Is The Mad-Iic Really Op Since St?
#21
Posted 05 June 2017 - 12:54 PM
#22
Posted 05 June 2017 - 12:56 PM
Ade the Rare, on 05 June 2017 - 10:57 AM, said:
However, and please bear in mind I don't play Clan mechs at all, I've not noticed anything particularly OP about it. Seems like a competent assault mech, sure, but nothing overly amazing (or indeed game-breaking) about it post-ST.
Am I alone in thinking the fuss about the ST buffing this mech turned out to be nothing?
I was one of those people saying that numerous times.
I tested it. It really is as good as I expected (except that it's a little low on agility). The thing is just that I found something WAY better with the Skill Tree.
#23
Posted 05 June 2017 - 12:57 PM
#24
Posted 05 June 2017 - 01:06 PM
It's probably stronger overall than it was pre-ST, but I think what really brought it up more than anything is that the KDK and TBR were hit much harder by the engine decoupling- both the MAD-IIC and the Night Gyr are the tall poppies now, so to speak.
MAD-IIC is IMO OP not in the gamebreaking sense, but in the sense that it's just got too much going on. Compare the MAD-IIC to the Supernova, for instance.
Edited by Aggravated Assault Mech, 05 June 2017 - 01:09 PM.
#25
Posted 05 June 2017 - 01:26 PM
I would personally like to see what the energy weapon rebalancing does to the meta first, preferable the engine rebalancing too.
#26
Posted 05 June 2017 - 01:36 PM
#27
Posted 05 June 2017 - 01:37 PM
Coolant, on 05 June 2017 - 01:36 PM, said:
It isn't broken hitboxes, it is people not understanding that hitting hitboxes of destroyed components means the damage you are dealing is reduced by 60%.
#28
Posted 05 June 2017 - 01:59 PM
#29
Posted 05 June 2017 - 02:05 PM
Viktor Drake, on 05 June 2017 - 12:20 PM, said:
I mean you really don't hear about the Marauder IIC being Overpowered, those terms aren't used all that often. What you hear is that it is a strong mech or a good mech or power house or something like that, but rarely straight up OP.
If you're not hearing it, then you're not playing IS in faction warfare enough.
Quote
Yes, yes it is. Overperforming refers to what's happening RIGHT NOW. What might or might happen, maybe, some indeterminate time in the future, is completely irrelevant. I really don't understand this line of reasoning. It's ok for things to be unbalanced on the clan side, because maybe it might not in a few months? Hello? How does that make it ok for IS to be knowingly screwed over in the meantime?
#30
Posted 05 June 2017 - 04:59 PM
Aggravated Assault Mech, on 05 June 2017 - 01:06 PM, said:
It's probably stronger overall than it was pre-ST, but I think what really brought it up more than anything is that the KDK and TBR were hit much harder by the engine decoupling- both the MAD-IIC and the Night Gyr are the tall poppies now, so to speak.
MAD-IIC is IMO OP not in the gamebreaking sense, but in the sense that it's just got too much going on. Compare the MAD-IIC to the Supernova, for instance.
If it isn't OP in a gamebreaking sense why should being good be justification for a nerf. I mean that is seriously stupid. It isn't even like there are 6 of them each and every match. The most I usually see per side is 1 or 2, so it isn't at all like the KDK-3 where you would have 4, 5 or even 6 per side. There is zero reason to nerf the Marauder IIC currently as it is in game. It is a good mech and that is it.
#31
Posted 05 June 2017 - 05:20 PM
#34
Posted 05 June 2017 - 05:33 PM
Viktor Drake, on 05 June 2017 - 04:59 PM, said:
If it isn't OP in a gamebreaking sense why should being good be justification for a nerf. I mean that is seriously stupid. It isn't even like there are 6 of them each and every match. The most I usually see per side is 1 or 2, so it isn't at all like the KDK-3 where you would have 4, 5 or even 6 per side. There is zero reason to nerf the Marauder IIC currently as it is in game. It is a good mech and that is it.
Because it disrupts balance, not just in an IS vs. Clan sense, but in comparison to other Clan mechs. There doesn't have to be an overwhelming number of them for this to be true.
MAD-IIC (and Battlemaster, frankly) both are just too easy in terms of the economy of what makes a mech good to begin with. They pay too little in disadvantages compared to all the boons you receive by playing them. Why play a Stalker when the Battlemaster is just straight up better? Why play a Supernova? The MAD-IIC has essentially the same firepower as the SNV-1, better top speed, better hardpoint locations with better convergence and better hitboxes.. at the expense of a tiny amount of agility,and then, only compared to the SNV-1, which is the most agile. Scorch is just a straight upgrade over the boiler if you're building for splat, with the only advantage of the Boiler being the torso energy weapons in a gauss + PPC build.
Likewise, the Battlemaster is just a straight upgrade from the STK-4N, being significantly more agile, better hardpoint locations. Even the advantage of better hitboxes are questionable given the durability quirks of the -2C... better overall hardpoints and agility to twist damage etc.
The fact that it's not overwhelmingly powerful like the KDK-3 was on release doesn't mean it's any less problematic from a game design perspective. These mechs dumb the game down into overly predictable cookie-cutter picks that are really rather excellent no matter what map or game mode you're playing. Compare that to something like the ERLL Grasshopper or current Kodiak which are undoubtedly powerful, but only in a specific role that confers proportionately significant disadvantages... that's better design.
#35
Posted 05 June 2017 - 05:36 PM
El Bandito, on 05 June 2017 - 05:29 PM, said:
You should be pushing with the laser vomit build (or receiving brawlers) so you don't really need mobility there and the poke builds that you run generally don't get enough accel/decel to really bother with since they already side poke well (2 Gauss/2 ERPPC builds for example feel fine due to the engine desync which helped out the fact you have to run a STD).
Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 05 June 2017 - 05:36 PM.
#37
Posted 05 June 2017 - 06:40 PM
#38
Posted 05 June 2017 - 06:53 PM
Probably going to get cruicified for saying this but its one of those mechs that if i could cross tech tree with it I would in a heartbeat. coming IS UAC20 on ... *changes pants*
At any rate the Mad-IIC can certainly lay down the hurt and potentially delete people with some of the laser vomit from the main chassis. Splat Scorch is fun and useable as are some other oddball configurations like 2ERL + 2Gauss (don't ask).
I feel like instead of nerfing the Mad-IIC the other assaults should be buffed... if the IIC gets nerfed, i hope its very light or tame. The new hotness which is the Mk2 will be nice to see but still gonna prefer the Marauder chassis over the big cat. My evidence for the Mad-IIC not being nerfed should actually come FROM the ST update. The mech isn't harder to take down or kill, even with the structure upgrades that I can tell, also most people go for firepower and structure so mobility is still hampered a bit. I know I did. Even still its a solid contender. Then again... I also have fun with Orion-IIC's... so something might be wrong with ME not the mechs... take that how you will.
#39
Posted 05 June 2017 - 07:56 PM
Khalcruth, on 05 June 2017 - 02:05 PM, said:
If you're not hearing it, then you're not playing IS in faction warfare enough.
Yes, yes it is. Overperforming refers to what's happening RIGHT NOW. What might or might happen, maybe, some indeterminate time in the future, is completely irrelevant. I really don't understand this line of reasoning. It's ok for things to be unbalanced on the clan side, because maybe it might not in a few months? Hello? How does that make it ok for IS to be knowingly screwed over in the meantime?
BECAUSE THINGS AREN'T OP ON THE CLANS SIDE. I play both Clans and IS equally and the Clans aren't OP. I am so fricken tried of hearing it too. Even PGI said 6% difference in their numbers and we already know the higher skilled players typically play Clan side because PGI released that info as well so that accounts for that 6% difference if not more.
I am so tired of IS purist always claiming Clans are OP. They were once, but not any more and haven't been for a long time so quit using the past as justification for the here and now.
I mean maybe I am just so much more skilled with my IS mechs than I am with my Clan mechs right? Is that the reason, I don't feel dominated by Clan mechs when I am playing my 54 fricken IS mechs against them? Maybe I just suck so badly at play Clan mechs that my poor skills bring their Omnipotent presence down to mear moral levels of performance. Seriously enough with the OP Clans BS.
As far as the future tech, we are talking a very short window between now and it being launched and there are other balance changes like the Energy Re-balance going into the game even sooner. It is just plain stupid to be making additional balance changes now with all that going on. We aren't talking 6 months we are talking 6 weeks and PGI is balancing around a meta that won't even exist after those 6 weeks. Once everything is in, then balance.
Finally and frankly, I am just tired of all the nerfing. PGI so ever rarely buffs anything but nerfing, well that is second nature to them and when they nerf something, they leave it nerfed even if nerfing it actually broke it. So instead of crying "Nerf" why don't you post "BUFF the IS" if you really think there is a problem, at least then maybe we can have a few more good things in the game rather than a bunch of garbage.
#40
Posted 05 June 2017 - 08:14 PM
Viktor Drake, on 05 June 2017 - 07:56 PM, said:
BECAUSE THINGS AREN'T OP ON THE CLANS SIDE. I play both Clans and IS equally and the Clans aren't OP. I am so fricken tried of hearing it too. Even PGI said 6% difference in their numbers and we already know the higher skilled players typically play Clan side because PGI released that info as well so that accounts for that 6% difference if not more.
I am so tired of IS purist always claiming Clans are OP. They were once, but not any more and haven't been for a long time so quit using the past as justification for the here and now.
I mean maybe I am just so much more skilled with my IS mechs than I am with my Clan mechs right? Is that the reason, I don't feel dominated by Clan mechs when I am playing my 54 fricken IS mechs against them? Maybe I just suck so badly at play Clan mechs that my poor skills bring their Omnipotent presence down to mear moral levels of performance. Seriously enough with the OP Clans BS.
As far as the future tech, we are talking a very short window between now and it being launched and there are other balance changes like the Energy Re-balance going into the game even sooner. It is just plain stupid to be making additional balance changes now with all that going on. We aren't talking 6 months we are talking 6 weeks and PGI is balancing around a meta that won't even exist after those 6 weeks. Once everything is in, then balance.
Finally and frankly, I am just tired of all the nerfing. PGI so ever rarely buffs anything but nerfing, well that is second nature to them and when they nerf something, they leave it nerfed even if nerfing it actually broke it. So instead of crying "Nerf" why don't you post "BUFF the IS" if you really think there is a problem, at least then maybe we can have a few more good things in the game rather than a bunch of garbage.
And yet the same statistics that you think show better players playing Clan also show the MAD-IIC overperforming. Woops
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users