84 replies to this topic

[Gyrok]

Bud Crue, on 04 May 2017 - 04:28 AM, said:

If it is a true balance effort PGI is interested in you need to be consistent in your changes in order to first define the criteria of the baseline you are seeking and then to have consistent comparative data to which to form the baseline with. That is the opposite of what PGI is doing.

My god, you and I do not often agree as I recall...however...welcome to game design 101 ned and the first reader edition.

This quote is absolute fact.

If PGI wanted to do the skill tree justice, this is how to proceed in order to properly balance mechs:

1.) Remove ALL quirks, positive or negative, from every mech in the game, and restore all weapons to baseline performance, period.

2.) Implement new tech at presumed baseline levels per PTS data, and gather data for 30-90 days with all weapons at straight baselines.

3.) Take 1 group per month, (IS Lights, Clan Lights, IS Mediums, etc.) and adjust each class of chassis independently to bring them in line with the selected baseline mech. This requires choosing a mech in each class to be the baseline for performance. Every mech below that is adjusted upward to meet performance, and every mech above that is adjusted downward slightly. NOTE: YOU WILL NEVER ACHIEVE PERFECT PARITY, BUT A 3-5% GAP ABOVE AND BELOW IS ACCEPTABLE.

4.) Once all chassis have been gone through class by class, look at the new weapon tech and adjust accordingly per a selected baseline in each class of weapon.

5.) Adjust skill trees to offer under performing weapons/chassis options to achieve parity strictly for fine tuning adjustments.

6.) Begin reviewing data for statistical outliers based upon baseline performance.

This is called iterative balancing, and hopefully someone at PGI reads this. I am amazed that game designers would not be familiar with this concept...

Edited by Gyrok, 04 May 2017 - 06:42 PM.

[Kanil]

Gyrok, on 04 May 2017 - 06:40 PM, said:

1.) Remove ALL quirks

2.) gather data for 30-90 days

3.) Take 1 group per month

5.) Adjust skill trees to offer under performing weapons/chassis options

Would it really take 60-330 days to conclude that the Vindicator kinda sucks and could use some quirks?

[LT. HARDCASE]

Tier 1 Clan mechs suddenly getting more quirks than Ivan Drago just doesn't make any sense.

[Requiemking]

Khobai, on 03 May 2017 - 08:54 PM, said:

except its not the best light in the game for all the reasons I already mentioned

so basically its being punished for no reason

Actually, 129 KPH is a really good speed for Lights, the Cheetah has hands down the best hitboxes of any humanoid Light in game, and it can boat 6 CSPLs, which are currently the best lightweight weapon in game right now. Plus it wasn't screwed over during the Rescale and it has ECM and JJs. All of this adds up to being the best Clan Light in game, with it's only competitor for best overall Light being the Locust due to the Locust's speed and size.

Edited by Requiemking, 04 May 2017 - 07:35 PM.

[Monkey Lover]

Kanil, on 04 May 2017 - 07:27 PM, said:

Would it really take 60-330 days to conclude that the Vindicator kinda sucks and could use some quirks?

Anyone still left after the mass run for the uninstall wouldn't play it anyway. There would be no data to collect lol

[I_AM_ZUUL]

Vellron2005, on 03 May 2017 - 11:57 PM, said:

OK, so let's get one thing str8..

Clans will always be OP, Trashcan pilots would whine about it being too difficult to club baby seals

IS will always know CLANS are OP, cause Clam mechs are broken for the most part with their worst mechs being above average IS power level

Had to fix that for you

[Gyrok]

I_AM_ZUUL, on 04 May 2017 - 08:02 PM, said:

Had to fix that for you

You actually screwed it up...

[I_AM_ZUUL]

Gyrok, on 04 May 2017 - 09:03 PM, said:

You actually screwed it up...

Nope... that is the acurrate assessment of the mentality of people on the forums. Trashcan pilots whining about ridiculous things which is just adding insult to the injury of the already broken balance problems PGI has caused by their incompetence as "designers"

Edited by I_AM_ZUUL, 04 May 2017 - 09:28 PM.

[Karl Streiger]

Kanil, on 04 May 2017 - 07:27 PM, said:

Would it really take 60-330 days to conclude that the Vindicator kinda sucks and could use some quirks?

No - because after 10days nobody would use it.
I think a good baseline is not possible anymore to many variables (not only weapons)

Ok after day one you might have some clues about weapon balancing.
This the aggregate of some few players weapon stats (althoug its obsucred by patches and quirks)

The most important question is the "balance model" either tonnage or unit based?
If its tonnage based (would make more sense) you set those accuracy stats in relation to mass; ammunition, heat and range.
After that you have superb values.

Check 2 would be to consider the load values of mechs - a function of hardpoints, location & speed

Check 3 would consider other facts like hitboxes (although you could calculate them too as a function of speed and area)

Usually with life data you should hardly need more then 24-48hrs to get some data.

Edited by Karl Streiger, 05 May 2017 - 01:18 AM.

[Bud Crue]

Gyrok, on 04 May 2017 - 06:40 PM, said:

1.) Remove ALL quirks, positive or negative, from every mech in the game, and restore all weapons to baseline performance, period.

2.) Implement new tech at presumed baseline levels per PTS data, and gather data for 30-90 days with all weapons at straight baselines.

3.) Take 1 group per month, (IS Lights, Clan Lights, IS Mediums, etc.) and adjust each class of chassis independently to bring them in line with the selected baseline mech. This requires choosing a mech in each class to be the baseline for performance. Every mech below that is adjusted upward to meet performance, and every mech above that is adjusted downward slightly. NOTE: YOU WILL NEVER ACHIEVE PERFECT PARITY, BUT A 3-5% GAP ABOVE AND BELOW IS ACCEPTABLE.

4.) Once all chassis have been gone through class by class, look at the new weapon tech and adjust accordingly per a selected baseline in each class of weapon.

5.) Adjust skill trees to offer under performing weapons/chassis options to achieve parity strictly for fine tuning adjustments.

6.) Begin reviewing data for statistical outliers based upon baseline performance.

This is called iterative balancing, and hopefully someone at PGI reads this. I am amazed that game designers would not be familiar with this concept...

My change to you proposal would be to rather than remove all quirks...LEAVE THEM THE HELL ALONE.
PGI has spent the last 3 years balancing by quirks. I do not understand why they are so keen to throw that effort away just because of the skills tree.

[Bud Crue]

Ruar, on 04 May 2017 - 05:16 PM, said:

I disagree. From what I saw the removal of IS quirks was done to dial down dps in general. Yes, there were items like the Atlas, but a range buff isn't the same as a cooldown or LBX buff. Both the cooldown and spread buffs are designed to increase overall dps while range buffs are there to keep the same dps but push it out farther.

I think they do have a baseline they can work with right now. Then when the new tech comes out they'll be able to make adjustments.

What is the meta right now?
It's long range PPFLD of between 40-50 (+5-10) from Night Gyrs and other mechs running 2Gauss and 1-2 ERPPCs right?
How many mechs on the IS side can match that and still be competitively built? Not many.
So what do a lot of IS folks do to compensate? They relly on dps builds like the MX90. "Tough" brawlers like the Atlas. ERLL spam from Battlemaster, ad their ilk. ALL of these options are not as competitive as the meta, elsewise they would be the meta. They are not the meta.
They are being nerfed.

THAT is not how you establish a new baseline of performance. It is how you make less than meta mechs worse than they already are. Why on earth would we simply accept that it is good to "dial down dps" in mechs that relly on dps to have a chance against the meta? That makes zero sense if you really believe that the goal is to provide balance. If anything they ought to buff mechs to have greater dps so that they can better compete with the PPFLD meta.

But I am not even asking for that, because even buffing when instituting a new system will skew the baseline (as more people disproportionately play the buffed content). All I want is for them to leave this set of variables (quirks) alone so that they aren't screwing their own data set from the get go.

Edited by Bud Crue, 05 May 2017 - 04:27 AM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Requiemking, on 04 May 2017 - 07:34 PM, said:

Actually, 129 KPH is a really good speed for Lights, the Cheetah has hands down the best hitboxes of any humanoid Light in game

It really doesn't, but it has the best hitboxes of any of the humanoid lights that can use a Clan XL which is the really important part. Honestly, if the Firestarter could survive a side torso loss I would say it has the better hitboxes (and weapon mounts).

[Jackal Noble]

Andi Nagasia, on 03 May 2017 - 08:39 PM, said:

it seems like the SCR TBR NTG, are also getting hit in the Agility to better balance them,

which will make IS mechs More Agile and more Tankie,
where are Clans will be Faster and have Slightly Better Weapons,

Hey guys how about riding around in heavily armed slugs!? Yay! They become even sluggier when you shoot off a side! double Yay!

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 May 2017 - 07:24 AM, said:

It really doesn't, but it has the best hitboxes of any of the humanoid lights that can use a Clan XL which is the really important part. Honestly, if the Firestarter could survive a side torso loss I would say it has the better hitboxes (and weapon mounts).

do you even commando?

[Quicksilver Aberration]

JackalBeast, on 05 May 2017 - 07:38 AM, said:

do you even commando?

Commando has chunkier arms than the Firestarter, which is not something you want when a bunch of your firepower resides there.

[El Bandito]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 May 2017 - 07:24 AM, said:

It really doesn't, but it has the best hitboxes of any of the humanoid lights that can use a Clan XL which is the really important part. Honestly, if the Firestarter could survive a side torso loss I would say it has the better hitboxes (and weapon mounts).

Also, ACH is tiny. Firestarter is giant in comparison.

JackalBeast, on 05 May 2017 - 07:38 AM, said:

do you even commando?

Is that a mech?

Edited by El Bandito, 05 May 2017 - 07:56 AM.

[Jackal Noble]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 May 2017 - 07:40 AM, said:

Commando has chunkier arms than the Firestarter, which is not something you want when a bunch of your firepower resides there.

I am aware and yet still it proves to be a resilient thorn in the right hands. Speed and size and decent hitboxes factor in there. Same can be said for the Cheetah, hex -SPL in my mind is still the most viable build (vs 2x ErLL, 4 Small 2 MEd, 6 Med), but can be relatively neutered by taking the arms off, which is pretty easy with the shoulders it has.

Edited by JackalBeast, 05 May 2017 - 07:46 AM.

[Papaspud]

The problem with the mass nerfs on IS mechs is going to be, when they nerf IS mechs, nobody is going to want to play them. They were barely competitive, now they will be bullet sponges- should be fun for the clans to be able to rack up big damage amounts during Tuk3- until IS just gives up..

[Bud Crue]

JackalBeast, on 05 May 2017 - 07:38 AM, said:

do you even commando?

I'd have said Spider.
How do those 5Ks manage to hold onto their arms and torsos so damn long!

[Y E O N N E]

Gyrok, on 04 May 2017 - 06:40 PM, said:

My god, you and I do not often agree as I recall...however...welcome to game design 101 ned and the first reader edition.

This quote is absolute fact.

If PGI wanted to do the skill tree justice, this is how to proceed in order to properly balance mechs:

1.) Remove ALL quirks, positive or negative, from every mech in the game, and restore all weapons to baseline performance, period.

There's a problem here, because the baseline has inherent deficiencies all by itself. Before even touching the 'Mechs themselves, they need to address those.

[Jackal Noble]

Papaspud, on 05 May 2017 - 07:45 AM, said:

The problem with the mass nerfs on IS mechs is going to be, when they nerf IS mechs, nobody is going to want to play them. They were barely competitive, now they will be bullet sponges- should be fun for the clans to be able to rack up big damage amounts during Tuk3- until IS just gives up..

Bull. I love my IS mechs and I wreck face with them. So tired of this perpetuated myth.