28 replies to this topic

[Mystere]

Quoting just for emphasis.

legatoblues, on 21 January 2017 - 08:20 PM, said:

Battletech is the wrong starting point to attempt to balance units 1:1 ...

And the Clan invasion is the absolute worst time period to insist on 1:1 balancing, and just absolutely insane with the claimed objective of doing it at all levels (i.e. Mech [including between classes], weapon, equipment).

legatoblues, on 21 January 2017 - 08:20 PM, said:

The game would be far better off if it was to completely disregard the "Battletech" tag and just do whatever they wanted.

Amen to that!

Either use the IP or junk it completely.

[Buster Machine 0]

Quirk and tweak every mech until the w/l averages for all mechs are close to 50% across the board.

It's doable, but makes gameplay less interesting, which is why PGI is also tweaking weapons.

The very fact that PGI tweaked LRMs and Gauss rifles means they aren't just focused on chassis but the game as a whole.

Balance doesn't happen overnight and you guys aren't giving PGI enough credit for their recent attempts which I feel are all appropriate and well thought out.

[Deathlike]

MischiefSC, on 21 January 2017 - 07:25 PM, said:

No, run events. By weight class. Then collect data both from pug queue as a guidance and then offer "bonuses" for group queue kills - then you collect data from matches involving that top fraction of a percent. What they take (and how they play) you use for balance.

Then you have another tournament for mechs by chassis - so you opt into a faction and each faction has a chassis in each weight class, matches played in a "faction" chassis get points for rewards in the tourney. So, say, Davions get Zeus/Banshee, Jags/WHR, Griffins/Trees, Firestarter/Locusts. Do same as above for qualifying the data you get.

That would be a good start.

Without both motivating top performers to seek each other out while playing comparable tonnage mechs and isolating performance data to minimize player skill differential you get bad data.

The problem these days is that they have reduced the rewards, thus the level of data collection isn't as strong as it could be.

Also, it doesn't really show (on the surface) what variants are inferior, rather it's just "the best variant" that tends to get the most play (only the initial variants being released get some specific love, but not for the global mech aspect).

[Snazzy Dragon]

I think you can balance this game, but not by aiming for total 1:1 balance based on tonnage

Faction flavor is key

Look at the IS LPL versus the Clan LPL-- IS LPL is the ultimate for mid range skirmishing and is strong even within the short range spectrum. Clan LPL is more rewarding at the longer range of skirmishing but will not brawl well and is more focused on suppression of a target by forcing them to twist and seek cover-- the IS LPL is focused on outright damage and DPS

[Johnny Z]

Snazzy Dragon, on 21 January 2017 - 11:11 PM, said:

I think you can balance this game, but not by aiming for total 1:1 balance based on tonnage

Faction flavor is key

Look at the IS LPL versus the Clan LPL-- IS LPL is the ultimate for mid range skirmishing and is strong even within the short range spectrum. Clan LPL is more rewarding at the longer range of skirmishing but will not brawl well and is more focused on suppression of a target by forcing them to twist and seek cover-- the IS LPL is focused on outright damage and DPS

That amount of fire power and range that Clantech allows for the same tonnage and space those LPL makes it very hard to compete.

This makes sense though because Clantech is easy mode.

If they actually wanted balance a point of damage would have been knocked off every clan weapon by now.

Funniest thing I have read on these forums to date is "pro" players saying Clantech is easy mode for newbies but not for experienced players. Just shows the level of skill among "pro" players is all. It really is funny how it all works out.

Whats also funny is players that hate this game saying they want to have table top stats on weapons and then in the same breath saying this game isn't a Battletech game at all even though its easily the most loyal to its origins online game, small weapon stat changes or not.

Edited by Johnny Z, 21 January 2017 - 11:42 PM.

[GreyNovember]

To be fair, OP has a point.

If one side likes the given scenario, another side is rabid and frothing at the mouth that their version isn't being used.

If you ignore both sides and go completely impartial you piss off MUCH more people.

Be Paul for a minute. Can you imagine you'd be hailed any differently than he is? No matter what you, someone's going to go "LOL PGI CANT DO ANYTHING RIGHT ", and the cycle will continue.

[BoldricKent]

MischiefSC, on 21 January 2017 - 07:25 PM, said:

No, run events. By weight class. Then collect data both from pug queue as a guidance and then offer "bonuses" for group queue kills - then you collect data from matches involving that top fraction of a percent. What they take (and how they play) you use for balance.

Then you have another tournament for mechs by chassis - so you opt into a faction and each faction has a chassis in each weight class, matches played in a "faction" chassis get points for rewards in the tourney. So, say, Davions get Zeus/Banshee, Jags/WHR, Griffins/Trees, Firestarter/Locusts. Do same as above for qualifying the data you get.

That would be a good start.

Without both motivating top performers to seek each other out while playing comparable tonnage mechs and isolating performance data to minimize player skill differential you get bad data.

Nice idea...i would fully support a bit of lore orientated events, chassis depended. There is enough mechs that
you could make/sell House lances, where you would get 1 of each class. (with skill tree incoming, that would
actually work).
just one thing, never say Zeus/Banshee are Davions, people will demand you body parts since those two are
one of most iconic Steiners/Lyran design, even build by the same Defiance Industries.

[Johnny Z]

Just like week end events, in game events that are not part of a proper faction play system are annoying. The rewards are nice but its a buy time and not very immersive or game improving way to go about it. Its less of a game because its trying to make up for something that is missing or not done right. Sorry to say.

[Guile Votoms]

How to balance mechs?
Remove hardpoint limitations. Limit max weapon number and size instead.

How to balance weight classes?
Huge maps with objectives so every weight class has it's own area of expertise.

How to balance Clans vs IS?
10 against 12. Let Clans have superior tech but only 2 5-man stars, while IS have numbers in 3 4-man lances.

The real balance problem of MWO isn't number-crunching on individual mechs.
It's the fact that it doesn't behave like an actual Mechwarrior game.