


Watch This And Tell Me Is Is Getting Killed...
#21
Posted 01 May 2017 - 01:47 AM

#22
Posted 01 May 2017 - 01:52 AM
Quote
you exaggerate. the difference between CXL and LFE is like 4 tons or less in most cases.
4 tons extra equipment isnt suddenly going to make IS and Clan equal.
Point being that CXL isnt the reason Clans are so much better. Its a combination of CXL, clan endo, and clan tech in general weighing less.
#23
Posted 01 May 2017 - 01:53 AM
#24
Posted 01 May 2017 - 01:54 AM
Quote
why? its the only way to balance it vs Clan XL.
LFE with no penalties is pretty damn close to CXL. Id say 85% as good.
When clans lose a side torso they lose A LOT of engine and heatsink tonnage (probably like 10-12 tons). A lot more than the 4 ton or so difference between what CXL and LFE weigh. LFE pulls ahead pretty heavily once both mechs have lost a side torso. IS mechs wont be nearly as diminished by side torso loss.
Edited by Khobai, 01 May 2017 - 02:01 AM.
#25
Posted 01 May 2017 - 01:56 AM
#26
Posted 01 May 2017 - 01:57 AM
Quote
because clans are better right now. There is no LFE to help even things up.
#27
Posted 01 May 2017 - 02:02 AM
Khobai, on 01 May 2017 - 01:52 AM, said:
you exaggerate. the difference between CXL and LFE is like 4 tons or less in most cases.
4 tons extra equipment isnt suddenly going to make IS and Clan equal.
Point being that CXL isnt the reason Clans are so much better. Its a combination of CXL, clan endo, and clan tech in general weighing less.
I exaggerate only as much as yourself.
4 tons is a significant amount. Heck, 1 ton is game changing for a Light.
On the last point, I agree. Clan equipment (and only a select few weapons), are the main point of balance disparity.
That said, while I'm looking forward to the new toys IS will be getting (especially my Uziel

#30
Posted 01 May 2017 - 02:38 AM
Khobai, on 01 May 2017 - 01:54 AM, said:
I don't expect a whole lot of competence from PGI when it comes to balancing.
I predict they'll just think 'it occupies 2 slots in each side torso like the Clan XL, so it should be equal in penalties', and implement it like that.
#31
Posted 01 May 2017 - 02:44 AM
Khobai, on 01 May 2017 - 01:43 AM, said:
so it will be pretty close. clan endo vs IS endo will be far more unbalanced at that point than CXL vs LFE
Exactly my point. CXL is still better than LFE, and is overkill on top of Clan endo/ferro. This change will not bring balance. Far from it.
Edited by El Bandito, 01 May 2017 - 02:46 AM.
#32
Posted 01 May 2017 - 03:07 AM
Dogstar, on 01 May 2017 - 01:56 AM, said:
Because i just left the IS.
If there's one thing many IS potatoes seem to be forgetting is their god tier defensive quirks, which aren't getting touched from what i understand. Adapt and over come. That's how i've always worked my IS mechs.....Even those metamech tier 4 ones like Kintaro and Wolfhounds.
You can't have your cake and eat it.
Edited by Lupis Volk, 01 May 2017 - 03:10 AM.
#33
Posted 01 May 2017 - 03:08 AM
Quote
but it will still be better balanced than it is now. which is my point.
#34
Posted 01 May 2017 - 03:11 AM
Juodas Varnas, on 01 May 2017 - 12:18 AM, said:
Bloody hell...
Yup. This is what we've been arguing. All the white knights who play with the skill maze and manage to make some IS mech similar to what they had before are missing the fact that currently quirk-free Clan meta-mechs can also take the same skills, get about the same results, and thus remain far more competitive.
Also, beyond a certain point, durability buffs mean nothing if you can't move or shoot effectively. It's like the stupid structural (instead of armor) buffs PGI loves to hand out, which accomplishing nothing except delay your death a bit after all your weapons have been shot out.
#35
Posted 01 May 2017 - 03:11 AM
Maybe it's true, that better skill node gains for IS, are the reason for the IS offensive dequirkening. I'm not sure it's justified though, but since we're facing a fundamental game play change with extended TTK, 'mech specialists like back stabbers and information warfare units MIGHT prove even more useful. Or the exact opposite.
Your points about LFE vs. CXL are all hilarious. People obviously have biased opinions on how much 4 ton is worth, and how often you really need the ability to lose a side torso. And fanbois never agree with the counterpart.
#36
Posted 01 May 2017 - 03:16 AM
Dogstar, on 01 May 2017 - 01:56 AM, said:
My personal preference.
I like the clan´s meritocratic ideal in the warrior caste .
I still have soft spots for some of the more notorious IS characters as well, though .
Not because of MWO´s state of balance .
MWO came ten years+ after my going through all BT books I could lay my eyes on .
Argument invalidated, keep that salt coming

#37
Posted 01 May 2017 - 03:19 AM
Lupis Volk, on 01 May 2017 - 03:07 AM, said:
If there's one thing many IS potatoes seem to be forgetting is their god tier defensive quirks, which aren't getting touched from what i understand. Adapt and over come. That's how i've always worked my IS mechs.....Even those metamech tier 4 ones like Kintaro and Wolfhounds.
You can't have your cake and eat it.
I have adapted. I run meta Clan mechs in SQ and GQ now. Better than other alternatives.
And god tier defensive quirks are mostly on **** tier IS mechs, which means they will still be overall mediocre.
Edited by El Bandito, 01 May 2017 - 03:35 AM.
#38
Posted 01 May 2017 - 03:37 AM
#39
Posted 01 May 2017 - 05:27 AM

#40
Posted 01 May 2017 - 05:45 AM
Khobai, on 01 May 2017 - 12:31 AM, said:
uac kodiak really wont be that threatening though
because the new skill tree is only gonna give you a fraction of the cooldown skill it used to.
right now it gives -17% between fast fire and cooldown module, on the PTR it was only like -3.5%... because the other cooldown nodes were all walled behind nodes that werent worth paying points for.
between the considerable armor/structure bonuses and the reduction of cooldown bonuses, dps weapons like UACs are going to be considerably weakened, while PPFLD weapons like gauss/ppc are going to be much stronger.
So you're saying a Kodiak that has to suffer the indignity of 2.5 second fire cycles on UAC/10s won't be viable? That's ******** and you know it.
It will still be viable, in fact it will be exactly where it is now compared to non quirked ballistics boats and way ahead of the ones that currently are quirked.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users