95 replies to this topic

[Alan Davion]

Ced Riggs, on 20 June 2017 - 01:53 AM, said:

I am certain, the top teams would gladly provide feedback that keeps their playstyle dominant and screws over everyone else.

FTFY

Ced Riggs, on 20 June 2017 - 02:41 AM, said:

Game needs to be balanced from the top. But, the tears about those consequences would be considerable.

See above.

PhoenixFire55, on 20 June 2017 - 02:34 AM, said:

Clueless bads did. And since clueless bads are PGI's target audience you come to a clear understanding why certain things are as they are.

PGI is just as clueless, so that doesn't exactly help things.

PhoenixFire55, on 20 June 2017 - 02:50 AM, said:

No, a game needs to be balanced, period. I.e. when "the top" uses all mechs and builds equally, and "the bottom" does the same.

That given you even want your game to be balanced. BT was always balanced by having an assymetric balance between IS and clans (i.e. 12 spheroids vs 5 clanners etc.). And mechs weren't born equal and weren't ever supposed to be equal, some were cheap but bad, others were good but expensive.

^That is how I think game should be balanced.
But then again, who cares about making "A BattleTech Game" when you have "A BattleTech Game" in your logo. Ain't nobody got time for dat.

I think you meant 12v10 there. 12v5 would have been an absolute slaughter. Also, don't forget that BT was balanced because of completely random hit locations determined by dice rolling.

Because I'm pretty sure even 30-someodd years ago the people who made BT knew that being able to dump all your weapon damage into one spot would have made for a HORRIBLY balanced game.

You had to get super lucky to score through armor crits to be able to take mechs out in one or two shots, whereas you can do that here in MWO left right and sideways with very little luck.

[Mystere]

Gwahlur, on 20 June 2017 - 07:58 AM, said:

If you say so, but yeah, it's pretty hard to catch some peripheral point about mechs he didnt even mention in his post.
In fact, you may even know his point better than he does himself.

Actually, DGTLDaemon did mention and complain about the state of the Timber Wolf.

[Gwahlur]

Mystere, on 20 June 2017 - 08:05 AM, said:

Actually, DGTLDaemon did mention and complain about the state of the Timber Wolf.

Ah yeah, he did, it just wasnt in his "unplayable mechs" list.

But my point is, the mechs on his list are the mechs that are widely accepted as OP. Now, they've got baseline stats in line with everything else.

Is it best for the game that they continue to be OP so he can run around and wreck face with them, or is it best to have them in line with everything else?

Edited by Gwahlur, 20 June 2017 - 08:12 AM.

[DGTLDaemon]

Mystere, on 20 June 2017 - 07:55 AM, said:

A game in which a Timber Wolf is as agile as a slug is not "A BattleTech Game".

That's not the point. The point is that PGI are essentially removing mechs from the game by giving them unplayable mobility values, and are not providing any replacements. Since you mentioned the Timber Wolf, let's look at the Clan 75-tonners. There are two of those: Timber Wolf and Night Gyr. In about an hour from now, the Night Gyr will become irrelevant. As far as the Timer Wolf goes, the only variant that remains more or less playable after the engine desync is TBR-A with a full set of omnipods. And the only build you can run on that mech is laser vomit. I used to run six different builds at 75 tons - three Night Gyrs and three Timber Wolves. Now I run one. ONE. And I sometimes force myself to play the other two Timber Wolves, hoping that I can get used to their sluggishness eventually, but it isn't looking very promising at this point. Do I need to explain further why it makes me unhappy? If PGI threw the Timber Wolf and the Night Gyr in the dumpster AND provided a viable replacement for them, that would be acceptable (the ever-changing meta and so on). But they didn't. They're simply deleting mechs from the game.

Edited by DGTLDaemon, 20 June 2017 - 08:16 AM.

[Gwahlur]

Looks like you didn't hit the point either Mystere

[Mawai]

Although this might not apply to the OP ... I know it has applied to me.

Over time at various points in the last four years I have gotten very dissatisfied with MWO. The devs make a change and in some cases I haven't liked it simply because it was different. They make a change and the meta shifts a bit. Maybe I die a bit more because my playstyle, the mech I am using or the average playstyle of everyone else doesn't mesh as well as it used to.

However, in most of these cases the problem was not really the change to MWO, it was my perception and enjoyment of the game in response to the change. I had usually hit a low point with MWO, I was bored with the same repetitive and ultimately pointless game play so any change simply became the last straw ... not because the game was worse but because I was simply tired or fed up with the game itself. It was time for a break.

I love the Battletech IP and the feel of Mechwarrior games. MWO STILL has the same feel for the most part that it had in closed beta. It is a fun game. Looking objectively over the past four years I can only really say that the game has gotten better and that includes the most recent skill tree, engine decoupling and other efforts. However, I find that if folks are reaching a point of general dissatisfaction with MWO then any changes that the devs make, whether they ultimately improve the game or not, often become a flashpoint for dissension and salt. This is particularly true of nerfs ... if a nerf affects my playstyle or a favorite mech directly it can be hard to objectively realize that EVERYONE is in the same boat and that the overall game balance is likely better and as a result MORE people are probably having MORE fun in MORE mechs even if my personal favorite took a hit ... it still feels almost like a personal affront rather than a dispassionate balance change.

My suggestion in these cases is usually to take a break and come back in a couple of months and see how it looks after being away for a while. In my experience, most of the time the game looks and feels a lot better after the break.

[Coolant]

farout, on 20 June 2017 - 01:34 AM, said:

I really think that the devs are completely disconnected with the people who actually play this game. Everything they introduced or changed in the recent past made the game less fun to play.

Funny how I completely disagree with you. Everything they have released in present memory has made the game more enjoyable.

Quote

Engine decoupling invalidated a lot of mechs.

It has made a lot of mechs even more viable.

Quote

The Skill Tree forces you to spend SP on useless stuff

You do realize that even passive skills are beneficial? Just because it doesn't affect your weapons or add armor doesn't mean it's useless. You say you are a silent reader of the forums, then you know the whole reason of the skill tree was to add options and not have the same cookie cutter skill tree that everyone had. I'm betting you have Skill Points spent on nodes that others dont and vice versa. I bet you have different nodes than I do. That was not the case with the old skill tree.

Quote

It seams like the devs want a game where you can stand out in the open and shrug of chain fired medium lasers for 10 minutes and not die.

I wish I got hit with just chained medium lasers. If I stand out in the open for more than 5 seconds I'm cored.

Quote

Instead of studying some stats they should play their own game more often.

You are looking at ground level while stats show the aerial view. It's like being in a forest and you can't see a way out because the trees are much higher than you, but you climb a tree and get above the trees and you can see beyond the trees.

Quote

The new game modes are lame too.

Well, just Conquest, but I've expressed my distaste of Conquest for a long time now and won't rehash. But, at least we can vote which was a nice change.

Edited by Coolant, 20 June 2017 - 08:17 AM.

[Bigbacon]

or.... do what people wanted forever and create a real heat scale so you can't just alpha away for ages without fear of crippling yourself in the process.

heat is why laser vomit got out of hand. because of laser vomit other weapons got pushed to the wayside..

TTK is still short at time. One mistake can still get your cored in an instant....but that all goes back to laser vomit which can be traced back to heat not really being a thing.


the problem with ALL the games modes are they almost always play as skirmish mode. everyone goes to same places and fights it out. Domination takes skirmish to a forced level.

Incursion....I've never seen the base taken except when there is a 12 vs 1 going on and people don't want to hunt or chase the last mech. Same goes for assault.

So there is really only ONE game mode....skirmish.

Edited by Bigbacon, 20 June 2017 - 08:19 AM.

[Mawai]

DGTLDaemon, on 20 June 2017 - 07:02 AM, said:

THAT. I can live with the skill tree - I don't particularly like it, but I can work with it, it's not rocket science. What's much worse is that PGI are essentially removing mechs from the game by giving them mobility values that make them unplayable. Between the previous patch and the upcoming one, I've already lost a good chunk of my stable to engine desync, namely:
2 Kodiaks
1 Dire Wolf
2 Marauder IICs
3 Night Gyrs
That's a total of 8 mechs that I'll never touch again. And I can barely force myself to play my Timber Wolves now, because they are balancing right on the edge of being unplayable. Plus the upcoming cSPL nerf will invalidate at least two more of my mechs - the 6xSPL Jenner IIC and the 10xSPL Nova. So while some people may be angry about the changes, I'm simply sad. I'm playing fewer and fewer mechs and builds with each passing month. It just doesn't make sense, you're supposed to expand your stable over time, but mine is growing smaller instead. And I can see no light at the end of the tunnel. I expect nothing positive from the game anymore. With each patch, the only thing I can think about is how hard the nerf bat will hit my mechs, and what can I do to salvage at least some of them...

Weird. I've played my MAD IICs a bit since the skill tree drop and they seemed just fine especially compared to everyone else. However, I usually put a few points into the mobility tree so maybe that is the difference.

I haven't played my Dire Wolves but to be honest I didn't really like them much anyway

However, I think they might be tweaking the MADIIC base mobility in the next patch so I'll see what it is like post-patch.

Bottom line for me is that I have not found the engine decoupling to "invalidate" ANY of my mechs. The decoupling applies to everyone and my mechs seem to perform proportionally as well as anyone else's ... so it honestly hasn't been a big deal so far to me with ANY mech I have tried (but I've only tried about a dozen and then only at most a few matches in each).

[JediPanther]

I pretty much agree with op. The tree gives the illusion of pick your own quirks. When the base stats of a mech are so bad you will look for a better mech and funner. Even mechs that don't have crap tastic base stats can still be poor mechs compared to others in its own weight class simply from combinations of low hard points,poor hard point placement, hard set engine cap or some other thing like clans' fixed jj.

Take any panther light mech. The best engine I can shove into them is a 250. While it still is "fast" by is standards of light mechs it is just barely faster than any clan mech light caped at 97kph. Having learned lights on the Jenners with their 300 engine cap then moving on to the locust for speed the panther pales on the fun factor simply because it is not as responsive or as fast as that jenner or locust.

As one who likes to engage and disengage the enemy as much as possible to try and do "scouting" or pretend to do any semblance of "role warfare" the panthers are a very poor and hard choice when I can go for a faster mech. Can the panthers be fun and do decent damage? sure, just not with how I tend to play.

[MischiefSC]

PhoenixFire55, on 20 June 2017 - 02:50 AM, said:

No, a game needs to be balanced, period. I.e. when "the top" uses all mechs and builds equally, and "the bottom" does the same.

That given you even want your game to be balanced. BT was always balanced by having an assymetric balance between IS and clans (i.e. 12 spheroids vs 5 clanners etc.). And mechs weren't born equal and weren't ever supposed to be equal, some were cheap but bad, others were good but expensive.

^That is how I think game should be balanced.
But then again, who cares about making "A BattleTech Game" when you have "A BattleTech Game" in your logo. Ain't nobody got time for dat.

That's absolutely not correct.

Developers apologized for the **** environment the asymetric Clan/IS balancing was and it was resolved by mixed tech and by Dark Ages it's pretty much 1 to 1. That's where the balance went.

Mechs were balanced by cost - which can't happen in this game. Also people had only 1 mech - ever. Usually inherited. So, what, everyone gets 1 mech?

Or at a meta game level it was balanced by everyone controlling a set value of mechs, since it was a tabletop strategy game.

This is a FPS. It can't be balanced the same way and the game concept you're talking about in a FPS would be a raging failure as everyone would just move to the best mechs, nothing else would be used and would just be a waste of development time.

There would be no better way to destroy a FPS game like this than to try and balance it like you would a tabletop turn based strategy game.

[scadateck]

DGTLDaemon, on 20 June 2017 - 08:11 AM, said:

...Since you mentioned the Timber Wolf, let's look at the Clan 75-tonners. There are two of those: Timber Wolf and Night Gyr...

Hey don't forget the Orion-IIC!

Edited by scadateck, 20 June 2017 - 08:35 AM.

[PhoenixFire55]

Reno Blade, on 20 June 2017 - 07:46 AM, said:

Some good points.
I pug a lot or play with friends that are very noobish, so we land in group queue.

Ah, well, if that was a group queue then you simply experienced what a solid group focusing fire is. That'll happen to any mech being focused down regardless of balance simply because the sheer amount of damage 6+ mechs can put out within 4-5 seconds is enough to annihilate you entirely, obviously much more so if it goes into the same component, which it usually does.

Reno Blade, on 20 June 2017 - 07:46 AM, said:

In this kinda scenario, there is much less deathballing and that means group scatters a lot. So while half the team on HPG is moving to one side of the ramps, the other half is on the other ramps (enemies were on the middle platform).

Also consider that peeking while your opponent stands and waits puts you in a great disadvantage in terms of who fires first and whos aim is usually better. Especially so when the amount of spots you can peek from is limited, like it is limited by those ramps for non-JJ capable mechs on HPG. High mounted hardpoints do help, but they aren't sufficient to negate such disadvantage entirely.

Reno Blade, on 20 June 2017 - 07:46 AM, said:

And yes, it was my fault being too close to the middle bridge when they were on the platform. It just sucks when you die before you can even notice your mistake.

Maybe. However try looking at it from a different perspective. The more it sucks the more you are willing to avoid it, i.e. the more you are willing to learn. It is debatable whether a forgiving environment is better or not tbh ...

Reno Blade, on 20 June 2017 - 07:46 AM, said:

TTK is very low, even with less than 1vs2.

Very low compared to what exactly? ...
And what is your definition of TTK? ...

I've done many 1v1 duels against players of similar skill level, and I can only say that 1v1 TTK is perfectly fine where it is. Which in turn means that seemingly low TTK in team v team scenario is just a result of teamwork and focused fire. Nothing to do with actual game balance.

Reno Blade, on 20 June 2017 - 07:46 AM, said:

I want battles where you can have fun and survive with 15% health instead of dying "instantly".

But it happens all the time in solo PUG. Of course the actual % depends on both your mech and your skill, but I've been able to finish matches alive with 5-7% left on smth like an IS XL Highlander at times. More often tho you are around 35-40% health. If you have more then you are most likely doing it wrong, because you are either hurting your team by not sharing armor while you still have it, or hurting yourself by not being aggressive enough, thus producing less damage.

As for group queue ... it all comes down to your teamwork. You can rotate damaged front mechs easily enough compared to solo queue, thus sharing the damage evenly among your team. Ideally, you should be all damaged badly, but you should also all be alive.

Reno Blade, on 20 June 2017 - 07:46 AM, said:

Spreading laser damage does not help enough against very good pilots (who can aim well) and definitely not against good SRM and Gauss/PPC boats.

It is much less about spreading damage by twisting when someone shoots you than it is about twisting before someone shoots you. I.e. if you know you can take your shot and then twist away before your opponent takes his shot you do that. And if you know you can't, you don't turn for your shot, you wait when he shoots a useless / non-damaged component you give him and then you turn to take your shot. It is a delicate game, but mastering it you can spread anything, SRM volleys, lasers, Gauss/PPC etc.

Reno Blade, on 20 June 2017 - 07:46 AM, said:

And cSP boats is not the only thing that counters snipers. SRMs, cERSL and ML/MP are good enough for brawling.

True, but take a mech like a Nova with 12+ energy hardpoints. What exactly am I supposed to do with it if I want to brawl? ... SLs duration is too long to reliably pinpoint locations on anything remotely fast, MPLs don't have nearly the same sustained DPS, which is what important for brawling etc. Better yet consider Viper or ArcticCheetah ... there is literally nothing else at all they can do except SPLs ... All it does is either forces you to use your mech in a way you don't want to, or renders it utterly useless to begin with.

[DGTLDaemon]

scadateck, on 20 June 2017 - 08:34 AM, said:

Hey don't forget the Orion-IIC!

Oops Thanks for pointing it out, it somehow stuck to my mind that Orion IIC was a 70-tonner. My mistake, I guess I got it confused with the Summoner. Anyway, it's one of those few Clan mechs that I could never make work. I know it's a good chassis, but I just can't find any build for it that would fit my playstyle...

[PhoenixFire55]

Alan Davion, on 20 June 2017 - 08:01 AM, said:

I think you meant 12v10 there. 12v5 would have been an absolute slaughter. Also, don't forget that BT was balanced because of completely random hit locations determined by dice rolling.

Not really, no. Given for example that in TT smth like an IceFerret takes out smth like an Atlas fairly easy, albeit not very fast you can kinda grasp at the actual balance between stock IS and stock clan there. I recall many occasions when my BloodAsp took out a lance of IS assaults without as much as breaking a sweat ...

Alan Davion, on 20 June 2017 - 08:01 AM, said:

You had to get super lucky to score through armor crits to be able to take mechs out in one or two shots, whereas you can do that here in MWO left right and sideways with very little luck.

Yeah, but you can kill any and all mechs in TT with one shot from one Gauss rifle or one clan ERPPC. All it takes is to roll a 12 for a headshot ... Similarly I can recall games when my fully fresh ~2800BV BloodAsp was instagibbed by a 450BV UrbanMech slinging a single AC20 at me. It doesn't really matter that I've put enough damage into it to kill it three times over on the same turn ...

That is what makes TT so fun, its unpredictable, and since BV does balance it fairly well, it doesn't matter what you bring, everything works. Of course we could have had something similar in MWO, but nope, adding balancing multipliers for all mechs that MM could easily account for is too much of a hassle. I mean who needs that when you can always buy another MechPak^TM, right?

[CFC Conky]

Hello all,

I suspect that even after this patch, a good MADII-C driver will still be dangerous. Same goes for any other mech that has had it's performance reduced.

Many here said the new skill tree meant the end of the world is nigh, but that has obviously not happened, so the latest changes to mechs will likely not have a long-term negative effect on the game, imho.

Good hunting,
CFC Conky

[Summon3r]

been less and less fun ever since the complete flop of CW

[Alan Davion]

MischiefSC, on 20 June 2017 - 08:27 AM, said:

everyone would just move to the best mechs, nothing else would be used and would just be a waste of development time.

Umm... I think that's pretty much what's happening right now. And has been happening since day 1. People find the best builds for the best mechs, and probably 90% of the mechs in game end up ignored.

And then when those best builds on those best mechs get messed up by PGI changing something here or there, everyone moves onto the next best build on the next best mech.

Case in point, the Night Gyr. People complain that the mobility is shite, and it's going to get worse. Oh hey~! Look at Civil War: Escalation~!

The Nova Cat is coming.

You can bet dollars to donuts that Night Gyr fans are going to FLOCK to that mech in DROVES because it's lighter and will have a better movement profile, and it does laser vomit pretty much second to none.

[PhoenixFire55]

MischiefSC, on 20 June 2017 - 08:27 AM, said:

That's absolutely not correct.

Developers apologized for the **** environment the asymetric Clan/IS balancing was and it was resolved by mixed tech and by Dark Ages it's pretty much 1 to 1. That's where the balance went.

LOL ... yeah, and nobody actually plays any of the mixed tech and sh!t ages content. Dark ages aren't even considered canon. Pretty much nothing past 3063 is.

MischiefSC, on 20 June 2017 - 08:27 AM, said:

Mechs were balanced by cost - which can't happen in this game. Also people had only 1 mech - ever. Usually inherited. So, what, everyone gets 1 mech?

It can and it should. That is also an essential part of BT. But we aren't making BT game, are we? ... Even if you don't balance by actual c-bill costs, you can always balance by different multipliers for each mech that MM takes into account. It doesn't even require much of an effort ... but we aren't exceeding the Minimally Viable^TM part now, are we?

MischiefSC, on 20 June 2017 - 08:27 AM, said:

This is a FPS. It can't be balanced the same way and the game concept you're talking about in a FPS would be a raging failure as everyone would just move to the best mechs, nothing else would be used and would just be a waste of development time.

It is indeed an FPS, and a bad one at that. The thing is, this wasn't supposed to be an FPS, this was supposed to be a mech simulator within an existing established franchise. Or at least it was Their Position at the Time^TM.

Edited by PhoenixFire55, 20 June 2017 - 08:55 AM.

[Alan Davion]

PhoenixFire55, on 20 June 2017 - 08:55 AM, said:

LOL ... yeah, and nobody actually plays any of the mixed tech and sh!t ages content. Dark ages aren't even considered canon. Pretty much nothing past 3063 is.

You haven't kept up with CGL's development lately, have you. We're in the 3150s or something right now, and the next "era" set to happen is the era of the iLClan.

That's right, one Clan is finally going to take Terra and re-establish the Star League under their own twisted view of how it should be.