53 replies to this topic

[Pixel Hunter]

I recently slid into a thunderbolt. running large pulses

that aside, I've noticed it take a whole bunch less effort to get that little "up arrow" at the end of a match than it does light or medium mechs. just for reference, i'm scrub-lord t5 ranking...but honestly...it seems a whole bunch easier to rank up the more tons you drag around. I've noticed that when i'm doing the same damage on the low end in the thunderbolt as my crab gets for a poor/average match, and getting around the same assists, my thunderbolt at worst gets an equal and at best a positive where as the crab gets an equal or a negative

what gives? do chassis matter? are lights and mediums supposed to be running around being bros for all the heavies 100% of the time as far as skills are concerned?

Edited by Gimpy117, 26 March 2017 - 06:23 PM.

[Alistair Winter]

Yes. In MWO, all mechs are equal, but some are more equal than others.

[Felicitatem Parco]

A 65 or 70 ton Mech will almost always out-perform a 50 ton Mech because you can use the extra weight to engine-up and nearly match speed, while still having more weight left over to bring more weapons and armor than the smaller guy.

[Khobai]

medium mechs have always gotten pretty shafted in MWO

because heavies go nearly as fast with 30% more weapons and armor

[Alistair Winter]

In addition to the aspect of raw speed in terms of max kph on a flat surface, I think it's important to take into account that there are other variables. "Mobility" is a lot of things. Acceleration, turn rate, arm movement, torso twist, hill climbing, and so forth. In MWO, heavier mechs have less mobility, but the disparity is not big enough to make weight class balanced.

A lot of players argue that this is an unavoidable consequence, but it's actually an arbitrary design choice that you as an individual may or may not like. MWO does not have a real physics engine that calculates how much horsepower your mech has and how much energy it takes to rotate your Kodiak's torso.

[Ultimax]

Alistair Winter, on 26 March 2017 - 06:41 PM, said:

Yes. In MWO, all mechs are equal, but some are more equal than others.

To be honest since I've started in 2014 I have not seen a single thing pointing to PGI stating that all mechs should be equal.

Mechs cost less to buy, in both CBills & MC the lower their tonnage is.

Actual Light mech packs are now clearly cheaper than other mech packs.

Group queue requires you to compose your team through a tonnage limit, meaning more tonnage is more valuable.

FP is also based on tonnage for drop decks.


If you want to say PGI hasn't given Lights or Mediums enough non-combat roles or positive traits to compensate for these realities, I would completely agree.

I don't think it's intended for them to be equal in a damage dealing role, nor do I think that is a realistic goal.

Edited by Ultimax, 26 March 2017 - 07:57 PM.

[Tarl Cabot]

Depending on the T-bolt, they all have energy quirks of one sort or another, and when there were fewer mechs to chose from, especially when Community Warfare started (aka Faction Play) w/ max tonnage was @240tons, the quirked T-bolts were the workhorse for IS forces. The 9S had even more massive PPC quirks than it does today and the 5SS with MPL quirks. The 9S has fallen out of favor while the 5SS tends to be the preferred T-bolt of choice.

With its age, T-bolts are not seen as often as they used to be, as there are other, newer mechs in that weight class that players prefer to play. That said, you are tier 5 and the T-bolts are definitely one way to move up as it has the ability to deliver the pain, the mobility to get where you need to be and to get out of bad spots.

When there are no mech sales or new mech releases, it is also why heavies has the highest percentage of usage due to having a excellent mix of firepower, durability and mobility. Assaults can have more durability and firepower but lack in the mobility department. If the faster mechs leave them alone they can be easy pickings. Mediums and lights depend on mobility even more, relying more on hit and run tactics, with lights needing to actually go unnoticed most of the time to be effective, never stopping. A stopped light is usually a dead light.

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 26 March 2017 - 08:05 PM.

[Alistair Winter]

Ultimax, on 26 March 2017 - 07:57 PM, said:

To be honest since I've started in 2014 I have not seen a single thing pointing to PGI stating that all mechs should be equal.

Nor have I.

Also, in 2012, PGI stated that a key of role warfare was that they wanted to make the first Mechwarrior game where lighter mechs weren't made practically obsolete by heavier mechs. To be honest with you, I ain't never seen that either.

Ultimax, on 26 March 2017 - 07:57 PM, said:

I don't think it's intended for them to be equal in a damage dealing role, nor do I think that is a realistic goal.

Depends on what one's definition of "realistic" is. It obviously can be done. But it obviously can't be done without majorly upsetting the players, at this point. Assault pilots get cranky when they get killed by light mechs.

[SeaLabCaptn]

Forget that worthless PSR arrow, I just want to get paid. Damage is king, and lights and mediums get shafted.

[justcallme A S H]

There are plenty of Med mechs that can do just as well as a heavy for Dmg/Kill potential:

NVA, SCR, SHC, HKB, HKC IIC, CDA - All of them are great mechs, some of them I'd say are better than a t-bolt, much better in fact and I pilot my t-bolts quite a bit. you just have to play them differently/to the strengths of each just like any chassis.

Edited by justcallme A S H, 26 March 2017 - 08:29 PM.

[Deathlike]

Alistair Winter, on 26 March 2017 - 08:03 PM, said:

Depends on what one's definition of "realistic" is. It obviously can be done. But it obviously can't be done without majorly upsetting the players, at this point. Assault pilots get cranky when they get killed by light mechs.

They don't like being touched in the naughty parts.

Apparently, putting the back to the wall is Lostech.

Ultimately damage is king and overexaggerating how much DPS a Light can do is what bad players do best.

[Ultimax]

Alistair Winter, on 26 March 2017 - 08:03 PM, said:

Also, in 2012, PGI stated that a key of role warfare was that they wanted to make the first Mechwarrior game where lighter mechs weren't made practically obsolete by heavier mechs. To be honest with you, I ain't never seen that either.

That's quite a different concept vs. "equality".

Alistair Winter, on 26 March 2017 - 08:03 PM, said:

Depends on what one's definition of "realistic" is. It obviously can be done. But it obviously can't be done without majorly upsetting the players, at this point. Assault pilots get cranky when they get killed by light mechs.

It's unrealistic because mechs on each far end of the spectrum are so wildly different that in order to make it so that Light mechs were "equals" in damage dealing and surviving damage as Assault mechs - you would likely see at least one class of mechs drop out of the equation.

There simply isn't enough room on a balance spectrum to have mechs from 20 tons up to 100 tons in 5 ton increments all be "equal" to each other in raw combat ability.

[Alistair Winter]

Deathlike, on 26 March 2017 - 08:32 PM, said:

They don't like being touched in the naughty parts.
Apparently, putting the back to the wall is Lostech.
Ultimately damage is king and overexaggerating how much DPS a Light can do is what bad players do best.

It's ok though.

Light mechs are important for scouting. I've been told from credible sources that only light mechs can scout and shoot down UAVs and it makes them supremely valuable and stuff.

@Ultimax: I disagree. But I've had this discussion so many times, at this point, it feels like I'm participating in a written screenplay where we're all looking at the script, knowing full well what the other person is going to say next. I'm out.

[Ultimax]

Alistair Winter, on 26 March 2017 - 08:53 PM, said:

@Ultimax: I disagree. But I've had this discussion so many times, at this point, it feels like I'm participating in a written screenplay where we're all looking at the script, knowing full well what the other person is going to say next. I'm out.

Feel free to disagree with examples on how you think it could be balanced - I'm not some closed minded zealot.

I'm not talking role warfare, that could be done if PGI actually worked harder to bake that into maps and modes (and it looks like they are making some kind of attempt with Incursion). Having roles that are all valuable is quite a different thing from being equally value in raw combat potential.

I'm talking about how and why all mechs regardless of tonnage could be equally powerful in raw damage output and survivability.

Edited by Ultimax, 26 March 2017 - 09:07 PM.

[Mystere]

Alistair Winter, on 26 March 2017 - 08:03 PM, said:

Nor have I.

Also, in 2012, PGI stated that a key of role warfare was that they wanted to make the first Mechwarrior game where lighter mechs weren't made practically obsolete by heavier mechs. To be honest with you, I ain't never seen that either.


Depends on what one's definition of "realistic" is. It obviously can be done. But it obviously can't be done without majorly upsetting the players, at this point. Assault pilots get cranky when they get killed by light mechs.

We get big maps ... fattie lovers cry. They complain MWO has become a walking simulator.

We get atmospheric effects ... fattie lovers cry. They complain they cannot see targets to shoot with their big guns.

We get rough terrain ... fattie lovers cry. They complain it's unfair they cannot climb them like a ninja.

Do you get the picture?

[Clownwarlord]

Yep usually do, because it is the right amount of armour, fire power, and speed usually.

[Mystere]

Ultimax, on 26 March 2017 - 09:07 PM, said:

Feel free to disagree with examples on how you think it could be balanced - I'm not some closed minded zealot.

I'm not talking role warfare, that could be done if PGI actually worked harder to bake that into maps and modes (and it looks like they are making some kind of attempt with Incursion). Having roles that are all valuable is quite a different thing from being equally value in raw combat potential.

I'm talking about how and why all mechs regardless of tonnage could be equally powerful in raw damage output and survivability.

Doing your "role" that does not involve any shooting instead of just dealing damage gives you a lump of coal as the reward. But if you increase rewards for people for doing their non-shooting "role", other people complain that the former are being paid for "sitting on a square", "not helping the team", or some other such bullcrap.

So people bring fatties overflowing with firepower.

[Anjian]

65 to 75 ton mechs nearly has much firepower as assaults yet with the speed and agility of mediums.

This is the game's sweet spot.

[dario03]

Ultimax, on 26 March 2017 - 09:07 PM, said:

Feel free to disagree with examples on how you think it could be balanced - I'm not some closed minded zealot.

I'm not talking role warfare, that could be done if PGI actually worked harder to bake that into maps and modes (and it looks like they are making some kind of attempt with Incursion). Having roles that are all valuable is quite a different thing from being equally value in raw combat potential.

I'm talking about how and why all mechs regardless of tonnage could be equally powerful in raw damage output and survivability.

Well a good start would be to make the quirks make sense. So instead of some heavy mechs having 60+% agility quirks and a lot of lights having none...we could....mayybeee....switch that around???

[Deathlike]

Alistair Winter, on 26 March 2017 - 08:53 PM, said:

@Ultimax: I disagree. But I've had this discussion so many times, at this point, it feels like I'm participating in a written screenplay where we're all looking at the script, knowing full well what the other person is going to say next. I'm out.

I'll come up with new content new lines improved recycled content sooner or later.