88 replies to this topic

[Gyrok]

Scout Derek, on 20 June 2017 - 04:37 PM, said:

It's not slanted Gyrok, It's incomplete. It's not accurate raw data. One match with a vindicator and at that a loss is not Raw at all.


I'm tired of people finding fault with you. Even on outreach. I tried man, I really did try to see it your way. but I can't man, I can't see a VND, or an ENF, or a TBT being better than a Night Gyr or Marauder IIC.

The sample size is small...but that is all the data we have. Not sure what else you want?

I only stated what is performing above those mechs overall. A lot of it are low sample size outliers, true...but the stats they do have are still above the averages of the others.

The true take away is that the GHR, BLR and WHM are doing quite well, and the WHM will likely continue to do quite well. The TW is in a bad spot overall, and the NTG and MAD-IIC are not the god tier mechs people thought they were. Those mechs still have deficiencies and weaknesses, and loss of mobility will only outright kill them off, rather than see variety.

Is that what we want? Kill off some more variety because potatoes complain about 1 good build? Look at what PGI is doing for a moment...the KDK is dead, the TW is dead, the NTG and MAD-IIC just got killed, and the BLR and GHR were nerfed.

I mean, really, do you think I made the post about giving mechs nerf guns totally in jest? There was some definite tongue in cheek facetiousness in that. If they keep killing off the fun mechs, what will we have left? FFS, they could stand to BUFF something once in a while...you know? At this rate, their version of a buff is a backhanded nerf with token changes to try to lessen the extent of that nerf (see laser balance pass for details).

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Gyrok, on 20 June 2017 - 04:48 PM, said:

The true take away is that the GHR, BLR and WHM are doing quite well, and the WHM will likely continue to do quite well.

Cryrok, what are you smoking. The fact the WHM was ONLY taken in 5 drops is a sure sign it isn't doing well.

[Deathlike]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 20 June 2017 - 05:02 PM, said:

Cryrok, what are you smoking. The fact the WHM was ONLY taken in 5 drops is a sure sign it isn't doing well.

If you go XL, it gets sidecored easily enough. If you go STD, you are literally not competing with the agility/speed of a Clan mech (up until the skill tree anyways). There's a firepower problem to boot (to a degree).

Then again, it would be the 4th heavy if it even was considered from the alternatives.

"You could do better" is the proper response (and rightfully so for MRBC DivA).

[Ultimax]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 20 June 2017 - 02:13 PM, said:

I'll admit I definitely underestimated the impact of Dual Gauss DPS with the Night Gyr and how the Nova would suddenly become a dominant medium in many matches and how both would basically kill the Timby. Not that I ever thought the Timby was a god mech because it does have some things against it (mostly mount locations and the fact the arms don't really take enough damage) but I didn't expect it to fall as hard as it ended up doing.

It's frustrating for me.

I argued against the original Victor quirks, I called out what I saw as design flaws - it didn't mean I didn't recognize it as the top tier mech it meant that those flaws will become pronounced and dramatic should any meta game shifts or nerfs happen. Look how long the Victor was an absolute joke?

I argued against TBR nerfs, even when it was the best.

I argued against removing the BK quirk reductions (the only thing that really let that mech shine to utilize its few nice design features) in the first place.

I argued against the Summoner CERPPC quirk reductions, I argued against the KDK agility nerfs (and more broadly engine desynch).

I'm kind of exhausted at this point arguing against nerfs people suggest, happen and then watch mechs slide out of favor or worse slide into the trash heap.


This game has enough garbage mechs that will always be garbage, and I really just hate seeing something that has actually good basic design features get artificially restricted so it can play in the kiddie pool with the trash tier mechs that PGI refuses to fix in the ways that make sense in this game.


Sorry, just a random tangent from me - this game's balance team has me tapped and I'm officially on hiatus at this point because I'm just tired of so many things being made unfun or unwieldy, the TBR sparked a nerve because that mech (and the SCR) were such a joy to pilot at release with most of their "overpowered-ness" coming from the tech imbalances in the game and the poor design flaws of the other Omni's.

And here we are.

MischiefSC, on 20 June 2017 - 02:36 PM, said:

Trying to debuff the Gyr (or KDK3) to make up for high mounts is doomed to fail - it will do nothing right up until it's too much.

And this is exactly why I always argue against nerfs.

You just can not nerf good mechs to a point where they are "even" with other stuff - usually they are still on top until the point the nerfs go too far and the mech gets dropped like a bag full of turds. I really hate seeing that happen.

MischiefSC, on 20 June 2017 - 02:36 PM, said:

A lot of ways to go about it but making mechs with high mounts unplayable isn't a good solution.

Couldn't agree more.

[Deathlike]

Yeonne Greene, on 20 June 2017 - 02:38 PM, said:

See, I've never been impressed with the TBR as a chassis, either. It has always leaned extremely heavily on Clan tech to be good. Its hit-boxes are similar to the Dragon, and actually worse. Its weapons are also mostly at the same height as the Dragon, and even the Cataphract. Without the tremendous firepower afforded it by the reduced weight Clan Tech and the survivability of the cXL, it would be a trash-bin 'Mech because it is just that easy to pick apart. It is awful at trading with lasers because it has to expose a whole side torso before it can bring even half of its guns to bear, where a Black Knight or Grasshopper essentially exposes everything at once in a nice, slim package. Now that Clan Tech is approaching much closer parity, and now that superior chassis have released, we see the TBR for what it really is. It's still solid for PUGs because its firepower is still pretty ferocious, especially at mid-range, but it has a low ceiling to correspond with that low floor.

IMHO, PGI could stand to give it some agility back, give it some moderate structure quirks in the torsos, or something. It's extremely squishy. I'd rather take a Linebacker for pretty much everything (I'm expecting some moderate nerfs to the armor/structure on this one). On the other hand, the reduced burn on the cSPL might actually be a blessing in disguise for it in the brawling bracket.

I think it could be said to some degree that the chassis "was the best option" at the time... kinda like the Victor... under the conditions of that specific time.

Viktor Drake, on 20 June 2017 - 03:14 PM, said:

Usage tells us what? That a mech is popular. Who fricken cares. Popular doesn't have anything to do with balance. I like the PHX, I play it often, I put up fairly big numbers with it at least compared to my other mechs, its POPULAR with me. However that doesn't mean its Over Powered. Hell a mech can be popular based on it looking badass, doesn't mean its a good mech.

As for interpreting stats, that is easy. Show me 10,000 matches with one mech and then 10,000 matches with another. It one is out-performing the other, then I find out why and fix it. 1 match, 5 matches, 50 matches don't mean diddly. In fact there is a statistical term for it, it is called "Small Sample Size"

Here is a small little tidbit about Small Sample Size:






This is one of dozens of explanation about how a small sample size adversely effects the accuracy of an statistical survey. This is why the Vindicator in that data looks OP, because it is based on 1 match where it performed very well. However if you look at it over 1000 matches then your likely to find that the average is much, much lower.

Do you like understand if the best of the best (well, not the slums of DivA anyways) take the best options (if they aren't, then are we playing a completely different game?), then it is in their best interests to succeed?

Essentially what you're saying is "I don't believe your truth and replace it with my own". OK then. I'm sure you're quality comp material "somewhere". Players in DivA pick the mechs that are most effective... NOT just because it's popular. There's a lot of popular mechs that don't get taken. There's a few unpopular (usually underrated) mechs that get taken too.

I'm not sure how else to be nice about it, but if you like to stay uninformed, please continue to embarrass yourself.

Edited by Deathlike, 20 June 2017 - 05:20 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

Gyrok, on 20 June 2017 - 04:42 PM, said:

You and I agreed upon this YEARS ago while there were cries that the TW was a "God Tier mech" among scrubs and forum warriors.

The TW had flaws, I noticed them immediately upon launch, and tried to tell people it was jack of all trades, master of none. People sat back and ridiculed me for being honest about my opinion of the mech. It has always been one to be able to adjust to meta builds relatively well, but did so at the expense of not being as great at anything as a specialized mech.

Well, it wasn't quite like that. It was true that the TBR couldn't necessarily min-max its 75 tons as well as other 'Mechs, but even the constrained capabilities it had allowed it to out-perform the best of the rest, including any and all IS Heavies.
Today, it loses to specialists on both sides of the aisle, but not by much if I'm being honest.

Quote

I think the cleanest possible lines are either the gauss + ppcs build, or laser vomit, and that tends to shoe horn it pretty strongly. As a striker it is not bad, but easily focused, and once it loses a ST, the mech is pretty crippled.

I'm not sure I'd call 54-68 damage with between 23 and 26 DHS "shoehorned". That's pretty much as optimal as it gets for Clan Heavy laser-vomit. Unless you meant to say pigeon-holed, but then I'd say that pretty much every 'Mech gets pigeon-holed to at least a similar extent. If they didn't, they would be bracket 'Mechs and, therefore, bad.

I also don't know that I agree with crippled. A 'Mech with a STD engine gets just as crippled when it loses a side because A.) it didn't have the same firepower/speed/cooling to start with and B.) it also lost half its weapons. I sure don't feel extra crippled when I lose a side in my TBR or MAD-IIC, I'm thankful to have had that firepower to start and not be dead. I don't find the heat penalty to be worth anything as far as balance is concerned because I'm not generating enough heat to care.

Quote

My biggest takeaway from all of these numbers, legitimately, is that the TW is not good right now, and it needs that mobility to make it worth taking again. I would also not be against torso armor quirks, but I think mobility might be enough. It needs to be a very agile mech, and it really is not right now.

This, I am fine with. Though I wouldn't say it's "not good," it's just not good enough to be optimal. But, real-talk, even in its diminished state the TBR is quite a ways down the list in terms of buff-priority.

Deathlike, on 20 June 2017 - 05:18 PM, said:

I think it could be said to some degree that the chassis "was the best option" at the time... kinda like the Victor... under the conditions of that specific time.

Something something position at the time...

[Gyrok]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 20 June 2017 - 05:02 PM, said:

Cryrok, what are you smoking. The fact the WHM was ONLY taken in 5 drops is a sure sign it isn't doing well.

Considering how many mechs are not even on that list...the WHM must be worth something.

Besides, when new IS dakka toys come, I have a feeling the 6R and BW will be in pretty good shape again.

[Deathlike]

Gyrok, on 21 June 2017 - 12:02 PM, said:

Considering how many mechs are not even on that list...the WHM must be worth something.

Besides, when new IS dakka toys come, I have a feeling the 6R and BW will be in pretty good shape again.

WHM is not a thing. Really, especially after the structure nerfs it got a while back.

[PhoenixFire55]

Scout Derek, on 20 June 2017 - 04:37 PM, said:

It's not slanted Gyrok, It's incomplete. It's not accurate raw data. One match with a vindicator and at that a loss is not Raw at all.

I'm tired of people finding fault with you. Even on outreach. I tried man, I really did try to see it your way. but I can't man, I can't see a VND, or an ENF, or a TBT being better than a Night Gyr or Marauder IIC.

You do realize that Gyrok wasn't the one who compiled that data, right?
And you do realize that the person who did presented it in that specific way with a metric sh!tton of sarcasm attached to it, right?

Coz if you don't, the only one at fault here is you ...