Jun Watarase, on 05 November 2017 - 03:44 PM, said:
Against pulse, its roughly an extra second of time. And IS have plenty of PPFLD options, and SRMs are still FLD. Ive never once thought that clan mechs were difficult to deal with in QP with my IS mechs...I mean crabs, bushwackers, assassins, annihilators, etc, just face tank so much damage. But clan mechs are so easy to pop. Even my non-meta bushwacker with 4x MPL/2x SRM-6s with artemis can do massive damage to a clan heavy at short range.
It's in your head. Completely in your head.
All those mechs you're talking about get *at best* 7-14 points of extra health on ST/CT. At best. Many don't even get that on torsos, just arms. Your Clan mechs, if made correct, are doing
20+ more damage with every trigger pull, are faster and cool more quickly and at longer range. Unless you are playing poorly you absolutely should *always* get a hit in on your IS enemies before they're even in range, wiping out that health advantage before any real fighting starts. Even if that opportunity doesn't come up you should be using cover to keep from getting shot by multiple enemies at once, ensuring your higher damage/shot lets you dominate your enemy.
If you're not beating IS mechs pretty consistently while in Clan mechs it's a user error problem. All the best people in the game, when playing each other, can attest to this. This is the part that's a struggle to understand why you're struggling with.
Players who can consistently, 10 matches out of 10, beat you in whatever mech you want to take - you take a mech, they take an identical mech, they will beat you. Pretty much every match. That's not a criticism - that's the nature of human skill curve. They would all mop the floor with me too, match after match. People who can literally demonstratively show that they understand how to play the game better than you or me can also clearly identify exactly why one thing is better than another, your position is that... they don't understand how the game works and you do?
This isn't about stat shaming or anything like that. There's no shame in stats anyway. However this isn't anything being seriously debated. It's like talking about germ theory of disease or theory of relativity. Nobody who understands the subjects is arguing the core ideas of either, at all. If someone else who demonstratively doesn't understand the topics as well shows up and says they're wrong, because (insert anecdotal experience here) that's not even an argument.
Personally my best performing heavy mechs are IS mechs. Marauders and Roughnecks. By a good stretch.
However this is a byproduct of how I play and what I play and the environments I play in. While there are some narrow contexts in which some of these IS mechs can out-perform their Clan equivalent that's a narrow niche situation that exists in spite of their overall inferior performance. Without question Clan mechs do all those same jobs better. I just really like those mechs and I like to play them so that significantly impacts the anecdotal experience.
However the only argument to be had about IS/Clan balance is "why do so many people not really understand why and how it's imbalanced and why, when presented with the math to prove it, so actively refuse to accept the facts being presented to them."
8
).
