114 replies to this topic

[Bud Crue]

No quirks, or even reduced quirks, on a whole lot of mechs means those mechs are useless.
Making content useless is not going to fix balance issues no matter how much you want it too.


If the goal is to remove quirks then they have to have a mechanism in place to account for their functionality. Such a mechanism does not exist, or at least has not yet been mentioned by PGI. Thus, the majority of quirks are not going anywhere (no matter how much they nerf).

[Gas Guzzler]

Yeah, no. Not gonna happen.

[MechaBattler]

No originally they were intended to address imbalances between mechs. Before the Clans even released they were already using quirks. The Victor for example was too maneuverable at the time and so it had negative agility quirks to tone it down.

Then when the Clans came about. They thought the Victor would be good enough by removing negative quirks. Boy were they wrong. Then the arms race began and we got bloated weapon quirks.

Now the weapon quirks are tonned down. In most cases mechs only enjoy 10% weapon quirks.

They're going back to the root of what quirks were for. Shoring up under performing mechs like the Vindicator or knuckle draggers like the Cataphract.

But this isn't really the point. It's about "Please don't nerf my favorite thing, which incidentally is the meta of it's class or even of the game"

Changing balance is par for the course for games like this.

[adamts01]

Quirks are great, PGI just doesn't do them right. There's always some ridiculously OP IS mech that's god tier one month then trash the next. This is a big reason I have mostly Clan mechs, I can always move omnipods around and make something work. Their dartboard approach with an all or nothing strategy just wrecks balance. It's just a mess, and you're right, unstable is the best way to put it.

[JediPanther]

Some mechs need ultra mega quirks just to even consider them. No one would waste c bills on a spider 5v when they can get the spider 5d which is far better just because of one hard point and ecm. The only reason I have it was due to the old must have three mechs to skill the one you really want and never bothered to sell it off.

Mechs like the lct-1v are passed over for very good reason: They suck. They suck compared to other variants. They suck compared to other lights. They suck fighting against other lights. they suck at doing any thing but trolling.

[Scout Derek]

Were it so easy to say.

[GrimRiver]

Yes and no.

"Yes" because new tech has closed the power gap a good bit(but not completely), quirks have gotten to the point that it defines a reason to even take that chassis/variant over another.

And "no" because too many mech really need those quirks to make them viable or even decent enough to consider taking them out on a midnight stroll.

Biggest offenders that needs every quirk and maybe more are the vindy's, victors, fridgebox, lolynx and ect.

Clans still have the upper hand with XL's great weight saving that doesn't die to a ST loss and tech that weighs less and takes less slots.

So ultimately I'd say no to quirk removal.

[Bud Crue]

Source Mystic, on 20 September 2017 - 10:19 AM, said:

...THIS IS ALSO WHY YOU SHOULD ALWAYS GO AFTER AND FOCUS OUT ALL MECHS THAT ARE BOUGHT AS THEY ARE MOST TIMES THE BIGGEST THREAT DUE TO THEIR WALLET WARRIOR PROTECTION WALL AND OVER QUIRKED ATTRIBUTES.

Oh stop.

Certainly PGI may make subtle quirk changes to encourage you to buy a new/different mech. I don't begrudge them that, what I find annoying is their insistence that such changes are based on data driven analysis, but I digress. This idea of newly purchased mechs are some how always the most OP due to "wallet warrior protection" is just not true. I mean I have gotten into the habit of just ignoring Uziels as one example. There are many more.

Edited by Bud Crue, 20 September 2017 - 10:42 AM.

[Khobai]

quirks as they are now need to go

quirks should not reward you for making meta builds

they should reward you for playing the mech how its intended to be played in lore

[FupDup]

Khobai, on 20 September 2017 - 10:57 AM, said:

quirks as they are now need to go

quirks should not reward you for making meta builds

they should reward you for playing the mech how its intended to be played in lore

What if the lore intended the mech to be played as a meta build?

[Bud Crue]

Khobai, on 20 September 2017 - 10:57 AM, said:

quirks as they are now need to go

quirks should not reward you for making meta builds

they should reward you for playing the mech how its intended to be played in lore

Why?

Also consider: if they did as you suggest, and quirks were applied so as to encourage you to take and play lore builds, and such builds ended up being particularly successful due to those quirks, would not such particularly successful builds then be the meta? And if so, would we not be in the position that quirks are being used to reward you for making meta builds?

[Gas Guzzler]

Khobai, on 20 September 2017 - 10:57 AM, said:

quirks as they are now need to go

quirks should not reward you for making meta builds

they should reward you for playing the mech how its intended to be played in lore

Yes, lore comes first. Balance be damned!

[Accused]

I agree, quirks need to go.

Quirks were supposed to add flavor and bring up under performing chassis. PGI has failed miserably in this regard. If they can't balance their own weapon systems how are they supposed to balance quirks to compensate if it's always after the fact.

[Gas Guzzler]

Accused, on 20 September 2017 - 11:12 AM, said:

I agree, quirks need to go.

Quirks were supposed to add flavor and bring up under performing chassis. PGI has failed miserably in this regard. If they can't balance their own weapon systems how are they supposed to balance quirks to compensate if it's always after the fact.

Removing quirks will hurt balance even more.

[Thorn Hallis]

Khobai, on 20 September 2017 - 10:57 AM, said:

quirks as they are now need to go

quirks should not reward you for making meta builds

they should reward you for playing the mech how its intended to be played in lore

Ya well, if we would have gotten role warfare that would be the way to go.

For the current state of the game...not so much.

[C E Dwyer]

Most mechs need quirks to be viable in Q.P and even then most won't get touched in 'serious' comp play

[Quicksilver Aberration]

MechaBattler, on 20 September 2017 - 09:51 AM, said:

Now the weapon quirks are tonned down. In most cases mechs only enjoy 10% weapon quirks.

They're going back to the root of what quirks were for.

And thus why Clan mechs have been enjoying their dominance over IS tech ever since.

[Andi Nagasia]

personally i feel, Weapon Quirks need to go,
Structure Quirks need to stay to allow Mechs with Bad Geo to be Viable,
and Mobility Quirks Tied to OmniPods are ok as well(ex weaponless pods)

note i feel Quirks given by the Skill Tree are ok, and should be kept,
i only have a slight problem with the Weapon Quirks tied to Mechs,

[Quicksilver Aberration]

I don't understand why weapon quirks are consider so "outrageous". Why can't some mechs have things that improve their firepower (especially in cases where they have anemic firepower like the Spider)? Sorry, but at some point you end up with stupidly outrageous mobility/survivability quirks to make firepower anemic mechs which could easily be solved by adding firepower quirks instead.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 20 September 2017 - 12:37 PM.

[Bud Crue]

Andi Nagasia, on 20 September 2017 - 12:32 PM, said:

personally i feel, Weapon Quirks need to go,
Structure Quirks need to stay to allow Mechs with Bad Geo to be Viable,
and Mobility Quirks Tied to OmniPods are ok as well(ex weaponless pods)

note i feel Quirks given by the Skill Tree are ok, and should be kept,
i only have a slight problem with the Weapon Quirks tied to Mechs,

Without weapons quirks half the locust variants become useless. This is true of a lot of other mechs too.