etc) and had most of their introduction to the game in an environment where they saw and experienced first hand good v bad players and play styles.

The more we curate the environment to shelter new/inexperienced/bad players the more we cement the new/inexperienced players into habits learned from bad players. It's like having your schools taught by dropouts and felons. What do you expect them to learn?

So everyone should get a trophy? f- that, learn by getting rekt, reading, and joining a unit like everyone else.

[Alan Davion]

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

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?

The problem is how do you buff the IS XL to be as good as the Clan XL without alienating the Clan players?

Because the Clan XL is immune to death on ST loss, the only way to make the IS XL as good as the Clan XL is to make it immune to death on ST loss, and I doubt that would go over well with either the Clanners or the IS. One, because both engines are now immune to ST loss (Clanners), and Two, because the engine is still 3 crits over the Clans 2 (IS).

I don't claim to know that this is how all Clan or IS players would react, but I'm sure there are some die-hards on both sides of the equation, but it's a big enough risk to warrant being brought up.

Frankly I'm of the Risk/Reward mindset.

STD engine, no risk of death until your CT is blown out, but there's a lot less space for weapons.

LFE, from a purely numbers point of view, it acts as a bridge between the IS XL and Clan XL. 2 crit slots per torso, allowing similar immunity to death upon a single ST loss like the Clans, while allowing a little more weight savings over the STD engine, but not quite as much as the XL for weapons. Allows for more build options that aren't possible with either an STD or XL for one reason or another, be it weight savings or crit slots preventing certain weapon combinations.

Clan XL, functionally a combination of the LFE and IS XL. 2 crit slots per ST, but allowing for far greater weight savings than the LFE or STD.

IS XL, the ultimate risk/reward. You risk instant death upon a single ST loss, but you give yourself the most room for weapons in order to do as much damage as possible before you get ganked, but locking yourself into very specific builds that are XL friendly.

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.

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 heat sink issue, man oh man that is one huge f***ing can of worms.

AphexTwin11, on 16 January 2017 - 02:49 PM, said:

So everyone should get a trophy? f- that, learn by getting rekt, reading, and joining a unit like everyone else.

Now was that really necessary? Mischief was advocating for a unit style training system which would cover topics from battle tactics to better understanding of the mechlab mechanics. He was just a little more wordy about it than most others would have been.

I understood his meaning after reading it just once.

People don't learn by being seal clubbed... Except maybe learn to say "f*** this" and leave.

How many players do we have in the game that DON'T come onto the forums, or read Sarna, or read the TT rules to get a basic grasp of the game mechanics?

How many players do we have in the game that DON'T come onto the forums ever join a unit?

Can you answer either of these questions? I sure as f*** can't, and I seriously doubt you can either.

Mischief was not advocating for a "everyone wins" scenario. He was trying to advocate for a system where people would be able to learn how to increase the chances of their winning by learning from people who understand the mechanics without having to consult manuals every five seconds.

He was advocating for a system that would make this community an actual F***ING COMMUNITY thanks to people ACTUALLY F***ING HELPING EACH OTHER! Not f***ing seal clubbing all the people that don't know what the f*** they are doing. New to the game or otherwise.

[Revis Volek]

Snazzy Dragon, on 14 January 2017 - 02:28 PM, said:

"Buff IS engines please!"

"Okay, we here at PGI have agreed to listen to your request and nerf clan XL engines."

So we should have been asking for nerfs all along!


doh!

[Sjorpha]

Alan Davion, on 16 January 2017 - 02:59 PM, said:

The problem is how do you buff the IS XL to be as good as the Clan XL without alienating the Clan players?

Only a complete idiot would quit playing a PVP game because the factions in it are properly balanced, it's better for everyone to have good balance.

The self serving obfuscation and fearmongering needs to stop and the tech needs to be balanced.

Maybe some silly grognards gets mad about somehow not being entitled to superior tech (but seriously, what kind of person argues they should have superior tech just because with a straight face?) but so what? Many more people will be happy about it and the game will play a lot better and have better matches, especially in faction play.

Quote

IS XL, the ultimate risk/reward. You risk instant death upon a single ST loss, but you give yourself the most room for weapons in order to do as much damage as possible before you get ganked, but locking yourself into very specific builds that are XL friendly.

As long as Clan XL gives a larger reward for less risk that isn't true.

It would be nice if it WAS true.

For example is IS XL saved 25% more weight than the Clan XL. That would motivate the side torso death as a risk-reward feature and give a nice tradeoff where IS XL and Clan XL both had different reasons to be desired. I could get behind that alternative.

Quote

The heat sink issue, man oh man that is one huge f***ing can of worms.

Why?

It's just two different pieces of equpment. One is currently strictly better which is always bad design in PVP games. Just buff SHS to the point where they are equally worth taking.

The tradeoff should be like now that the DHS gets more cooling at the cost of extra crit space, but the SHS should be strong enough to be better on builds that have more tonnage than crits. It should make competitive sense to take SHS on a Banshee 3M or a Stalker for instance.

The main culprit here is the engine internal heatsinks, since they give those DHS the bonus without the critslot cost. So simply making internal heatsinks always function as either DHS or SHS regardless of which kind you use externally would probably be almost enough to make SHS worth using.

There is way too much sophistry going on here. This is just a game, it works according to the same game theoretic principles like every other game does. Balancing this game isn't in principle more complicated than balancing any other game.

[Tarl Cabot]

If you use the TT rules as a guideline only, as that is how PGI explained it when the initial cXL 20% heat penalty was introduced, a placeholder for a hopefully actual engine crits for IS/Clan.

• cXL has a total 10 engine slots, 2 each ST and 6 in CT - 2/10 = 1/5 or 20% w/50% weight savings.
  
• isXL has a total of 12 engine slots, 3 each ST and 6 in CT - 3/12 - 1/4 or 25% w/50% weight savings
  
• Reference STD 6 engine slots in CT - rules 3 engine crit/disabled 3/6 = 1/2 or 50%. No weight savings
  
• LFE - total 10 engine slots, 2 each ST and 6 in CT - 2/10 = 1/5 or 20% w/25% weight savings.

And PGI has an easy out to go that route if they note that at this time that actual engine crits are off the table, so we will use Engine crit TT rule and its effects as a guideline instead of as a hardset rule for XL/LFE/etc engines with the differences between the number of slots destroyed vs the overall size of the engine. And to apply that one rule without the other aspects that are part of the formula of how crits, or the lack thereof in general are handled, at this time it does not make for good gameplay. With this change, and with different penalty percentages, we can then review and update the percentage penalties and other items on the table for updates after processing the incoming data from this change.

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 16 January 2017 - 06:53 PM.

[the cute little kitty]

I agree, let clan play without more heat nerf. If anything nerf the auto-aim clan streak crap that has 400m range and super high dps! Take it back to 270 like IS srm. 400m is IS large pulse arena.

[Black Ivan]

Typical PGI behaviour. Don't buff the bad stuff, nerf the good stuff. It starts to really hurt to see this level of false aco taken.

[Brain Cancer]

CapperDeluxe, on 15 January 2017 - 05:23 AM, said:

It's in the Battletech game rules that Engine criticals really mess a mech up (especially 2 out of the 3 you get before you are destroyed), Clan mechs really have gotten off easy these past couple years.

All engines in MWO get off easily, as the only way to "damage" an engine is to destroy the section it's in entirely and crits are basically designed to destroy a section even faster than usual, rather than wrecking equipment.

[MischiefSC]

AphexTwin11, on 16 January 2017 - 02:49 PM, said:

So everyone should get a trophy? f- that, learn by getting rekt, reading, and joining a unit like everyone else.

WTF? No. How is having new players play with and against experienced players getting a trophy? Right now new players learn about the game from the people they meet and play with - currently that's going to be terribads and, hopefully, a few mediocres. That's who they meet and play with. So you want everyone to get taught to be bad at the game unless they go find a good unit and players to join up with?

Do you realize that's a stupid idea or are you just hoping that by keeping as many people bad at the game as possible you're going to give yourself some breathing room?

[MischiefSC]

Sjorpha, on 16 January 2017 - 03:33 PM, said:

Only a complete idiot would quit playing a PVP game because the factions in it are properly balanced, it's better for everyone to have good balance.

The self serving obfuscation and fearmongering needs to stop and the tech needs to be balanced.

Maybe some silly grognards gets mad about somehow not being entitled to superior tech (but seriously, what kind of person argues they should have superior tech just because with a straight face?) but so what? Many more people will be happy about it and the game will play a lot better and have better matches, especially in faction play.



As long as Clan XL gives a larger reward for less risk that isn't true.

It would be nice if it WAS true.

For example is IS XL saved 25% more weight than the Clan XL. That would motivate the side torso death as a risk-reward feature and give a nice tradeoff where IS XL and Clan XL both had different reasons to be desired. I could get behind that alternative.



Why?

It's just two different pieces of equpment. One is currently strictly better which is always bad design in PVP games. Just buff SHS to the point where they are equally worth taking.

The tradeoff should be like now that the DHS gets more cooling at the cost of extra crit space, but the SHS should be strong enough to be better on builds that have more tonnage than crits. It should make competitive sense to take SHS on a Banshee 3M or a Stalker for instance.

The main culprit here is the engine internal heatsinks, since they give those DHS the bonus without the critslot cost. So simply making internal heatsinks always function as either DHS or SHS regardless of which kind you use externally would probably be almost enough to make SHS worth using.

There is way too much sophistry going on here. This is just a game, it works according to the same game theoretic principles like every other game does. Balancing this game isn't in principle more complicated than balancing any other game.

If PGI were to actually balance the game correctly and quit trying to keep the Clan tech OP but not *too* OP so as to appease the 'I'll only play if the game is broken in my favor' crowd, I **** you not I would gleefully buy every single package they ever release. Even the bad ones. I'd gift packages to my friends. I'd campaign to get people to buy mech packs just to make up for whatever would be lost by those people leaving -

because them leaving would be one of the best things ever for this game. It's a game. It's a PvP team based game. It needs to be balanced and THEN attention paid to the lore as much as possible without borking gameplay. That would be an actually good game. Having game balance broken because at one point in the history of BTs game lifetime it make a stupid mistake in balance and had the Clans OP. The developers recognized it as a mistake and have since rebalanced 1 to 1 but it's like this holy grail situation for terribads; this magical game environment where the game is supposed to be slanted to make them better, so they can win more often without actually having to be better at the game.

PGI has actively and aggressively failed to balance the game for YEARS. Clan tech has been out, stone cold broken as F@#$ for over three years. I can not imagine still having a job if I did something like that. To have ignored bad game balance for so long in a PvP game has gotten everyones expectations for PGI so low if it came out that actually they haven't done anything on the game just hired interns to hack something out once a month while they all smoked crack and passed out day after day I don't think anyone would even act surprised. The first two years were flat out absurd. The last year we've been happy that at least it's better than it was. Our standards are so low right now that we get stupid decisions like the tonnage nerfs in group queue (you know, nerfing groups in the group queue) and people are just like 'Meh. Not like it's the most incompetent thing they've ever done'.

Ugh. So face-palm worthy.

[Lily from animove]

MischiefSC, on 16 January 2017 - 02:37 PM, said:

I can not stress enough how important the observations you made here are. Building or breaking habits takes a good 6 weeks of consistent experience - however impressions are created very quickly and they strongly color our perceptions for a very long time.

The biggest problem with wide tier separation is that bad players only have other bads to learn from. It literally teaches people to be bad at the game.

We really, really need a coop training environment. We also need a 'mentor' program that lets players who qualify (likely with a request to PGI) to intentionally drop in the newbie tiers and offer help and direction and when they find people who want to learn or want help they can just grab them right there in the match so after the match they are already grouped up and can drop in a coop training ground. Heaven forbid a sort of shared mech bay; that's dark sorcery and too much to dream for but at least the ability to collect new players who want some help and direction and be able to give it to them.

The system we have right now is an environment where people learn bad habits that 'work' only because they're playing against terribads. When they encounter skilled players and get crushed they have to reconcile their own (largely erroneous) experience vs the reality they're facing. The brutal truth is that the players who've been here a long time or play FW a lot have a *huge* advantage, not by total matches played but because they've played so much in environments with no MM (old mixed group/pug queue, FW, etc) and had most of their introduction to the game in an environment where they saw and experienced first hand good v bad players and play styles.

The more we curate the environment to shelter new/inexperienced/bad players the more we cement the new/inexperienced players into habits learned from bad players. It's like having your schools taught by dropouts and felons. What do you expect them to learn?

yes some training grounds is what we suggested like a long time ago. Maybe we can make a thread about that again. If we really get a consistent and floarting chat that may be not too bad, as it is currently hard to gather and tlak with the terribads to begin with. They also need to losen those 2 premium player requirement to make a private lobby.
I still would love the shared mechlab if someone mentors a newbie, nothing would be more important than giving them a proper build and teach them before they end up with a lrm catapult from their academy and cadet cbills.

Edited by Lily from animove, 17 January 2017 - 01:17 AM.

[Tamashii]

Actually all the XL engines should be gernerate more heat if they are critted, not only by destroying a side torso at a clan chassis.
In my opinion, if PGI does the change to 40%, we Clanners should get the benefit of changing all the Jumpjets and heatsinks without any fixed slots!

Always the Clans are getting nerved, the real balance problem are the Merc Units, this will always be.

Think about the IS Laser Alpha Monsters if you want to nerf something...

Anyhow, to get a real balance in the game, we need a battlevalue system!
For example: Daishi (Dire Wolf) 2.341BV / Atlas AS7-C 1.665BV + Cicada CDA-2A 567BV would match.
The Clans got all the advantages they have, but the IS got more tonnage and in this case 2 Mechs.
Each point of armor got his BV, all the weapons got the specific BV, what PGI has to achive is a Matchmaker who calculates all the BV and match it together, and some programers who know their job...

Edited by Tamashii, 17 January 2017 - 03:42 AM.

[Willard Phule]

Here's the funny part....none of this would be necessary if PGI could figure out how to actually make the internal components work.

3 engine hits = death.
2 gyro hits = death.

When those 5 crucial critical slots actually have a physical presence and can actually be destroyed, balance will happen.

Sure, the Clan XL can still survive the loss of a side torso, but if you continue to hit it.....it goes to the center and one more engine hit will do it. Not complete destruction of the CT.

[Sjorpha]

Tamashii, on 17 January 2017 - 02:41 AM, said:

Think about the IS Laser Alpha Monsters if you want to nerf something...

The best laser vomit mechs aren't IS, and laser vomit isn't even the strongest current playstyle. The strongest current playstyle is PPFLD, and it's exclusively clan based (the IS PPFLD builds sucks donkeyballs in comparison).

As for unlocking tech, I'd be in favor of that is the tech was balanced all the way through, but this penalty change doesn't do a damn thing to even make the engines more balanced. It's a completely insignificant change, it doesn't solve any balance problems, it doesn't close the gap between clan and IS tech. Completely useless.

Edited by Sjorpha, 17 January 2017 - 05:32 AM.

[Alan Davion]

Tamashii, on 17 January 2017 - 02:41 AM, said:

Anyhow, to get a real balance in the game, we need a battlevalue system!

For example: Daishi (Dire Wolf) 2.341BV / Atlas AS7-C 1.665BV + Cicada CDA-2A 567BV would match.

The Clans got all the advantages they have, but the IS got more tonnage and in this case 2 Mechs.

Each point of armor got his BV, all the weapons got the specific BV, what PGI has to achive is a Matchmaker who calculates all the BV and match it together, and some programers who know their job...

Unfortunately I have to say I've recently had my eyes opened on the subject of a BV system in MWO.

It works in TT because in TT you don't have to take into account the location of the weapon and/or hardpoint on the mech itself.

Where as in an FPS system you have to take that into account.

Take your Atlas for example. Let's place a Gauss rifle in that Right Torso, it's now mounted right around the Atlas' hip.

Now, let's take a Rifleman or Jagermech, stick a couple Gauss rifles in their arms. Those weapons are now mounted significantly higher than the Gauss rifle mounted on the Atlas.

The Rifleman/Jagermech don't have to expose nearly as much of their body as the Atlas would in order to fire their Gauss rifles. This would require weapons be given dynamic BVs depending on the location they are placed in a given mech.

This is just spit balling here, but let's say a Gauss rifle placed in the Atlas' side torso is given a BV of 5, while if it were placed in the arm of a Rifleman or Jagermech, the weapon might have a BV of 10, 15, or even as high as 20 because of how much easier they are to use thanks to their higher hardpoints, and how much more damage they could put out compared to that Atlas because they don't have to expose as much of themselves, allowing them to hide much quicker than the Atlas would, therefore avoiding more damage to themselves.

I dare say the only way a BV system would work is if the entire game were forced into to a "Stock Only" mode, which we all know would piss off the min/maxers to no end.

No, a BV system will not work in MWO. It would add so much unnecessary work and in the end it still wouldn't work to really balance the game.

[Tamashii]

Alan Davion, on 17 January 2017 - 07:28 AM, said:

No, a BV system will not work in MWO. It would add so much unnecessary work and in the end it still wouldn't work to really balance the game.

Ok, the position of the mounted weapons are indeed a significant aspect you can´t catch with a normal BV system.
But to be honest, away from that, the BV system I proposed is getting close to a balanced game.
Every chassis got his advantages and disadvantages, Torso twist etcpp.

[JC Daxion]

I will wait and see how it plays before i make a judgement..

The mechs that would be affected most by this are ones that boat up all their weapons in one side, and feel zero loss when they blow off the wrong torso. there are many clanners that loosing the torso is not a big deal, even with the agility loss. Yea it hurts a bit, but hardly equal to being dead..