426 replies to this topic

[Kuaron]

The patch is OK, I guess, but why does the CTF-IM get buffed more than other CTFs?
It already was one of the better ones, wasn’t it?

Edit:
Also, whoever is whining over the WHM nerfs never sat in a CTF.

Edited by Kuaron, 21 January 2017 - 11:04 AM.

[Grey Death Storm]

ingramli, on 21 January 2017 - 06:31 AM, said:

Sir, i want to stay alive with my IS mech when the ST is blown, even with 50% heat penalty, i dont want to sit there just to watch those idiots i team with doing all sort of stupid things (a heavy/assault that carry LRM, laser, SRM, and MG), let me have a choice to fit a clanXL in my IS mech, please.

You would not have this problem and there would be no need to nerf clan tech If PGI in the first place would allow inner sphere pilots to adapt and use Clan Tech. Mechwarrior 4 allowed for intergration of clan tech and weapons onto inner sphere chassis. This would also close the gap in fire power between inner sphere and clan war

Edited by Grey Death Storm, 21 January 2017 - 11:08 AM.

[I_AM_ZUUL]

Wuldain, on 20 January 2017 - 08:38 PM, said:

No, you keep forgetting. WE DONT HAVE A CHOICE. It's simple. You have a choice. You exchange speed for survivability. You want your speed, but not the downsides. Imagine the river of tears if it's announced that IS XL wont kill you, but you have a 40 percent heat penalty and a movement penalty as well. You already have weapon quirks to make you more offensive, defensive quirks to make you more tanky, now you want speed and not dying to an xl check. Where do you draw the line, unless you want it back to blackjacks being equivalent to an atlas in the tanking department?

So basically... make IS the slightly inferior version of Clans, yeah that is what exactly what is needed

[MovinTarget]

Grey Death Storm, on 21 January 2017 - 11:07 AM, said:

Mechwarrior 4 allowed for...

And with that phrase you bring us back to point at hand...

Some people want a game that is true to BT/TT

Others want an RTS that is fun and balanced.

You can see its not a trivial matter balancing the two sides. If PGI flat out eschews lore and BT convention (like mw4 and other titles), they lose customers...

If they attempt to implement lore-accurate content that prevent any hope of balance (clan wave 1 release anyone?)... they lose customers...

They have to tip toe through minefield because:
1) one side's $$$ is just as good as the other's
2) picking one side does not garauntee increased sales since its f2p and for all we know half the whiners don't spend a dime...


It's easy to tell them what they should do, try walking in their shoes where someone is over your shoulder telling you how to do your job without any guarantee that they'd pay you for the changes to compensate for alienating other customers possibly.

Edited by MovinTarget, 21 January 2017 - 11:46 AM.

[Kmieciu]

Cathy, on 21 January 2017 - 09:41 AM, said:

I'm going to relate a little story.

I once had a boss, because she was someones pet project she got everything she wanted from upstairs, now in her ambition to climb to the top of the monkey tree, she demanded, asked, sucked up, to become head of a front line unit, which she duly received.

Now she came in like a dose of salts, had no clue how anything worked, didn't know what was involved, but she loved her spread sheets and what the Statistic's told her.

Anyone, that tried to explain to her that front line doesn't work exactly how the graphs say it should, that it's unrealistic, and in the end causes the wrong choices to be made, it's only a guide line, and has very little correlation to the reality, were considered trouble makers obstructing the business, i.e her rise to the boardroom, and were removed or transferred ( I happen to be the only survivor ).

Needless to say, Moral crashed, the units performance crashed, and now slightly more than a year on she has no job. Sanity has resumed, people with practical experience are being listened to, and the unit is now rapidly moving back to its correct place as the best performer in its area.

I really hope I don't have to explain why I wrote this story, as I'm really hoping people understand my little Parable and take note of it.

Bet she was running an IS XL.
Had she used clantech, she would only lose 40% of her base salary.

Edited by Kmieciu, 21 January 2017 - 12:05 PM.

[I_AM_ZUUL]

Duke Nedo, on 21 January 2017 - 09:58 AM, said:

My experience is that it is currently a bit past the tipping point where you start to die from ST destruction on gauss explosion. Before the WHM was nerfed from 16 to 13 ST structure in June you would nearly always survive losing a gauss, after the nerf you'd instapop more often than not. Remove 6 more points and I expect any gauss build to be completely dead on an XL WHM.

I can live with the laser vomit, uac/ac and uac/ppc builds on the 6D and BW losing some ST structure, but the 6R really needs what it has. It would actually need one or two points more of ST structure to really compete with the 2x gauss+1x PPC NGRs...

again... this is not a Guass/Structure problem, this is an isXL problem. a Problem that none of the Clan mechs suffer from which is what makes them the top of ALL weight classes by a far margin... not all Clan mechs are better than all IS mech, but all the best mechs are Clan with the best IS mechs being 3rd or 4th in every weight class

[Kmieciu]

I_AM_ZUUL, on 21 January 2017 - 11:51 AM, said:

again... this is not a Guass/Structure problem, this is an isXL problem. a Problem that none of the Clan mechs suffer from which is what makes them the top of ALL weight classes by a far margin... not all Clan mechs are better than all IS mech, but all the best mechs are Clan with the best IS mechs being 3rd or 4th in every weight class

Trying to out-Gauss the Night Gyr in a Warhammer is futile. Night Gyr has arm mounted gauss which makes is 100% safe (clan CASE). IS XL with double Gauss? That's suicide
Besides, after the Gauss range nerf 2xUAC5 2xPPC build is better in every way.

Edited by Kmieciu, 21 January 2017 - 12:04 PM.

[Grey Death Storm]

MovinTarget, on 21 January 2017 - 11:44 AM, said:

And with that phrase you bring us back to point at hand...

Some people want a game that is true to BT/TT

Others want an RTS that is fun and balanced.

You can see its not a trivial matter balancing the two sides. If PGI flat out eschews lore and BT convention (like mw4 and other titles), they lose customers...

If they attempt to implement lore-accurate content that prevent any hope of balance (clan wave 1 release anyone?)... they lose customers...

They have to tip toe through minefield because:
1) one side's $$$ is just as good as the other's
2) picking one side does not garauntee increased sales since its f2p and for all we know half the whiners don't spend a dime...


It's easy to tell them what they should do, try walking in their shoes where someone is over your shoulder telling you how to do your job without any guarantee that they'd pay you for the changes to compensate for alienating other customers possibly.

With respect to your comment

"Some people want a game that is true to BT/TT"

How this true battle tech PGI has nerfed clans and completely watered them down, so far their not following the Clan Cannon and the only way to preserve the Cannon of mechwarrior is by doing the sujested that Mechwarrior 4 has done if FASA developed those games with the knowledge of battle tech cannon then they also are following mechwarrior Cannon because they have continued on from table top to the present day.

I will also put this out there Please note I have not played table top battle games.

[MovinTarget]

Grey Death Storm, on 21 January 2017 - 12:08 PM, said:

With respect to your comment

"Some people want a game that is true to BT/TT"

How this true battle tech PGI has nerfed clans and completely watered them down, so far their not following the Clan Cannon and the only way to preserve the Cannon of mechwarrior is by doing the sujested that Mechwarrior 4 has done if FASA developed those games with the knowledge of battle tech cannon then they also are following mechwarrior Cannon because they have continued on from table top to the present day.

I will also put this out there Please note I have not played table top battle games.

If it were the only way they would have done it already.

So either its not the only way or they decided that's one line they won't cross.

No way to know PGI's mind unless they express it, but by your line of reasoning, there should not be any difference in the tech since one side should not have certain advantages over the other...

Lets just make all mechs same and equal (all glory to mother russia) because once they acquiesce to your demands, some clanners will whine and you'll lose something or clams will gain something...

Lets make all the mechs the same so anyone that is underperforming has no one to blame but themself... that's basically the precedent it seems people are going for...

[Wintersdark]

MovinTarget, on 21 January 2017 - 09:57 AM, said:

Seriously, weapons on your torsi and head can magically converge on a target regardless of the distance change... i get arm + torso convergence, but even if all the non-arm weapons are fully pivotable to pinpoint point blank out to 1k meters, they are not going to do it instaneously other than perhaps lasers using lens/mirrors to bend light/aim (still a stretch).

You want to lower TTK, consider slowing torsi/head convergence. Suddenly the meta won't revolve around mechs that pack weapons in torsos-only. Poptarys can still work but will not be as accurate. Armweapons will be more viable, despite the risk since your "quick" pinpoint dmg will have to come from there...

Maybe holes in the idea, but just a thought...



I hope its just coincidence this sounds familiar...

We had delayed convergence back in the day. Note how we still have a convergence speed increasing skill to this day! It was removed for one major reason, and stayed away for another:

It was hard for new players to understand as there was no visual indication of where particular weapons where aiming. It complicated play in an opaque manner. They where right in this, but IMHO simple reticle growth (as designates cone of fire in current shooters) would have solved this.

It stayed away because delayed or mixed convergence is fundamentally incompatible with HSR, and THAT is an extremely serious problem. It may not be insurmountable (we've had some suggestions which may work) but PGI has been uninterested in pursuing that because...

...Russ is directly opposed to any sort of even situational CoF or similar effects.

[Grey Death Storm]

MovinTarget, on 21 January 2017 - 12:27 PM, said:

If it were the only way they would have done it already.

So either its not the only way or they decided that's one line they won't cross.

No way to know PGI's mind unless they express it, but by your line of reasoning, there should not be any difference in the tech since one side should not have certain advantages over the other...

Lets just make all mechs same and equal (all glory to mother russia) because once they acquiesce to your demands, some clanners will whine and you'll lose something or clams will gain something...

Lets make all the mechs the same so anyone that is underperforming has no one to blame but themself... that's basically the precedent it seems people are going for...

Again with respect to what your saying

I do not agree with this as I feel its not following battletech Cannon and its ruining what clans were meant to be the mechwarrior 4 idea gave the inner sphere that fight back. This is not Cannon so i do not agree

I do not wish to fall out with you I can respect what you are saying so please take these word with respect

[Tiantara]

- Once again about who will use STD engine anyway even if IS XL will be changed.

1. All zombie mech builds with weapon in CT. Yes, such mech still present in game and works great, continue battle with longrange or brawler medium range weapon till the end. Noone zombie mech pilot never put in mech XL because of death after both ST destroyed.
2. All mech with big guns in torso. Yeap - many mech with XL have no room for such weapon as AC20, Gauss, Double AC5 and so on. Or Pack of LRM20+Artemis. They use STD instead.
3. All missileboats - because of ammo and heatsink.
4. Many laserboats - because of heatsinks taking place besides installed in XL engine. They also put STD for some reason especially if they longrange support mech.
5. Nearly all gauss users who place gauss in side torso of mech - place STD. Because easy death of gauss (sometimes under nearly untouched armor) make mech dead too.

Someone say that we, Inner Sphere, have more mobility and more firepower when use XL and for that must have death penalty. But even that not true... Most of light mech with installed "must have ferro-fibrous \ endo-steel \ double heatsinks" after placing XL engine must have at least 3(!) DHS. Whole 9 hardslots only to make mech run! Most of IS light mech have firepower nearly equal 9 or 10... But in same time suffer from instant death if not have ECM. And ECm have not all models of IS mech...

That was true back days, when we have no clan mech! And that was true when we have IS vs IS conflicts in FP and can choose not to fight against clan at all - keep fighting between Houses!

Now we have no choice but fight against Clan only. Clan who have better speed (not all IS mech can use same speed XL without loosing in firepower or DHS!), better range and better survivability. Before tier 3 pilots gets near - their mech nearly full of holes, have no armor and sometimes got only one hand attached. Shielding tactic wont work ether, because after pinpoint fire we get LRM shower which seek damaged side torso on XL mech and make our team smaller.

So it's not true that making IS XL suffer bigger speed penalty make them better choice than STD. Pilots will use them if they don't wan' loose speed, and in same time players from tier 5-3 learn how to play on mech which die after loosing both side torso not only one. Also that push some newcomers back to Inner Sphere population from Clan side.
Many players love IS mech by style and military forms, but they took Clans only to have victory in FP, making population unbalanced.

So, try one week on PTS with such change and you'll see how better become FP and popular among new players. Put IS XL lore mechanic as part of tournaments, high level content for pro gamers and as setting in Private Games (like making all mech stock builds)
Still - you want make battle longer and even buffs armor and structure for that... why not change one type of engine and see, maybe that makes battle much longer without all that quirks dances?

P.S. But I starting to think that changing engine mechanic could be part of old (unchangeable by some matters) program code and can't be changed... if so - just say it and we all sit with running old sturdy STD, and wait until LFE engines come in future. If not - place it on PTS with -40% of speed and see. Even as part of future LFE that test can give much useful info.

Edited by Tiantara, 21 January 2017 - 12:54 PM.

[Wintersdark]

Grey Death Storm, on 21 January 2017 - 12:08 PM, said:

With respect to your comment

"Some people want a game that is true to BT/TT"

How this true battle tech PGI has nerfed clans and completely watered them down, so far their not following the Clan Cannon and the only way to preserve the Cannon of mechwarrior is by doing the sujested that Mechwarrior 4 has done if FASA developed those games with the knowledge of battle tech cannon then they also are following mechwarrior Cannon because they have continued on from table top to the present day.

I will also put this out there Please note I have not played table top battle games.

It's not all or nothing, it's a matter of degrees. Arguing PGI has stepped away from lore in some respects so they may as well do away with it entirely is stupid - Mr Target's whole point here is PGI must strike a balance.

Numbers change easily without changing how things feel, so it's preferable to be balanced but different and thus maintain flavour.

Balanced but different is the goal here, to appease both groups of players (and those of us in the middle). Most reasonable folks understand that we can't have OP clans and have a functional PVP arena game. So that's some lore that has to be sacrificed and interestingly was lore that the Battletech designers regretted, as it damaged the game itself.

[Grey Death Storm]

Wintersdark, on 21 January 2017 - 12:41 PM, said:

It's not all or nothing, it's a matter of degrees. Arguing PGI has stepped away from lore in some respects so they may as well do away with it entirely is stupid - Mr Target's whole point here is PGI must strike a balance.

Numbers change easily without changing how things feel, so it's preferable to be balanced but different and thus maintain flavour.

Balanced but different is the goal here, to appease both groups of players (and those of us in the middle). Most reasonable folks understand that we can't have OP clans and have a functional PVP arena game. So that's some lore that has to be sacrificed and interestingly was lore that the Battletech designers regretted, as it damaged the game itself.

Okay however

the way I suggested with what mechwarrior 4 has done already addressed this, Inner sphere were able to adapt Clan tech and bring the fight back to the clanners.

Edited by Grey Death Storm, 21 January 2017 - 12:47 PM.

[I_AM_ZUUL]

Kmieciu, on 21 January 2017 - 12:03 PM, said:

Trying to out-Gauss the Night Gyr in a Warhammer is futile. Night Gyr has arm mounted gauss which makes is 100% safe (clan CASE). IS XL with double Gauss? That's suicide
Besides, after the Gauss range nerf 2xUAC5 2xPPC build is better in every way.

So AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! A isXL problem not a Gauss/Structure problem... how is this such an unfathomable point????

[cBiscuit]

Anyone else need some more popcorn? This is a sad amount of tears being shed for a mechanic that has been in the MechWarrior/Battletech games since the beginning.

Clan XL Engines are 2 slots in each torso.
Inner Sphere XL Engines are 3 slots in each torso.

3 Engine hits is a wreck. Each engine hit is also normally the equivalent of 20-25% increase in heat. So a clan xl engine should be 40%-50% heat anyway.

[Wintersdark]

Grey Death Storm, on 21 January 2017 - 12:47 PM, said:

Okay however

the way I suggested with what mechwarrior 4 has done already addressed this, Inner sphere were able to adapt Clan tech and bring the fight back to the clanners.

Mixed tech has serious problems, most notably that if no effort is made to balance IS vs Clan tech, people will just ditch IS tech and the factions will have no flavour at all - it'll be clan with IS banners vs Clan with clan banners.

If they DO balance IS vs Clan, then it's not an issue. The later is preferable.

[MovinTarget]

Grey Death Storm, on 21 January 2017 - 12:47 PM, said:

Okay however

the way I suggested with what mechwarrior 4 has done already addressed this, Inner sphere were able to adapt Clan tech and bring the fight back to the clanners.

They may ultimately go that route... but they have to do it on their terms not ours...

If they make the change, no one is responsible but them so they can't just decide to do it. They have to anticipate the consequences, unlike us when we spew solutions.

And i appreciate your tone and thoughtfulness in this thread. we all haven't had our moments where we think we have the solution. Sometimes we might have it right sometimes we don't. Sometimes its the right idea but not fleshed out enough to be convincing...

Don't for a moment that disagreements will force me into troll mode

I doubt my troll mode would be any good... everyone would have to read my posts with british accent and with a dictionary at their side...

[Duke Nedo]

Kmieciu, on 21 January 2017 - 12:03 PM, said:

Trying to out-Gauss the Night Gyr in a Warhammer is futile. Night Gyr has arm mounted gauss which makes is 100% safe (clan CASE). IS XL with double Gauss? That's suicide
Besides, after the Gauss range nerf 2xUAC5 2xPPC build is better in every way.

The UAC/PPC build is ok, but I find it's a bit hot for my taste. The 2x gauss + 4x ML used to be pretty safeish when it had 16 ST structure, not so much now and totally dead by tuesday. It was a really strong build last spring. The IS really lacks versatile strong chassi now imo, like NGRs and TBRs that can do anything well.

I_AM_ZUUL, on 21 January 2017 - 12:53 PM, said:

So AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! A isXL problem not a Gauss/Structure problem... how is this such an unfathomable point????

Yes you can say that, but IS XL survivability is not really up for discussion it seems.... sadly. So quirks is what we have, and soon skuirk-tree...

[Malcolm Vordermark]

Not buffing isXL engines for fear of leaving STD engines behind makes no sense. Outside of certain edge cases, one takes a STD on a mech with bad hitboxes so they won't be a walking coffin. On the other hand, mechs with good hitboxes get more weapons and speed (and likewise more durability) from a better engine, and that was before the Clans were introduced. I think the trade off between XL and STD has always been something of an illusion.

Edited by Rouken Vordermark, 21 January 2017 - 01:08 PM.