253 replies to this topic

[Mystere]

visionGT4, on 20 January 2017 - 11:10 PM, said:

*mind blown*

This statement from PGI really says it all. There is zero hope for any meaningful IS-Clan balance when its clear for all to see that the decision makers are blatantly biased towards the easy mode end of the spectrum.

PGI really has reached a new level of limp wristedness.

some 12 year old throws a tantrum screaming "I'm ENTITLED to my sh1t being better then the other guys" - pgi rolls over like a dog.

Pathetic is the word that springs to mind.

Given that PGI is a business, in the end what matters most is income. If they think doing what they do will result in an increase in income, then that is what will happen. Whether you or I like it or not does not matter.

Economics vs. Science.

Edited by Mystere, 21 January 2017 - 09:05 AM.

[Sjorpha]

Star Commander Horse, on 21 January 2017 - 08:56 AM, said:

I hate gettin off topic but have to say:
Why....why do you think SMNs are so rarely seen?

I told you, but I can say it again:

It's seen less than it should because one of the two strong builds is held hostage by the loyalty pods and the other is too niche to see lots of play in a general context (it's amazing in coordinated brawl decks)

Now, it's not "so rarely" seen, Summoner 2ERPPC build is common in the games I play, just less common than it would be if everyone could build those hardpoint.

Also not everyone can actually jumpsnipe well.

Quote

Granted, I'm not a comp player (interested but honestly not good enough ...without proper training), but know SMN's good at poptartin. That being said, in QP (or FW) it doesn't shine as much as it probably could...or should.

When it's used it does.

Quote

And how can it be a 'chassis with two of the strongest builds' when (as stated by pretty much everyone), "anything the Summoner can do the TimberWolf can do better."?

No the Summoner (with loyalty pods) currently does both SRM boating and ERPPC jumpsniping better than the timber wolf, it's not even close.

Quote

And because it has a few strong builds should not mean it needs to be hit with degrades. If that was truly the case, all metamechs.com tier 1 meta and comp tiered mechs should be, right?

Essentially yes.

Overperforming builds/mechs should be nerfed and underperforming builds should be buffed. Carefully and frequently. Balancing in online games needs to be an ongoing process and continue as long as the game does, this is a key ingredient in maintaining the competitive health of any online PvP game.

Also most mechs have only one good build, if that. Having 2 or more good builds for different roles is a luxury that very few mechs enjoy (mostly omnimechs). Even mechs that only have one good build needs to be nerfed if that build overperforms. Just look at the balancing of most IS battlemechs, in almost every case there is only one competitive build, and if that's too strong balancing will be needed.

[a gaijin]

Sjorpha, on 21 January 2017 - 09:31 AM, said:

I told you, but I can say it again:

It's seen less than it should because one of the two strong builds is held hostage by the loyalty pods and the other is too niche to see lots of play in a general context (it's amazing in coordinated brawl decks)

Now, it's not "so rarely" seen, Summoner 2ERPPC build is common in the games I play, just less common than it would be if everyone could build those hardpoint.

Also not everyone can actually jumpsnipe well.

When it's used it does.



No the Summoner (with loyalty pods) currently does both SRM boating and ERPPC jumpsniping better than the timber wolf, it's not even close.



Essentially yes.

Overperforming builds/mechs should be nerfed and underperforming builds should be buffed. Carefully and frequently. Balancing in online games needs to be an ongoing process and continue as long as the game does, this is a key ingredient in maintaining the competitive health of any online PvP game.

Also most mechs have only one good build, if that. Having 2 or more good builds for different roles is a luxury that very few mechs enjoy (mostly omnimechs). Even mechs that only have one good build needs to be nerfed if that build overperforms. Just look at the balancing of most IS battlemechs, in almost every case there is only one competitive build, and if that's too strong balancing will be needed.

Thank you very much for the lesson and explanations, and also for your patience. I do appreciate it
If you don't my asking, which team are you in?

I'd like your opinion: do you think the non loyaty pod variant 2erPPC SMN is a strong build?

Also, do you think (leaderboard) stats are an overrated thing that we all shouldn't pay attention to, or do you think it's a decent measure of someone's general skill level?

[C E Dwyer]

Spread sheet balancing is spreadsheet balancing.

I don't actually believe they leave it long enough between changes these days

Unless it's structure to armour, which people have been wanting since structure quirks became a thing


Comp Whammy builds are plain dumb, and at times I wish they'd never bothered to add the mech just to be a gauss, dakka build.

That said these are the builds that are causing the whammy to lose it's structure quirks, the quirks it's needs in any other format.

Same thing happened to the Victor ( yes yes I do go on) people poptarted with it, I never did, I jump brawled and used the whoosh to spread damage, I'd often finish a match with 4 kills 400 plus damage and only one leg in my non meta Ac20 SRM brawler, but it got the same kind of hurt, because of the poptarters.

The Summoner is getting hammered to simply because it works well as a poptart even with bad jumpjets.

Because lol it's over performing acording to the statistic's.

The reason it's 'over performing' is because only above average pilots that can poptart and can also hit with it, bother using it.

Anyone that isn't that good, and wants to use it for anything other than Poptarting is now screwed.

Welcome to PvP balance 101

Edited by Cathy, 21 January 2017 - 10:36 AM.

[MischiefSC]

I can you what the main result will be - in FW everyone is going back Clans.

[Bud Crue]

MischiefSC, on 21 January 2017 - 11:31 AM, said:

I can you what the main result will be - in FW everyone is going back Clans.

Obviously, you have not participated in a PGI balance meeting. Their "data" suggests that much like the new Victor meta, that has blatantly taken over the game since the last quirk pass, so to will the domination of CW by the newly and similarly buffed Cataphracts and Dragons follow for the same reason. The data does not lie.

[visionGT4]

Mystere, on 21 January 2017 - 09:03 AM, said:

Given that PGI is a business, in the end what matters most is income. If they think doing what they do will result in an increase in income, then that is what will happen. Whether you or I like it or not does not matter.

Economics vs. Science.

Its interesting how you have gone from emotionally charged, irrational arguments based on entitlement to "cos business".

Congrats you have unlocked a new achievement - The Apologist

[Sjorpha]

Star Commander Horse, on 21 January 2017 - 10:15 AM, said:

Thank you very much for the lesson and explanations, and also for your patience. I do appreciate it
If you don't my asking, which team are you in?

I'm in MJ12, a unit mostly active in faction play, though we've had some stabs at competitive play in MRBC and the World Championships, with very underwhelming results I might add.

So in other words there are real competitive players that are much more up to date with the exact state of balance than I am being mostly a casual player, and perhaps they would correct me on something that I'm getting wrong. I think I'm right in this case.

Quote

I'd like your opinion: do you think the non loyaty pod variant 2erPPC SMN is a strong build?

It's a strong build yes, I think so, because you still get the very significant quirks helping PPCs. It's not over the top though, that only happens when you add the second torso E hardpoint.

The SRM build doesn't require the loyalty pods, but it gets a little stronger quirked if it does. It's good either way.

Quote

Also, do you think (leaderboard) stats are an overrated thing that we all shouldn't pay attention to, or do you think it's a decent measure of someone's general skill level?

The leaderboards are relevant data or not depending on the sample size. So in other words it gives a very good indication of skill level if that player has hundreds of matches and not so good if he or she has few matches. A player at the top of the leader board that ALSO has hundreds of matches logged is actually that good, yes. A player at the top with 5 matches during the period? That could be luck so who knows?

A major flaw of the leaderboard is that it is independent of tier, which is itself a kinda weird and inaccurate system, though not "only and XP bar" like some like to say to sound cool. In any case you can make an alt account and smurf your way up the leaderboards in low tier matches. In other words the leaderboard data is less useful the lower tier the player is, and the newer the account is. So if you add a 3rd condition to reading the leaderboard stats on top of large sample size and good placement, you can also require that the player is tier 1 and has played more than a year to say that the data is reliable, then you're reasonably safe to say this represents the skill of that player.

If anything the leaderboards and other sources of data on this game are an underrated source of information, because people around here loves to say things like "that means nothing..." etc to sound like they're cool and cynical internet badasses, especially if they don't have good stats to show themselves.

Edited by Sjorpha, 21 January 2017 - 12:26 PM.

[MischiefSC]

Bud Crue, on 21 January 2017 - 11:44 AM, said:

Obviously, you have not participated in a PGI balance meeting. Their "data" suggests that much like the new Victor meta, that has blatantly taken over the game since the last quirk pass, so to will the domination of CW by the newly and similarly buffed Cataphracts and Dragons follow for the same reason. The data does not lie.

As someone who works in analytics I can say that it's easy to make decisions based on bad data. This seems to be the hallmark of PGI balance decisions.

Mech/tech/weapon balance is tricky because player skill is a huge variable and better players gravitate to better mechs, inflating their perceived value.

The only viable way to balance performance is to minimize the player skill gap. Only way to do that is collect your data from the top 1/10th of a percent of players. As you hit the top of the curve variation in player performance narrows drastically.

That would give you the best view of mech/equipment performance when fully optimized and with minimal player skill variance. You don't want to balance around sub-optimal mech design and performance because that's wildly inconsistent.

PGI tries to collect data it seems as an aggregate, which would only make sense if the mechs were only ever stock. Since mech design. Changes along with variation in player skill data taken as aggregate is corrupt.

Also if they're balancing IS to IS only and Clan to Clan.... Clan mechs must be expecting an insane nerf if the WHR, already inferior to top tier Clan heavies, needed whacked down.

[Appogee]

MischiefSC, on 21 January 2017 - 01:13 PM, said:

Clan mechs must be expecting an insane nerf if the WHR, already inferior to top tier Clan heavies, needed whacked down.

This.

But then, PGI. They'll probably buff the Night Gyr because data says.

I have a theory that Paul holds the spreadsheet upside down.

Edited by Appogee, 21 January 2017 - 01:39 PM.

[Mystere]

visionGT4, on 21 January 2017 - 12:05 PM, said:

Its interesting how you have gone from emotionally charged, irrational arguments based on entitlement to "cos business".

Congrats you have unlocked a new achievement - The Apologist

Ahem! Entitlement?

You're probably mistaking me for someone else.

[Buster Machine 0]

All that matters to balance in video games are overall statistics since it reflects how powerful the chassis actually is when used by the majority of players.

When you have a single chassis or mech winning more rounds than all other chassis across the board then you definitely know it needs to be looked at. For example the lowly locust which is a beast in the right hands, but still a pretty weak chassis overall yet the statistics reflect that it is in a perfect spot in the game.

So I'll be the one to say, thank you PGI for looking at mechwarrior game balance and trying to fix it. I for one am really glad you guys are and hopefully your hard work will open up MWO to competitive gaming and will eventually make both the Inner Sphere and the Clan unique in feel and balanced in play. Keep up the good work and try to keep power creep to a minimum (No more releases of ridiculously unbalanced mechs like the Kodiak please)

[Bud Crue]

Appogee, on 21 January 2017 - 01:39 PM, said:

This.

But then, PGI. They'll probably buff the Night Gyr because data says.

I have a theory that Paul holds the spreadsheet upside down.

How long have you guys been around here? You really ought to know better.

If PGI nerfs the Hammer because they claim it is over performing over all other heavies including the NG and Timber, PGI would not then nerf another mech that is also "over performing" in the next nerf round. No, no, that would be nerfing the top twice. Such an act would be excessive...unbalanced. The proper way to balance in "PGI land" would be to nerf one OP thing, and then nerf two or more under performers. That is balance in their eyes. Look at history. They almost ALWAYS hit mechs of middling to down right poor reputation every time they nerf what they claim to be OP. Because balance...PGI style.

So never fear The Timber and Night Gyr are safe. But I'd be thinking of an alternative to the Ice Fridge and Kit Fox if I were you.

Edited by Bud Crue, 21 January 2017 - 05:22 PM.

[Deathlike]

Honestly, it's as simple as the only Heavy mech that IS gravitates towards is the Warhammers... and it's not because it's OP... it's really as simple as all the other Heavy options suck, and it's not hard to express those chapter and verse.

It's one thing to say... the Kodiak-3 is the most used Assault compared to all of the other Assaults... and it's another to say the Warhammer is the most used IS Heavy... compared to all the other IS Heavies... but there's a specific distinct difference when that is being said.

The question should break down to is if all of IS Heavies are bad or is if all of the Warhammers are superior.. obviously PGI didn't spend a lick of time figuring out which happens to be the case (hint: it's the former you dopes).

[Kuaron]

I’m OK with the nerfs.

Nerfing things is the right way to avoid a power creep.
You remember all the people complaining about everything having to have quirks over quirks?
The least of you disagreed with them. Well, PGI listened:
The latter Mechs are being released with minimal quirks, strongly quirked Mechs that are performing better than the rest are being nerfed to the level of others, and the overall overperforming Clan Mechs due to their better XL engines are getting their better XL engines nerfed.

Even if I’d rather seen STD and IS-XL engines buffed, what PGI is doing is still in the right direction.

[Anjian]

The chest of this mech already feels like paper, and it can't seem to peep and ppc that well due to its geometry.

[Bud Crue]

Kuaron, on 21 January 2017 - 06:43 PM, said:

I’m OK with the nerfs.

Nerfing things is the right way to avoid a power creep.
You remember all the people complaining about everything having to have quirks over quirks?
The least of you disagreed with them. Well, PGI listened:
The latter Mechs are being released with minimal quirks, strongly quirked Mechs that are performing better than the rest are being nerfed to the level of others, and the overall overperforming Clan Mechs due to their better XL engines are getting their better XL engines nerfed.

Even if I’d rather seen STD and IS-XL engines buffed, what PGI is doing is still in the right direction.

I think a lot of folks agree with you. The disconnect here comes from the assertion by PGI that the Hammer is outperforming all other mechs in its weight class. If they were nerfing what players subjectively feel are the mechs outperforming all other mechs in their weight class, then there would certainly be less qqing. The fact is however, is that most people, IS and clanners alike, don't seem to agree with PGI's assertion that the Hammer is outperforming all other heavies. That is the problem here. You can't always buff and sometimes nerfing is necessary, but when they nerf things that are not perceived as being worthy of that nerf, there is going to be confusion and indignation.

[MischiefSC]

Kuaron, on 21 January 2017 - 06:43 PM, said:

I’m OK with the nerfs.

Nerfing things is the right way to avoid a power creep.
You remember all the people complaining about everything having to have quirks over quirks?
The least of you disagreed with them. Well, PGI listened:
The latter Mechs are being released with minimal quirks, strongly quirked Mechs that are performing better than the rest are being nerfed to the level of others, and the overall overperforming Clan Mechs due to their better XL engines are getting their better XL engines nerfed.

Even if I’d rather seen STD and IS-XL engines buffed, what PGI is doing is still in the right direction.

I could agree with this concept if there was any indication that PGI was at any point going to make real steps to balance IS/Clans or the tech. They've specifically said they won't however because.... STD engines?

In the face of decision making processes that poor then no, nerfing the WHR is bad. The WHR is still behind 2 or 3 Clan heavies and the IS mechs behind it are way behind.

It's indicative of poor statistical gathering and a complete detachment from the realities of the game and gameplay. The population has largely run out of patience with these sorts of mistakes and the flat refusal to balance tech and as such willingness to 'wait and see' is slim.

[Kuaron]

The nerf of the apparently best IS heavy happens simultaneously with an overall Clan XL nerf.
The alternative would have been to nerf the better Clan Mechs in addition to their engines (which would have led to even more whine, btw), but this way PGI has the chance to monitor the performance of the nerfed Clan XL-Mechs first before taking further steps.

I don’t see the flaw in this decision.
And I don’t consider this logic as complicated that even a mediocre game designer couldn’t come up with it.
Often enough it is obvious that PGI doesn’t know what they are doing, but this time it’s more the forum giving the impression of whining because of seeing their toys taken away.

[Y E O N N E]

Kuaron, on 21 January 2017 - 07:48 PM, said:

The nerf of the apparently best IS heavy happens simultaneously with an overall Clan XL nerf.
The alternative would have been to nerf the better Clan Mechs in addition to their engines (which would have led to even more whine, btw), but this way PGI has the chance to monitor the performance of the nerfed Clan XL-Mechs first before taking further steps.

I don’t see the flaw in this decision.
And I don’t consider this logic as complicated that even a mediocre game designer couldn’t come up with it.
Often enough it is obvious that PGI doesn’t know what they are doing, but this time it’s more the forum giving the impression of whining because of seeing their toys taken away.

The flaw is that the cXL nerf is not going to have any appreciable effect on making Clan 'Mechs more generally comparable to IS 'Mechs because when you lose a side, you also lose a lot of firepower, so the heat change is not hurting much of anything. Meanwhile, the WHM will now perform even worse against the NTG while both remain intact, a fight it was already losing before the nerf to the WHM.

That's the problem.