262 replies to this topic

[chucklesMuch]

Bombast, on 31 January 2017 - 02:12 PM, said:

Well, consider the Javelin. It has several variants, and just looking... JVN-10N - 285 Engine, 4 Missiles JVN-10P - 255 Engine, 6 Missiles JVN-11B - 255 Engine, 4 Missiles, ECM JVN-10F - 285 Engine, 4 Energy JVN-11A - 255 Engine, 7 Energy Now, yes, they're all different... but do they need to be? Would it really have killed anyone or broke the games balance if the JVN-10N got canned and it's engine cap transferred to the JVN-10P? And the same with the JVN-10F/11A? Doesn't it stink abit of variant bloat? What about mechs like the Sagittaire? Do we really need 4 made up variants with randomly jumbled energy hard points, or a made up missile variant? Why not just include the energy and ballistic variant and be done with it?

Quite true and its not just javelins suffer from this.

I like the idea of some level of player choice (so long as the price per mech doesn’t increase to say à la carte Timberwolf levels). And I also like having multiple chassis variants too… though I don’t generally want 6 or 7 of them – a couple and a hero option would work for me – or make however many of them and let me choose which ones make up the ‘basic’ pack… actually if I could choose what made up my packs… then make 500 variants… just change the pricing mechanism.

Currently basic light mech pack(s) = $15 for 3 mechs. What about front loading the first mech $x, then $y for each that subsequent purchase of non hero/champ variants of that chassis pack. Something like (current base pack/3)*1.5 = $7.5 per mech for lights, then $3.75 for each subsequent variant (or repeating a variant if doubling up for ST 1.0 reasons is your preference)… So 3 lights would still equal $15… and a medium/heavy/assault would be $10 for the first and $5 per variant after that. The onus would be on PGI to create multiple appealing variants (or valid competing skill path choices to take).

And if they are wanting more monetising options what about giving people the option to:
a ) upgrade 1 variant of a chassis to a cbill bonus mech for x$
b ) upgrade 1 variant of a chassis to a exp bonus mech for x$
c ) upgrade 1 variant of a chassis to a special camo for x$ ?
d ) upgrade 1 variant of a chassis to a special Hat for x $ (too far??)

Edited formating

Edited by chucklesMuch, 31 January 2017 - 04:43 PM.

[Kargush]

One thing I know is going to be hilarious is the c-bill pricing.

The Atlas D in MWO costs, according to smurfy, 9.7 mill c-bills (rounding up). A Dire Wolf Prime comes in at 17.8 mill. Both are pretty close to the lore costs. The Blood Asp? Lore price is 29.5 mill c-bills. The Albatross? 25.6 mill.

Are people really going to be OK with that sort of price for their little toys?

[Bombast]

Kargush, on 31 January 2017 - 05:04 PM, said:

Are people really going to be OK with that sort of price for their little toys?

A 400XL engine in Battletech costs over 24 million C-Bills on it's own. Only just shy of 7 million 6.5 million in MWO.

The C-Bill comparison between MWO and battletech falls apart as mech weight and engine size increases.

EDIT: The Kodiak, for example, cost almost 30 million in Battletech. Only 16 million in MWO.

Edited by Bombast, 31 January 2017 - 05:19 PM.

[Kargush]

Bombast, on 31 January 2017 - 05:16 PM, said:

A 400XL engine in Battletech costs over 24 million C-Bills on it's own. Only just shy of 7 million 6.5 million in MWO.

The C-Bill comparison between MWO and battletech falls apart as mech weight and engine size increases.

Sure, but they seem to have managed to stay fairly close to lore costs on mechs anyway.

[Bombast]

Kargush, on 31 January 2017 - 05:19 PM, said:

Sure, but they seem to have managed to stay fairly close to lore costs on mechs anyway.

As I said in my edit, the MWO Kodiak is only 54% as expensive as the BT Kodiak. The Blood Asp should cost roughly the same.

[Kargush]

Point conceeded.

[Y E O N N E]

Now that I am home...

If I could only pick one 'Mech from each class:

Lights
None.

It is not a question of tonnage or size or anything like that. Even if the Firestarter and other potential 35 tonners were still great, my answer would remain the same. We have simply hit the limit of what the BattleTech construction rules allow Lights to do in terms of combat and other objectives in MWO. If we are trying to get IS 'Mechs into the game that improve performance, there's nothing left to add here and resources would be better spent on the other weight classes.

Do I think they should ignore making IS Lights? No, because I have some for-fun chassis that I would like to see added before MWO goes poof (i.e. Raptor). That, however, is not within the scope of this thread, which is to make suggestions on what 'Mechs to add to make the IS more competitive.

Mediums
Lynx

it is basically a heavier BJ-1X that can jump, with all that implies. Anything energy-centric, it will do extraordinarily well. IS have plenty of competent brawl Mediums, what they lack is anything that can properly compete at the range game. The best option, the Blackjack, is a 45 ton 'Mech trying to punch upwards.

Runner-up: Lightray

Heavies
Onslaught

It has high mounts, it is max tonnage, it is narrow, and it has jump jets. It can compete with the Night Gyr by running 7x Light AC/2 or some combination of PPC/UAC/LAC and, barring the entry of those future-tech items, it can still do 2x UAC/5 + 2xAC/5 even better than the WHM-BW.

Probably the most perfect IS Heavy, period.

Runner-up: Falconer

Assaults
Sagittaire

It has a profile that lets it spread frontal damage very well, it has shield arms from the sides, and its mounts are conducive to running ballistics (especially Gauss) and PPCs. I don't think that the JJs add much, but they are there.

Runner-up: Fafnir

[Alan Davion]

Tristan Winter, on 31 January 2017 - 01:41 AM, said:

PGI has failed to make weight classes balanced, they've exacerbated the issue with rescaling that was never compensated for and I'm not paying real money for light mechs until they either fix that or continue the power creep to the point where light mechs are equal to other weight classes. PGI has made a game mode specifically for light mechs and mediums, where light mechs are basically cannon fodder. I've never seen anything like that in PVP games.

Because only a complete, total, flipping, idiot of a tard tries to balance, 1 to 1, mechs that weigh 20 tons against mechs that weigh 100 tons.

It.

Ain't.

Gonna.

FLIPPING.

WORK!

Except in those astronomically rare mechs like the Arctic Cheetah that have the absolute trifecta of excellent weapon arrangements, blistering speed, and perfectly made hitboxes allowing their limited armor to be used better than almost any other mech of the same weight, can somehow take on mechs weighing 2, almost 3 times its weight. I seriously can't think for the life of me of any other mech that can do what the Cheetah does and have a snowballs chance in hell against those same mechs.

That was the entire purpose of the TT BV system, to have a metric with which a mechs combat effectiveness could be judged against other mechs.

Yes it wasn't perfect, no system is or ever will be perfect, but at least it WORKED within the bounds it needed to work.

Unlike the massive shitstorm that is MWO where only 1% of the mechs in each weight class end up at the top of the meta boards.

Just for shits and giggles, I'll put up the BVs for a few of my favorite mechs from each weight class. Specifically, the variants with the highest BV of their chassis.

Wasp: WSP-3L, BV (2.0) 610

Stinger: STG-6L, BV (2.0) 680

Phoenix Hawk: PHX-6D, BV (2.0) 1,665

Shadow Hawk: SHD-11CS, BV (2.0) 1,700

Warhammer: WHM-9D, BV (2.0) 2,152

Marauder: MAD-6L, BV (2.0) 2,322

Battlemaster: BLC-C, BV (2.0) 3,025

Atlas: AS7-S2, BV (2.0) 2,389

So, to get the same effectiveness as that Battlemaster C, you would need 4.95, let's just call it 5 and be done with it, Wasp 3Ls

Meanwhile it only takes 1.81, let's call it 2, Phoenix Hawk 6Ds.

Even with the massive hard point inflation some light mechs have undergone here in MWO it is still literally impossible to balance, 1 to 1, mechs that can weight up to 5 times less than some other mechs.

The sooner someone at PGI gets that through their thick skull, the sooner they can get around to actually properly balancing the flipping game.

[Gas Guzzler]

Alan Davion, on 31 January 2017 - 06:29 PM, said:

Because only a complete, total, flipping, idiot of a tard tries to balance, 1 to 1, mechs that weigh 20 tons against mechs that weigh 100 tons.

It.

Ain't.

Gonna.

FLIPPING.

WORK!

Except in those astronomically rare mechs like the Arctic Cheetah that have the absolute trifecta of excellent weapon arrangements, blistering speed, and perfectly made hitboxes allowing their limited armor to be used better than almost any other mech of the same weight, can somehow take on mechs weighing 2, almost 3 times its weight.

So it will never work except for in the cases where it does?

Wow, ground breaking sentiment.

[Y E O N N E]

I find the lack of traction for this thread...unsettling.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Yeonne Greene, on 31 January 2017 - 07:42 PM, said:

I find the lack of traction for this thread...unsettling.

People don't really care that much about competitive IS mechs, I don't know that it is THAT unsettling.

[Alan Davion]

Gas Guzzler, on 31 January 2017 - 07:05 PM, said:

So it will never work except for in the cases where it does?

Wow, ground breaking sentiment.

Did you not read the whole "astronomically rare" bit?

One mech out of one hundred is not what I call a working system.

One mech that actually works is a fluke, an astronomical accident if you will.

How many light class mechs are there, total, in Battletech as a whole?

According to Sarna... There are 124 light mechs between 20 and 35 tons, and that's chassis only, no variants.

Now, how many of those light mech chassis are actually highly competitive enough, and have the properties required to take out an assault mech? Probably only the Cheetah, the Jenner IIC, and, maybe let's throw in the Firestarter and the Locust so the IS has an equal number in the mix. There might be one or two more, but these are probably the 4 most popular light mechs.

4 chassis out of 124, that's like 3.2% of all light class mech chassis.

Again, that is not a working system if only 4 mech chassis out of 124 total ACTUALLY work in the system, making them worth using and the rest are just garbage.

Do you see my point now? If only the strongest mechs are worth using, for example the few light mechs I've just listed, why bother having 90% of the mechs in the game right now?

So, therein, the system does not work.

Edited by Alan Davion, 31 January 2017 - 08:20 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

Can we please take the discussion regarding general game balance elsewhere? This thread is not about speculating what might be if PGI were to change this or that core mechanic. Instead, how about answering some of the questions posed by the OP so we can get a gauge on which of the more competitive options we might try to pitch to PGI. Thanks.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 31 January 2017 - 08:09 PM, said:

People don't really care that much about competitive IS mechs, I don't know that it is THAT unsettling.

But they do seem to care about competitive Clan 'Mechs. They foam like rabid dogs at the notion of possibly getting Heavy lasers and such on 'Mechs with durable XLs and a billion hardpoints. It is that which is unsettling to me.

I'm going to discard my more usual tact and just say it:

Bunch of f*ckin' weebs.

[FLG 01]

Yeonne Greene, on 31 January 2017 - 07:42 PM, said:

I find the lack of traction for this thread...unsettling.

I think the list is good; in the past I have voiced my support for many if not most of the Mechs on the list. And I have made rather unpopular statements on fan favourites like the Annihilator.

The only thing I would like to add is regarding the Toyama: it may only have one ballistic HP in the arm, but that can mount the (U)AC/20 - which I think is very nice.
Oh, and the Toyama link is broken in the OP.
http://www.sarna.net...ma_(BattleMech)

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 31 January 2017 - 08:09 PM, said:

People don't really care that much about competitive IS mechs, I don't know that it is THAT unsettling.

Nostalgia sells, PGI wants to sell, so we get nostalgia Mechs. But whenever I mentioned that we should give TRO:3025 a break, the posts were not very well liked (a mild understatement). CK16's poll, flawed as it was, still plainly demonstrated that people prefer nostalgia choices. Furthermore I remember TheArisen being criticized for promoting the OP/Meta/whatever Nightstar.
What's worse, people will rationalize their nostalgia choices. Fans of the Annihilator always point out that PGI could change geometry, engine cap, and quirk it massively (yeah, when has that happened the last time?).

What I am saying is you cannot fight it. However you can do two things:

• tell people in no uncertain terms that their nostalgia Mech would be bad in game (if it would be; one of nostalgia choices is the Fafnir...)
  
• get people interested in the good Mechs beyond the aspect of in-game performance. Highlight the cool looks, the proud service history, the notable pilots etc. TheArisen's NSR-thread gives you a good idea how to do it, even if I would strengthen the lore part of it. But his selection of artwork, i.e. the first people look at, is absolutely marvelous.

[Tristan Winter]

@Alan Davion

Spoiler

Alan Davion, on 31 January 2017 - 06:29 PM, said:

Because only a complete, total, flipping, idiot of a tard tries to balance, 1 to 1, mechs that weigh 20 tons against mechs that weigh 100 tons.

It.

Ain't.

Gonna.

FLIPPING.

WORK!

That's just demonstrably false in a game with so many variables. Getting stuck on how tonnage is so important just illustrates that you're not taking enough variables into account. There's nearly an infinite amount of variables involved in MWO, depending on how you look at it. You could boil it down to a few dozen, if you wanted to simplify complex issues such has hitboxes and hardpoint locations. Only a small number of these variables are non negotiable, due to TT rules. For example, you can't balance assaults by only letting them have 2 weapons. However, there's a huge number of variables that are negotiable, because TT doesn't really cover them. For example, how much do you let assault mechs twist their torso and move their arms? For the sake of simplicity, let's say you lock both. No torso twisting og arm movement for you. On top of that, let's reduce turn rate to 10 degrees per second.

To make assault mechs less powerful than light mechs is child's play. The only issue is that certain players will say "but that's not fun", because they want to be the biggest, most powerful guys on the battlefield. That's fine. But to argue that it's impossible to achieve balance is just demonstrably false. It may require quirks, it may require redesigning some of the [dumb] core mechanics of MWO, but it's certainly possible.
That being said, I have derailed this thread for long enough. And this discussion is going nowhere anyway.

On topic, the Raijin is listed in the OP as having ECM variants, but those also have stealth armour and I would assume PGI is never touching stealth armour with a ten foot pole. Of course, they can invent new ECM variants, but they can do that with any chassis.

The Men Shen looks like the best candidate to me. It's an IS omnimech, which the game definitely needs to make things more interesting. It also has ballistic options, and that's important to me, because I'm bored with energy + missile medium mechs. 400 engine cap, high mounted weapons, tech-compatible ECM variant, MASC option. Just a pity it doesn't have jump jets, otherwise it would basically be the perfect mech for me. If PGI invented a jump jet variant, I would be tempted to buy it.

[TheArisen]

Tristan Winter, on 31 January 2017 - 09:37 PM, said:

@Alan Davion

Spoiler

That's just demonstrably false in a game with so many variables. Getting stuck on how tonnage is so important just illustrates that you're not taking enough variables into account. There's nearly an infinite amount of variables involved in MWO, depending on how you look at it. You could boil it down to a few dozen, if you wanted to simplify complex issues such has hitboxes and hardpoint locations. Only a small number of these variables are non negotiable, due to TT rules. For example, you can't balance assaults by only letting them have 2 weapons. However, there's a huge number of variables that are negotiable, because TT doesn't really cover them. For example, how much do you let assault mechs twist their torso and move their arms? For the sake of simplicity, let's say you lock both. No torso twisting og arm movement for you. On top of that, let's reduce turn rate to 10 degrees per second.

To make assault mechs less powerful than light mechs is child's play. The only issue is that certain players will say "but that's not fun", because they want to be the biggest, most powerful guys on the battlefield. That's fine. But to argue that it's impossible to achieve balance is just demonstrably false. It may require quirks, it may require redesigning some of the [dumb] core mechanics of MWO, but it's certainly possible.
That being said, I have derailed this thread for long enough. And this discussion is going nowhere anyway.

On topic, the Raijin is listed in the OP as having ECM variants, but those also have stealth armour and I would assume PGI is never touching stealth armour with a ten foot pole. Of course, they can invent new ECM variants, but they can do that with any chassis.

The Men Shen looks like the best candidate to me. It's an IS omnimech, which the game definitely needs to make things more interesting. It also has ballistic options, and that's important to me, because I'm bored with energy + missile medium mechs. 400 engine cap, high mounted weapons, tech-compatible ECM variant, MASC option. Just a pity it doesn't have jump jets, otherwise it would basically be the perfect mech for me. If PGI invented a jump jet variant, I would be tempted to buy it.

Well unless Pgi allows IS Omni's to change engines you're gonna be "stuck" with it's 330xl.

[chucklesMuch]

Personally I don't have a BT or Lore or previous MW gaming back ground so I know how much value I would add to this but...

my picks would be

light:
Osiris: I like the shape of this mech, could have good hitboxes, and its 30 ton so should avoid the 35 ton firestarter syndrome, decent speed with JJ's 5 & 6 energy mount point variants. If they were to make up some variants. Then I would be happy with inflated the missile and or ballistic mount points, as 1M and 1B seem a bit low.

Medium:
Lynx Not so sure - I liked the Men Shen more, except for the missile mount point on top :/ and what appears to be a rather low cockpit.

Heavy:
Onslaught: fast 75 ton with JJ and 7 ballistic mounts! (and a few other mounts points too)

Assault:
Cerberus - its speed is the deciding factor for me.... but 4 Ballistic and 4 energy points wouldn't be terrible either (not sure where the mount points are though?) As if they are all low then... maybe one of the others...

[Tristan Winter]

TheArisen, on 31 January 2017 - 10:03 PM, said:

Well unless Pgi allows IS Omni's to change engines you're gonna be "stuck" with it's 330xl.

Oh ffs. I wasn't thinking clearly.

But yeah, I guess you wouldn't really want to put an XL400 on it anyway.

[Alistair Winter]

Bombast, on 31 January 2017 - 05:16 PM, said:

A 400XL engine in Battletech costs over 24 million C-Bills on it's own. Only just shy of 7 million 6.5 million in MWO.

The C-Bill comparison between MWO and battletech falls apart as mech weight and engine size increases.

EDIT: The Kodiak, for example, cost almost 30 million in Battletech. Only 16 million in MWO.

God... I want those prices for MWO. And R&R.

[TheArisen]

chucklesMuch, on 31 January 2017 - 10:08 PM, said:

Personally I don't have a BT or Lore or previous MW gaming back ground so I know how much value I would add to this but...
Assault:
Cerberus - its speed is the deciding factor for me.... but 4 Ballistic and 4 energy points wouldn't be terrible either (not sure where the mount points are though?) As if they are all low then... maybe one of the others...

Everyone's picks matter and can offer some interesting perspective.

The Cerberus is special because it has a ballistic slot in each arm and ST so it could do quad AC10 or quad Rac5s with an XL and still be fast.

I've fixed all the broken links and added a link for anyone interested in theorycrafting.
http://remlab.source...e.net/remlab30/