98 replies to this topic

[HAAUK]

Carl Vickers, on 07 September 2017 - 03:52 PM, said:

Now thats funny seeing as a comment like the below one came from one of your unit members on this very page.

Carl Vickers, on 07 September 2017 - 03:52 PM, said:

Now thats funny seeing as a comment like the below one came from one of your unit members on this very page.

you see, while i share the sentiments and opinion with my clan mate... I don't really care about making the game better...since pgi has proven time and time again that they don't care about lore, lore-realism and clan players. So many decisions were made in the wrong direction time and time again.

For me, it is simple... when the game passes my tolerance limit (which is very very close now by the way)... they will stop receiving any purchases and payment from me until it is back within my tolerance.

I don't really need the game to continue my life... but i am sure pgi would want my payments as much as possible

[A Shoddy Rental Mech]

HAAUK, on 07 September 2017 - 07:42 AM, said:

you should ask when are they going to up Clan Tonnage back up to 260?
Hmmm, maybe when most of the clan players had enough of dealing with whiney innersphere players and "MMO balancing" ********. Maybe a new single player mech game....

Most of the clan players are too busy stomping their way across the i.S. map to care about the "whiney innersphere players"

[Shenanigan23]

Not one for constant nerfing, I don't like the idea of further dropping clan dropdeck sizes. They need to be able to bring a decent array of their mechs.

Without better weapon, engine, heat sink balance though, I cant see bringing tonnage more aligned a good thing currently however.

Its easy to note problems. It doesn't look like real momentum of PGI or player suggested changes clearly shows a good way to improve the situation.

Look at the current map. How many planets have been taken on either side?...

Since its not even close by such a long way, can it only be assumed this is by design and how PGI wants it? The quirk mechanism should allow slow and steady balance to be implemented to have a reasonably even situation, however this clearly is not the case. Thoughts here?

[Fake News]

no amount of tonnage restriction can compensate for is pugs

[Kill Chain]

I think when the clans inevitably trigger the victory conditions, they need to reset everyone to unaffiliated so that mercenary contract bonuses can be reflected correctly instead of some factions counting players who haven't logged in in over 6 months. Loyalists can just re-tag wherever and then mercs can choose contracts based on an accurate population.

[Rick T Dangerous]

fenomeno, on 09 September 2017 - 04:56 AM, said:

[..]but what action can PGI take to educate/persuade these players to play better? Some sort of 'faction play guide' being more visible in the client would help as a start, perhaps.

They could use one of the siege maps and do a fly-over animation, showing how the gates open when the gate controls are destroyed, showing how to shoot inside of the generator boxes, showing how omega opens and then can be destroyed. Doesn't even need a voice-over, so no voice actors to be payed here. But that animation should be mandatory to watch before going into FW. It wouldn't improve how people play, but it would help reduce the risk of other players hurting themselves with intense facepalming.

[DAEDALOS513]

fenomeno, on 09 September 2017 - 04:56 AM, said:

100% this. The attitude of IS pugs really holds a lot of IS teams back. A lot of them don't even try to win, it's pathetic. Giving the IS pugs 300+ tons wouldn't matter - people would still try to fit LRMs and small lasers and RACs on there... and they'd still be too scared to share armor.. and they'd still reinforce losing fights in fresh mechs.... the list goes on and on.

Changing tonnage won't fix mass stupidity/selfishness - but what action can PGI take to educate/persuade these players to play better? Some sort of 'faction play guide' being more visible in the client would help as a start, perhaps.

My initial suggestion for adjusting ton. lim. wasn't meant to solve the problem of unbalanced matches based on skill differential but rather based on currently available weaponry and mech chassis'. The only thing I can think of that will truly solve this problem of matching higher skilled teams of pugs/units against lower skilled is by making the tier system work. Unfortunately it won't work until the player population increases. I expect things will improve somewhat after the summer season is over when everyone is back in their usual routine (including myself).

[Grus]

I just would like to bring a 100tonner another assalt a heavy and a decent med to a match like IS can... he'll they have the ability to drop 2 100's and still have tonnage left over for two of the best light mech's in the game.

[Frank Exchange Of Views]

Grus, on 12 September 2017 - 04:53 PM, said:

I just would like to bring a 100tonner another assalt a heavy and a decent med to a match like IS can... he'll they have the ability to drop 2 100's and still have tonnage left over for two of the best light mech's in the game.

Well, that's actually very easy to do: switch to IS.

[Grus]

Frank Exchange Of Views, on 13 September 2017 - 08:32 AM, said:

Well, that's actually very easy to do: switch to IS.

true but no, since the tech is so balanced right now so too should be the weight for drops.

[Marquis De Lafayette]

Grus, on 13 September 2017 - 10:39 AM, said:

true but no, since the tech is so balanced right now so too should be the weight for drops.

ummm....the weights are unbalanced because of talented units stacking one side more (Clan-side)... that has been PGI's consistent message. They wanted to cut the IS tonnage early in Civil War (as more units were IS-side), but units switched to Clan's and PGI then decided to stand pat on tonnage where it is today. Tonnage limits have little to nothing to do with where tech is.

Edited by Marquis De Lafayette, 13 September 2017 - 12:43 PM.

[Grus]

fenomeno, on 13 September 2017 - 12:27 PM, said:

Why? Clan 100-ton mechs are pretty bad. Bringing two IS 100-ton mechs is also bad... IS lights.. yep, they also seem pretty bad!

Bad players bringing 100-ton assault mechs has to be near the top of the list of "reasons why some FP games are miserable".

I don't know what lights you are u seing but the PB and the hero Raven are solid, the oxide is a powerhouse. I'd even go as far as saying the PB and Oxcide are the top 2. Alone yes a 100 tonnes isn't that good... But when you can drop 12 of them, twice, that's a lot of HP that the other team has to chew through and IS has way more durability and a bigger heathpool per mech than clan.

[TheFallOfTheReaper]

Again it brings the point of : loyalists punished on both sides for merc units constantly switching to get whatever wins planets or whatever, remove their ability to either: switch during a single season or remove mc rewards/bonus payouts/taking planets for "unaffiliated" units, if anything faction choices should be semi permanent either clan or is: but allow innerfaction switching. But then you get the argument what about contracts and what not so meh.....

[Frank Exchange Of Views]

Grus, on 13 September 2017 - 12:59 PM, said:

I don't know what lights you are u seing but the PB and the hero Raven are solid, the oxide is a powerhouse. I'd even go as far as saying the PB and Oxcide are the top 2. Alone yes a 100 tonnes isn't that good... But when you can drop 12 of them, twice, that's a lot of HP that the other team has to chew through and IS has way more durability and a bigger heathpool per mech than clan.

Again, you just have to come to the IS side, since we have it so easy!
Problem solved overnight.

[Bud Crue]

Grus, on 13 September 2017 - 12:59 PM, said:

I don't know what lights you are u seing but the PB and the hero Raven are solid, the oxide is a powerhouse. I'd even go as far as saying the PB and Oxcide are the top 2. Alone yes a 100 tonnes isn't that good... But when you can drop 12 of them, twice, that's a lot of HP that the other team has to chew through and IS has way more durability and a bigger heathpool per mech than clan.

Sorry to interrupt, but of all the IS lights you could have used to further your argument...you went with the Huggin as on of your exemplars of IS goodness? Also the Oxide? This is not summer of 2015, man.

I would have gone with the Javelin and if necessary the Wolfhound.

Again sorry to interrupt.

[Cabanaboy]

IS Pugs, plus the rewards benefits for Clans, plus the small gap in advantage for Clans tech (not huge, but it's there), plus the Cbill payout for Clan merc contracts, equals a heavily stacked clan side right now. As said before, the tonnage only removes some armor from the field, but doesn't level it, and in the case of the complex but obvious gap between top-line Clan units versus IS units, it will only speed up the clan stomping process.

Exhibit A - https://mwomercs.com...t-equal-rights/


I am not whining for the sake of whining, I am just pointing out the flaws and it's not an easy fix. Right now, if anything, I would drop the Cbill % payout greatly for all Clan contracts, and up some of the IS contract payouts. I wouldn't touch tech (it's supposed to be slightly balanced against IS anyways in lore until I think about what, 3065-ish? Haven't read that far in the books. I would also maybe add a new faction or two to the IS side, to offer the rewards and mech bays that current top tier units who switched to clan for those. Maybe Arc Royal Defense corridor, or something from the Chaos March, or even the Canopus Confederation (might have that wrong, but the one in the periphery). Something to attract top tier units back to IS side.

I don't blame the players/units who want to go after the rewards and benefits, that's a game design thing and it's natural to chase it. I do get salty when I am getting stomped, but again, the game is currently tilted to created the conditions for said stompings unless you are dropping in a 12-man IS premade yourself. Unfrotunately, right now because of the current state of where top tier teams are aligned (all or mostly clan in top 20, regardless of Merc or Loyalist) there is not a lot of chances to be lucky and dropped with a good IS team.

One thing that could help is getting the TS3 and Discord Hubs advertised, that would help a little with organization and getting premades going.

Anyways, the point is adjusting the tonnage at this time will only exacerbate the 'market' problem in the game right now. Fix the Rewards, increase IS CBill payouts and reduce Clan contract payouts, and finally add another faction or 2 for IS side to work towards and attract the top-line units back to IS side to balance the skill distribution between IS and clans. Then you can tinker with tonnage.

[DAEDALOS513]

Cabanaboy, on 14 September 2017 - 10:48 AM, said:

IS Pugs, plus the rewards benefits for Clans, plus the small gap in advantage for Clans tech (not huge, but it's there), plus the Cbill payout for Clan merc contracts, equals a heavily stacked clan side right now. As said before, the tonnage only removes some armor from the field, but doesn't level it, and in the case of the complex but obvious gap between top-line Clan units versus IS units, it will only speed up the clan stomping process.

Exhibit A - https://mwomercs.com...t-equal-rights/


I am not whining for the sake of whining, I am just pointing out the flaws and it's not an easy fix. Right now, if anything, I would drop the Cbill % payout greatly for all Clan contracts, and up some of the IS contract payouts. I wouldn't touch tech (it's supposed to be slightly balanced against IS anyways in lore until I think about what, 3065-ish? Haven't read that far in the books. I would also maybe add a new faction or two to the IS side, to offer the rewards and mech bays that current top tier units who switched to clan for those. Maybe Arc Royal Defense corridor, or something from the Chaos March, or even the Canopus Confederation (might have that wrong, but the one in the periphery). Something to attract top tier units back to IS side.

I don't blame the players/units who want to go after the rewards and benefits, that's a game design thing and it's natural to chase it. I do get salty when I am getting stomped, but again, the game is currently tilted to created the conditions for said stompings unless you are dropping in a 12-man IS premade yourself. Unfrotunately, right now because of the current state of where top tier teams are aligned (all or mostly clan in top 20, regardless of Merc or Loyalist) there is not a lot of chances to be lucky and dropped with a good IS team.

One thing that could help is getting the TS3 and Discord Hubs advertised, that would help a little with organization and getting premades going.

Anyways, the point is adjusting the tonnage at this time will only exacerbate the 'market' problem in the game right now. Fix the Rewards, increase IS CBill payouts and reduce Clan contract payouts, and finally add another faction or 2 for IS side to work towards and attract the top-line units back to IS side to balance the skill distribution between IS and clans. Then you can tinker with tonnage.

I think IS tech is much better atm..

[Cabanaboy]

DAEDALOS513, on 14 September 2017 - 11:50 AM, said:

I think IS tech is much better atm..

Which part? The higher tonnage per weapon? The heavier LFE engines? The part where weapons take more critical slots? or the part where range is less? Not sure, so many to choose from.

Oh, but heat and cooldown. Well, when you can fit several more DHS, heat is mostly offset. I will give you cooldown, but extra range offset that for quite a while, and even with IS ER MED and ER Smalls, the clan range is further, just not nearly as much.

However, this same old argument has been beaten to death and everyone on either side disagrees from whatever point they have. It's moot, as organized play usually will beat whatever quirk or weapon or crit slot advantage one side has over the other.

Edited by Cabanaboy, 14 September 2017 - 02:26 PM.

[DAEDALOS513]

Cabanaboy, on 14 September 2017 - 02:25 PM, said:

Which part? The higher tonnage per weapon? The heavier LFE engines? The part where weapons take more critical slots? or the part where range is less? Not sure, so many to choose from.

Oh, but heat and cooldown. Well, when you can fit several more DHS, heat is mostly offset. I will give you cooldown, but extra range offset that for quite a while, and even with IS ER MED and ER Smalls, the clan range is further, just not nearly as much.

However, this same old argument has been beaten to death and everyone on either side disagrees from whatever point they have. It's moot, as organized play usually will beat whatever quirk or weapon or crit slot advantage one side has over the other.

Racs to mention one...
Weapon range deficit is not an issue if you're using the right mechs on rangier maps..

Gotta use positional skill and not trade at clan optimal range..

Edited by DAEDALOS513, 14 September 2017 - 02:35 PM.

[Cabanaboy]

DAEDALOS513, on 14 September 2017 - 02:32 PM, said:

Racs to mention one...
Weapon range deficit is not an issue if you're using the right mechs on rangier maps..

Gotta use positional skill and not trade at clan optimal range..

That's all true, but that doesn't change the tech vs. tech, which is the point being made. Strategy works around tech, but doesn't actually change the tech.

RAC5's are very good point blank, but spread a lot at anything over 300m. They pad damage numbers nicely though, but you'll get a lot more components critted with an LBX10, or kills with any of the regular AC's. You build according to playstyle.

Edited by Cabanaboy, 14 September 2017 - 02:55 PM.