216 replies to this topic

[Vanguard836]

MacClearly, on 16 January 2017 - 06:41 AM, said:

Hey, did you know that when an IS mech with an XL engine loses a side torso it dies?

So tell me again how you think that this is unfair and gone too far....

I suggest you read around and see that people were asking for IS xl buffs to help the IS instead of a situational nerf.

[Lily from animove]

Sjorpha, on 16 January 2017 - 03:45 AM, said:

I'm pretty sure that upcoming IS omnis will have the exact same construction rules as Clan omnis, just like clan battlemechs have the same rules as IS battlemechs, so that's not an argument.

You may have missed this, but this game IS 1:1 teams, your "only" is the "only" constext there is to consider. PGI has officially rejected the entire concept of asymmetrical team sizes and said the goal is 1:1 balance.

Game is 1:1 and that's that.



That's why we need to convince PGI that they actually need to balance the tech all the way in order to also balance the population.

yes and upcoming is omnis will have the same issue, so all we will get is another imbalance between is omnis and is battlemechs. That alone is a reason why the entire tech balance thing isn't going to work since same thch, different mechs, different construction rules just messes balance up more than it fixes.
Imagine the Black hawk KU si oen of the IS omnis, bound to an XL with this geometry. Thx and BB, easy money for whoever shoots at it no matter how much you "nerf" clanengines, this is a fact that won't change, and in best case the CXL is nerfed so far that any clanomni with bad hitboxes will be similar useless. Tech needs to be proper working on badly hitbox shaped Omnimechs, otherwise you just create dead mechs. And this is why a buff to isXL would be better because mechs like the dragon could benefit form it and future badly boxed ISomnis aren't going to be DOA. Sure, twisting helps to spread, but those zepellin noses will always be inferior to those humnoid shapes. And when you make every cXL perform balanced to the isXL the gap between Nosed Omnis and any non Nosed mech (eithe rbattle or omni) just widens. While nosed battlemechs like the crab and stalker can still greatly use a STD but upcoming isOmnis with those noses will be doomed. So this either requires buffed iSXL and non overnerfed cXL's so that these different shapes in Omnis can stay in balanc, or it needs those construction rules unlocked.

MacClearly, on 16 January 2017 - 06:41 AM, said:

Hey, did you know that when an IS mech with an XL engine loses a side torso it dies?

So tell me again how you think that this is unfair and gone too far....

and thats why a wide range of IS mechs aren't used. Now balancing clanXL's to these just makes a load of clanchassis goign to be not used too, while the dakka bear doesn't cares. So where is this achieving balance? Oh right it achives balance between the nonsued IS mechs and the rarely used clanmechs to both be not used. Yeah thats some Kind of balance, but surely not the one that helps the game.

Edited by Lily from animove, 16 January 2017 - 06:50 AM.

[Felbombling]

If you've lost a side torso on your Clan Mech, it is entirely possible that you've lost a good chunk of your weaponry, as well. So, a 40% heat penalty should mean next to nothing in the grand scheme. I'm all for it, and all for Inner Sphere XLs to survive side torso destruction with an even higher heat penalty. PGI says they want to extend time to kill... well, here is a way to do that.

[Sorbic]

Hades Trooper, on 16 January 2017 - 12:54 AM, said:

Seriously folks, 40% is going to be stupidly over powered.

Most clan mechs have very large side torso's to the point in tier 1, it's constant side torso destruction.

Smash that side armour 1st, strip half or more of the weapons and then atm there currently then easy picking, slow, over heating even with reduced weapons.

If pgi insists on making the side torso destruction so high then surely they have to redo the hit boxes of the clans. As it's too easy as of now at 20% to cripple a clan mech taking out 1 torso.

Right now it feels about right on many mechs while not quite enough on a few. As always I'm for small changes and would rather they moved to 30% instead of 40.

Hades Trooper, on 16 January 2017 - 12:54 AM, said:

Boy i'd love to reduce my engine size and take a standard over an XL with these nerfs but no, i can't change my egine, i can't remove fixed equipment.

No you wouldn't.

[Davegt27]

Yeah the Clan nerf seems like a lot to me

but I will have to wait and see

the other thing no matter how much you nerf the clan or buff the IS people will still cry just as much

[C E Dwyer]

Lupis Volk, on 16 January 2017 - 01:17 AM, said:

What did people want. IS XL's to no longer be insta gibed. What does PGI do? Nerf Clams again.

I have to support P.G.I on this one, and hell's know I'm far from P.G.I's friend, but they did for once the right thing and didn't surrender to the cries of it's not fair, make it easier, and how I want it, because it would have been the final shift to make this game just Hawken in Battle tech skins.

Light fusion engines were introduced in 3062

I'm sure that people will be crying foul over it not being fair they weigh more than clan XL's

Maybe once they're in game the 40% heat increase will be reduced, if they are introduced.

[Mystere]

DGTLDaemon, on 16 January 2017 - 01:28 AM, said:

Not surprising, given PGI's history. This has always been their way of balancing - nerf the good stuff instead of buffing the bad stuff. Much as I am pissed off with yet another nerf to the Clan tech, I have to admit that IS players are not to blame for this. They didn't ask for a nerf to Clan XLs.

Ahem! Check the forums very carefully. There are those who did demand such things.

[Tristan Winter]

I don't need the IS XL to be as good as the Clan XL. I already think Clan mechs are too similar to IS mechs. When I switch from my IS account to my Clan account or vice versa, it feels more and more like I'm just changing the colour of my HUD. It's not like I have to adjust my playstyle and tactics all that much.

What's the point of having two factions if they're basically the same, if they feel the same and play the same way? Just to let people enjoy their Timber Wolf skins?

[Mystere]

kesmai, on 16 January 2017 - 03:12 AM, said:

Make it all the same.
Hardpoints weapons engines customization options. Everything equalized.
Balance achieved.

Boredome accomplished.

Or in other words, instead of MWO being "A BattleTech Game", just turn it once and for all into "A Game With BattleTech Skins". There balance achieved 100%!!!

And then people will fight next about shape, color, and sound effects.

[B L O O D W I T C H]

Sjorpha, on 16 January 2017 - 03:30 AM, said:

I keep hearing this, and I keep waiting for a single valid argument for it.

Lore.

[Mystere]

Ban customizations!

Remove the MechLab!

Everyone uses stock equipment only!

[Mcgral18]

Toha Heavy Industries, on 16 January 2017 - 08:05 AM, said:

Lore.

We asked for a valid reason

[Pika]

MacClearly, on 16 January 2017 - 06:41 AM, said:

Hey, did you know that when an IS mech with an XL engine loses a side torso it dies?

So tell me again how you think that this is unfair and gone too far....

I keep reading crap like this and it makes me despair a little. It also makes me glad people like you are not responsible for balance adjustments. Let me explain this as simply, and as easily as I can:

90% of Clan 'Mechs cannot remove their XL engine. They have no choice about the viability of what engine to take. They cannot remove most of their additional 'features' of certain 'Mechs being stuck with Endo or Ferro even when it's a bad choice. The Warhawk can't even remove most of it's HeatSinks leaving it with a tiny, tiny amount of tonnage to play with.

I am really baffled as to why people can't understand why this is a very important distinction. If Omni's could remove their XLs and swap down to standards, yeah sure then I'd say make it so Clan XL ST loss still kills the 'Mech. But the fact it's fixed is why the engine should be more survivable.

IS can tailor their 'Mechs to a play style. Clanners have to adjust their playstyle to a 'Mech.

This is not complex stuff. Don't want to die on an ST loss? TAKE. THE. ENGINE. OUT.

This nerf makes no sense and is further just pushing the clan-ballistic meta. 40% additional heat basically not only kills laser builds but also the SRM\Streak builds. I think I'll probably just shelve my Marauder IIC after this. It already runs hot - now it's going to be near useless.

Edited by Pika, 16 January 2017 - 08:32 AM.

[MacClearly]

Vanguard836, on 16 January 2017 - 06:43 AM, said:

I suggest you read around and see that people were asking for IS xl buffs to help the IS instead of a situational nerf.

Ok...and done. Now might I suggest you do some reading and hear some of the folks argument that 20% doesn't even follow lore to begin with. Oh and there's lots more valid and informative points but I don't want to ruin it for you.

[Mystere]

Mcgral18, on 16 January 2017 - 08:20 AM, said:

We asked for a valid reason

This comment applies here as well:

Koniving, on 15 January 2017 - 09:15 AM, said:

... if they did a translation filtered through lore, we'd have something much more tennible ...

Go here for the rest.

[B L O O D W I T C H]

Mcgral18, on 16 January 2017 - 08:20 AM, said:

We asked for a valid reason

If Lore and fluff aren't valid for you, why don't you try something like titanfall, it's pretty balanced so i've heard.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Mystere, on 16 January 2017 - 08:39 AM, said:

Go here for the rest.

That post while correct, is missing some huge problems with implementations of various things down the road. For example, he brings up the fact the AC20 is supposed to be a rapid firing short range weapon that sprays wildly (thus why it is short range), but then what do you do to make it different from other weapons like the UAC20 or RAC5 which do the same thing, but faster? Sounds like he makes weapons more bland to me.

That and he misses the real reason ghost heat was introduced. It wasn't because of the PPFLD, it was because of the strong synergy of boating and the fact 40 PPFLD was strong during those days, a single AC20 was never really a problem.



For all those using lore as a reasoning though, you realize people including the developers themselves regret making Clans the powerhouses they were at introduction right? There is a difference between spirit of the law and rule of the law, and the Clans don't need to be unbalanced to still be in-line with the spirit of the law and provide a good experience both within TT and within MWO.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 16 January 2017 - 08:51 AM.

[Mystere]

Toha Heavy Industries, on 16 January 2017 - 08:46 AM, said:

If Lore and fluff aren't valid for you, why don't you try something like titanfall, it's pretty balanced so i've heard.

Or Hawken. Or Heavy Gear Assault (if and when that thing gets done).

The latter is actually a great opportunity. It is still so unfinished maybe people can better influence its development. And it's a purely arena game to boot.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 16 January 2017 - 08:49 AM, said:

That post while correct, is missing some huge problems with implementations of various things down the road. For example, he brings up the fact the AC20 is supposed to be a rapid firing short range weapon that sprays wildly (thus why it is short range), but then what do you do to make it different from other weapons like the UAC20 or RAC5 which do the same thing, but faster? Sounds like he makes weapons more bland to me.

That and he misses the real reason ghost heat was introduced. It wasn't because of the PPFLD, it was because of the strong synergy of boating and the fact 40 PPFLD was strong during those days, a single AC20 was never really a problem.

Separate that post's examples from its underlying premise. It's the latter I am referring to whenever I point to that post.

Edited by Mystere, 16 January 2017 - 08:55 AM.

[B L O O D W I T C H]

Mystere, on 16 January 2017 - 08:50 AM, said:

Or Heavy Gear Assault (if and when that thing gets done).

The latter is actually a great opportunity. It is still so unfinished maybe people can better influence its development. And it's a purely arena game to boot.

Biggest let down for me. i was always a massive sucker for heavy gear. I and II were great. I was stupidly overhyped when i heard that a new game was in the making. Total devastated when i heard it will be yet another arena shooter with mechskins.
Heavy Gear was the only real dangerous IP for battletech in my book. Not even AC can combat that. Literal mech (vibro)knife fights and stuff. They had the opportunity and they tossed it into the trashbin.

[Aiden Skye]

StaggerCheck, on 16 January 2017 - 07:25 AM, said:

If you've lost a side torso on your Clan Mech, it is entirely possible that you've lost a good chunk of your weaponry, as well. So, a 40% heat penalty should mean next to nothing in the grand scheme. I'm all for it, and all for Inner Sphere XLs to survive side torso destruction with an even higher heat penalty. PGI says they want to extend time to kill... well, here is a way to do that.

If I lose a side torso on my shadowcat or badder even firing 1 of its 2 lasers or PPCS is not sustainable...and this is at 20%. Ballistic boats will feel zero impact. Less effect on heavier mechs that have the space for more heat sinks and larger engines that include more.