193 replies to this topic

[C E Dwyer]

Bishop Steiner, on 12 April 2017 - 09:41 PM, said:

There were two choices, reducing the missiles, or offering the same ones for cbills, they chose poorly, IMO, but oh well.

They had three

Ignore the whining, but as they're bending over for the E-sport crowd that rarely spend money supporting the game, this was never going to happen.

Edited by Cathy, 13 April 2017 - 09:24 AM.

[DRlFTER]

Didn't they mention in the roadmap that new variants for these mechs were going to be available for cbills...before the announcement? It seems to me that was the plan all along, and only the nerf was the direct result of feedback. It was clever and effective of PGI to include more details about the cbill variants with the nerf announcement.

Asides from softening the blow, it provides a more insightful analysis into whether it is worth spending real $, removing future buyer's remorse, and gives the appearance of measures taken due to feedback. They may have decided on additional variants months ago in addition to the clan heroes, and perhaps for P2W reasons, but let's not assume the new variants were due to populist angst.

Edited by DRlFTER, 13 April 2017 - 09:26 AM.

[Malrock]

Yeah the Shadow Cat nerf seems silly. Definitely means I am not interested in said mech. The other changes seem ok, and like they are giving something back for what they take / change... but the shadow cat seems like it just got hosed.

[Cy Mitchell]

El Bandito, on 13 April 2017 - 09:11 AM, said:

And just like that you mistook my intention. I repeatedly said in multiple posts that pay to perform better is wrong, no matter the type of mechs. The point is that omnimechs are very obvious when it comes to pay to perform, because it can easily min max using every variant's omnipods, which means if a Hero omni has a pod that is straight up superior to all C-Bill variants, then that's pay to perform, and should not be encouraged.

Battlemechs are more debatable because their hardpoints are fixed, and can be varied enough to not be clear just which variant is straight up better. Jager-DD vs. Firebrand, for example.

Then we are in agreement. PGI, based on the precedent that they just set, should release free versions of every hero Mech whether Clan or IS, omni-Mech or BattleMech unless the hero Mech is clearly inferior to what is offered on that chassis for free.

[Gamuray]

Rampage, on 13 April 2017 - 09:36 AM, said:

Then we are in agreement. PGI, based on the precedent that they just set, should release free versions of every hero Mech whether Clan or IS, omni-Mech or BattleMech unless the hero Mech is clearly inferior to what is offered on that chassis for free.

Ok first, INFERIOR? Why would they need to make sure the mech is inferior? Why isn't being on EVEN ground acceptable? They don't need to compensate the c-bill boost or camo, we're only concerned about not being more combat effective than counterparts (by a significant margin, because who the heck cares if a TDR-5ss with 7 energy has an upgrade to top dog with 9? Can't really use it). There needs to be some reason to buy it, and c-bill boost alone won't sell much. C-bills + non-inferior variety? Yes.


Let the record state that I do not find any of the listed IS hero's, with exception of the oxide, to be superior to their c-bill counterparts. I only find them to have different options. Having options that can be better in certain scenarios, but have equal trade-offs of being worse in other scenarios is just called diversity, not superior.

i.e. Firebrand hero. Sure it can go faster OR it can bring 2 2 ppc's and a gauss. But it can't bring 3 uac's or missiles. This doesn't make it better, just different. Boars head? Sure, it can laser boat, but that doesn't make it better, just different. It can't to the massive damage spike of the DDC/S variants.

Oxide with it's quirks though... and Huginn... they're different from normal variants, but the quirks drive their combat effectiveness way past their counterparts. THAT is pay to win.

(There's a reason you rarely see Firebrands, Boars Heads, Ilyas, Jesters, etc. It's because those mechs aren't better, just different. Heck, I see K2's WAY more often. Can't remember the last time I saw a Jester... or really any old IS hero other than the Huginn/Oxide.. or Pirate's Bane I suppose)

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Cathy, on 13 April 2017 - 09:24 AM, said:

Ignore the whining, but as they're bending over for the E-sport crowd that rarely spend money supporting the game

Ummm, wat

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 13 April 2017 - 10:24 AM.

[Cy Mitchell]

I said "inferior" because what constitutes equal to or better than is open to individual interpretation as you then proved by saying which IS heroes you consider superior.

I am playing devils advocate here because I am disgusted by this whole P2W debate so if there is any chance that a hero Mech may be superior in any scenario then it needs to be given to the player base for free. If it is not, then that is the very definition of P2W that others were using that I debated against since these most recent heroes were announced.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Gamuray, on 13 April 2017 - 10:07 AM, said:

Having options that can be better in certain scenarios, but have equal trade-offs of being worse in other scenarios is just called diversity, not superior.

Pay walling a way to play the game is counterproductive much like pay walling maps. Sorry, but even under those grounds having the heroes be pay walled and unique is bad.

Gamuray, on 13 April 2017 - 10:07 AM, said:

(There's a reason you rarely see Firebrands, Boars Heads, Ilyas, Jesters, etc. It's because those mechs aren't better,

Correction, it's because those mechs simply aren't good compared to their Clan counterparts, the story would probably be very different if Clan tech weren't in the game.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 13 April 2017 - 10:27 AM.

[Andi Nagasia]

Malrock, on 13 April 2017 - 09:27 AM, said:

Yeah the Shadow Cat nerf seems silly. Definitely means I am not interested in said mech. The other changes seem ok, and like they are giving something back for what they take / change... but the shadow cat seems like it just got hosed.

many Disliked the 2Missiles on the BL KNT Hero, they demanded Ballistics instead,
thats better than every other BL KNT, but its also 1) an IS Mech & 2) its a BattleMech,

it seems like a HardPoint starved Clan OmniMech isnt Privy to the same Justification,
here People Demanded that something Change for the OmniMech heros being P2W,
so they Gave more options to most of the Clan Omni Hero Mechs, which is noble,

i just dont like it was the SHC that got his with the fall out,

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Andi Nagasia, on 13 April 2017 - 10:26 AM, said:

i just dont like it was the SHC that got his with the fall out,

They SHC barely suffered though, it lost the ability to mount ECM with 4 ASRM6 but gained symmetry (which is honestly more important these days). I think people are over-exaggerating how this change honestly impacts the Shadow Cat's power.

Now, if you wanna talk about ridiculous, let's talk about how the hero Ebon Jag still retains the unique ballistic LT that allows it to run symmetric dual Gauss (which is pretty important, again).

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 13 April 2017 - 10:32 AM.

[Gamuray]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 13 April 2017 - 10:26 AM, said:

Pay walling a way to play the game is counterproductive much like pay walling maps. Sorry, but even under those grounds having the heroes be pay walled and unique is bad.


Correction, it's because those mechs simply aren't good compared to their Clan counterparts, the story would probably be very different if Clan tech weren't in the game.

Unique I find totally acceptable, otherwise, what could they possibly sell? When you sell a game you're selling the experience you provide players. If all of the experiences you encounter are free, what exactly would prompt someone to spend money, exactly? Maybe a c-bill boost, but that's much less encouraging than one might think when compared to a fun, albeit not inherently better experience.

And, I see plenty of Catapults, Jagermechs, and some Atlai around, but they're very rarely the heros. So I don't think clan counterparts has anything to do with the heros not showing up, since the c-bill versions do regardless.

[Pariah Devalis]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 13 April 2017 - 10:30 AM, said:

They SHC barely suffered though, it lost the ability to mount ECM with 4 ASRM6 but gained symmetry (which is honestly more important these days).

Plus, in a brawl, ECM is less important. The enemy knows where you are already, and is close enough to get data on you regardless. You only lose out on countering SSRM, but they'd probably bring along a BAP or TAG anyways, so.... I know I will be using all four M hardpoints on my new Stabby Tabby.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Gamuray, on 13 April 2017 - 10:32 AM, said:

Unique I find totally acceptable, otherwise, what could they possibly sell?

Skins, unique geometry, unique cockpits, c-bill boosts, etc

If Overwatch can survive on non-gameplay related microtransactions, then why is Mechwarrior so different? Hell, if I could apply some hero skins across all my mechs, that would be huge (cuz a lot of the hero and collector edition skins are simply more interesting than the generic crap). Sorry, but the idea that MWO NEEDS to sell items that impact gameplay to make money needs to die because it isn't founded on anything but the premise that this game's population is smaller which has nothing to do with poor monetization scheme MWO has which is the real issue.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 13 April 2017 - 10:37 AM.

[Snowbluff]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 13 April 2017 - 10:30 AM, said:

Now, if you wanna talk about ridiculous, let's talk about how the hero Ebon Jag still retains the unique ballistic LT that allows it to run symmetric dual Gauss (which is pretty important, again).

Because its a terrible build. 2 PPC 1 Gauss is current possible and alphas for more with better range and better ammo and better DPS and better headshots...

So no, P2W was only remotely a concern with the HBR.

Edited by Snowbluff, 13 April 2017 - 10:38 AM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Snowbluff, on 13 April 2017 - 10:37 AM, said:

Because its a terrible build.

No it isn't. it was the preferred Eb Jag build back when you actually saw the Eb Jag in comp, because 2 Gauss is unaffected by heat (which makes it great on Tourmaline or Caustic). The Dual Gauss Eb Jag also has better sustained DPS than the 2 PPC/Gauss build on a heat neutral map, so you wanna try that again? It also has the benefit of being easier to use due to not having to worry about syncing up the ERPPCs and Gauss to hit the same component, but you are correct about range since the x3 range nerf hurt it's ability to compete with ERPPCs at range.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 13 April 2017 - 10:42 AM.

[Mystere]

Cathy, on 13 April 2017 - 09:24 AM, said:

They had three

Ignore the whining, but as they're bending over for the E-sport crowd that rarely spend money supporting the game, this was never going to happen.

Well, if true, all I can say is:

**** eSports!!!

Anyone who seriously thinks MWO will be more that a tiny drop in the ocean as far as eSpurts is concerned is delusional given the history of this minimally viable product. <shrugs>

Edited by Mystere, 13 April 2017 - 10:41 AM.

[Snowbluff]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 13 April 2017 - 10:38 AM, said:

No it isn't. it was the preferred Eb Jag build back when you actually saw the Eb Jag in comp, because 2 Gauss is unaffected by heat (which makes it great on Tourmaline or Caustic). The Dual Gauss Eb Jag also has better sustained DPS than the 2 PPC/Gauss build on a heat neutral map, so you wanna try that again?

Okay, :3
It has better DPS, better Alpha, Better Ammo, Better HP, better splash...
Oh and it benefits from colder maps! If the map is hot you can still cool shot, and just shoot run PPC is you're feeling the heat (assuming you're firing constantly while poking).

The EBJ has decent built in heat cap with the locked heatsinks, and running asym on the EBJ gauss build is probably just as good anyway, considering you need both the weapons AND the cockpit showing to hit anything.

More importantly "when it was comp" kind of means it's not P2W is cbill mechs are performing better.

Edited by Snowbluff, 13 April 2017 - 10:51 AM.

[Pariah Devalis]

Twin shoulder gauss EBJ has one big flaw against it that the Gauss and twin peep one doesn't. Both ST are highly explosive. They are not exactly hard to target, either.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Snowbluff, on 13 April 2017 - 10:46 AM, said:

It has better DPS, better Alpha, Better Ammo, Better HP, better splash...

You mean worse DPS. It has better alpha and better splash, but again, at the cost of sustained DPS (which is important for recieving pushes, especially pushes involving flamers). It doesn't have better HP (but it would be less squishy), nor does it actually have better ammo (you can fit 6 tons of ammo and 2 Gauss if you don't run any ERML).

Compare both of these builds:
2 ERPPC/Gauss EBJ
2 Gauss EBJ (pretend the Gauss is in the LT)

Snowbluff, on 13 April 2017 - 10:46 AM, said:

If the map is hot you can still cool shot, and just shoot run PPC is you're feeling the heat (assuming you're firing constantly while poking).

Or you could just take 2 Gauss, have a UAV/Arty and be able to keep better sustained than you ever would with 2 ERPPC/Gauss even IF you had a coolshot......

Snowbluff, on 13 April 2017 - 10:46 AM, said:

The EBJ has decent built in heat cap with the locked heatsinks, and running asym on the EBJ gauss build is probably just as good anyway, considering you need both the weapons AND the cockpit showing to hit anything.

No, the asym build is worse because it is easier to neuter and has worse convergence than it would with torso mounted Gauss.

Pariah Devalis, on 13 April 2017 - 10:50 AM, said:

Twin shoulder gauss EBJ has one big flaw against it that the Gauss and twin peep one doesn't. Both ST are highly explosive. They are not exactly hard to target, either.

That's still a step up from before when it was run asym.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 13 April 2017 - 10:54 AM.

[Andi Nagasia]

=Idea=
perhaps if they gave the Hero back its hard Points,
wail also buffinf the SHC-H as well could help the SHC,

Shadow Cat
SHC-MI Hero Loadout
LA= 1E
LT=
CT=
RT= 1M +1M
RA= 1E 1B

SHC-H Loadout
LA=
LT= 1M +1M
CT=
RT=
RA= 1E

this would allow for:
2E 4M= SHC= H & B
2E 6M= SHC= Hero, H, & B,
2E 4M ECM= SHC= Hero & B
1E 4B 4M= SHC= Hero, H, & P,
I feel these could help the SHC greatly,

this could add to the SHC much needed Build Diversity,
and all it would take is adding in +1M to the SHC-H instead of removing 1M from the SHC-Hero,
the SHC is never ganna over Missile or over Ballistic the HMN so i dont think this is a problem,

Ive added a (Poll) to the Topic, i would like Everyone to Vote on how they feel about this Idea,
Thank you,

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 13 April 2017 - 10:53 AM.