107 replies to this topic

[Invictus XVII]

MischiefSC, on 27 November 2017 - 02:52 PM, said:

Okay. I'm the first to say that balance is off in favor of the Clans, has been since the nerfs to IS about the time of the KDK3 release and has gotten worse over time.

However LRMs are terrible. If you're dying to LRMs you're playing wrong.

Strategy and tactics is the name of the game in FW. It's how you handle every single map/mode and there's strats for every single map/mode combo from each side. The worst situation at all is attacking Boreal in Siege; that's the single most one-sided situation to be in and you can still do it, it's just hard. At one time it was Domination on Alpine, because the circle was in a place where one side was utterly ****** trying to get in it. Now that it's removed it's back to attacking Boreal.

A lot of this seems to come down to experience and skills, which are something you develop with time and ideally with the help of other experienced players. I strongly recommend getting on a TS hub and playing with a group and asking for help with builds.

Im telling you, there is a skill ceiling cap due to fundamental properties of the game.

When both teams are extremely skilled, it comes down to gear. The skill level of the individual doesn't matter cause the game use heatcap that takes around 60 seconds to cool off on most maps.

Making one faction have inferior gear and tell them to "git gud" facing people with atleast the same level of skill with superior gear, ISNT good game design. Infact the very idea is a deadly sin for a game designer.

Most maps are also very hot, which makes IS weaponry just as hot as clans, which makes them exceptionally inferior. And drags down your heat disipation down to 0.9 no matter what setup you have. heatsinks are useless bricks on average due to this.


But, If you get pushed in to close combat and have 1 or 2 derpy potatoes on your team, you get rolled no matter what faction you play for.

Theres no way to compensate for weak links in the team. The gamemodes in game forces IS to play in ways its extreamly inferior to clans.
I personally like the attack defend maps, but they are not made with actual level design in mind.
Incorperating the average mech designs and properties from both teams, placing vantage and disadvantage points on the level. Every vantage point needs another spot which gives them a disadvantage in order to counter it. so it can be countered. - This wouldnt be an issue if PGI would allow you to create a SET of loadouts for your mechs beforehand so you can choose with your setup for each mech before drop.

But again if you have no weak links and you play in full FW unit drops and are super serious, clans have the absolute upperhand.

death by LRM in FW = Playing it wrong: no map layouts and objectives makes it impossible to beat 12 lurmboats, its not possible. Try it, i faced it quite frequently and if they have one spotter, youre fuged as theres no tall cover on most maps, and a narc spells instant death, this is for everyone, not just clans. And then you get the most idiotic gamemode ever like "domination" which is always placed in an open death cauldron with no cover at all, where one team get a small piece of cover due to bad map design which means you win the game by spawning on the good side of the map.
If you know what i mean by saying "RUSH F7"


Example on LRM hell, i see this quite often and on most maps that have chokepoints which they force you to push through - you cant. You can wait for the clock to run out and lose.

Edited by Fishbaws, 28 November 2017 - 12:13 AM.

[MischiefSC]

Actually I play in a team and we have never, at any point, for many many thousands of drops, lost to an LRM team. As IS or Clans. It's never happened. Most good teams will tell you the same - in fact you won't find any good teams that play LRMs save for giggles. You won't find good players who don't acknowledge that LRMs are flat out inferior.

Did you watch the video? 228 is an exceptional team and this was them flat out trolling a mixed pug/small unit. By the way, they almost lost on the first wave - all 3 ogens were wiped and Omega badly damaged. They likely lost that match in fact; the one where it showed they won was a counter-attack match, which would have been pure combat with no objectives. They also almost got wiped, it went to time at 29-43. If you'd ever played 228 you would know that had they taken a serious loadout it would have been more like 48-12 at the 20 minute mark.

That video is a joke video. He's also got one of all 12 of them playing double gauss King Crabs. Pretty entertaining.

All the matches I won earlier today were carrying pug games, every team carries pugs regularly. Having otherwise worthless pugs is the nature of the game and why most teams like to drop in a 12man. It is true that many matches come down to pug weight however anymore there's only 2 or 3 teams that field 12 at a time for more than a couple drops a night.

You compensate for the weak links (like people who bring LRMs on your team. Again, no team who's anywhere on the top page or 3 of the leaderboard brings LRMs for other than giggles) by carrying harder and trying to pug boss.

[Honeybadgers]

MischiefSC, on 26 November 2017 - 01:29 PM, said:

Stormcrow wouldn't matter - HBK IIC and Huntsman are better in almost every role since smalls got nerfed to ****.

I kind of agree but the crow just catches shots better than the 2c and huntsman, which matters a lot when exactly 490,000% of IS mechs run SRMS and streaks. I think the crow would do better than people think, but not be overpowered like a lot of other people think. It'd be interesting to see how it'd be if we could also bring the lanner. But I have a feeling that mech isn't going to be very good.

Also, I still think smalls aren't nearly as broken as people think they are. They were too good. Now they're just decent. I still think a 6 ERSML r paw, 3 ERSML enter and UAC10 left arm is a great little 1v1 and 2v2 mech that the huntsman can't pull off.

Actually, that gives me an idea. Hmm. I can fit 6 ERSML, a UAC10, 5 heat sinks and a targeting comp 3 with 3 tons of ammo on my huntsman. Gonna have to play with that. My stormcrow only runs 1 more heat sink for 3 more ERSML and no targeting comp.

Also, LRMS are bad. I run them in exactly one mech, the danger close scorch (and on a goofy kit fox, but that mech isn't supposed to be good). And that mech only fights inside 400M, and the LRM's are there to tank AMS for the twin ATM 12's and suppress people that are trying to get aggressive poking while we push.

Are you blackhawkSC by any chance?

Edited by Honeybadgers, 28 November 2017 - 01:33 AM.

[Wolfways]

Fishbaws, on 27 November 2017 - 11:21 PM, said:

Most maps are also very hot, which makes IS weaponry just as hot as clans, which makes them exceptionally inferior.

You know hot maps affect clan mechs too right?

Quote

Example on LRM hell, i see this quite often and on most maps that have chokepoints which they force you to push through - you cant. You can wait for the clock to run out and lose.

lol no

[Bishop Six]

I guess you need to answer anymore. Threadopener just wanted to rant about something and went away.

It's so funny, on both sides there are always solo-pugger who are complaining during the match how OP the other side is.

For me, balance could be better, but atm it is the best balance we ever had, so i'm fine with that.

[Invictus XVII]

What im getting at, is MWO needs less of this:



And more of this:
https://youtu.be/--sQ2VaTl2s?t=2m37s

Edited by Fishbaws, 28 November 2017 - 02:55 AM.

[TWIAFU]

OZHomerOZ, on 27 November 2017 - 01:18 PM, said:

I'm not saying that's something you made up.

But do you have eva dense of official communications from PGI to the effect that FW has a matchmaker.

And in fact if as you said FW does indeed have a match maker, which I believe it doesn't, then said match maker is doing a poor job.

Otherwise it would seem you are spreading alternative facts.

Naughty Naughty.

Educate yourself for a change.
http://mwomercs.com/...e-how-it-works/

[eXizt]

Fishbaws, on 28 November 2017 - 02:55 AM, said:

What im getting at, is MWO needs less of this:
...

Does that mean your team outnumbered the enemy because of disconnecters, but fighting with no armed mechs, trying to reach them without using cover and getting shot while tankfacing, or in cause of friendly fire while trying to regroup??
I hope this is not the regular IS play style.

[Invictus XVII]

FritzKrieg, on 28 November 2017 - 05:09 AM, said:

Does that mean your team outnumbered the enemy because of disconnecters, but fighting with no armed mechs, trying to reach them without using cover and getting shot while tankfacing, or in cause of friendly fire while trying to regroup??
I hope this is not the regular IS play style.

It pretty much summizes the feeling of attacking with IS vs Clans in FW. Since the maps are usually just one massive chokepoint vs a firingsquad, one could imagine that the lack of guns on the russian side in this situation is the lack of range on IS weaponry. You may still overrun the clans, but its mostly just blind luck they didnt target you if you manage to survive that initial breach.

Edited by Fishbaws, 28 November 2017 - 05:29 AM.

[Wolfways]

Fishbaws, on 28 November 2017 - 05:28 AM, said:

It pretty much summizes the feeling of attacking with IS vs Clans in FW. Since the maps are usually just one massive chokepoint vs a firingsquad, one could imagine that the lack of guns on the russian side in this situation is the lack of range on IS weaponry. You may still overrun the clans, but its mostly just blind luck they didnt target you if you manage to survive that initial breach.

It works both ways. The Siege maps are just bad.

[ccrider]

Aside from Boreal attack, attacking any of the siege maps as IS isn't that bad. Chokepoints funnel you, but they also prevent all 12 enemies from firing at the same time. Just bring some tanky brawlers, get in a group on TS and bash in. 12 Orion VAs with 4xSRM 4s and an ac20 is gonna put the hurt on any chokepoint defenders. You also bring an assassin, then grind your enemy for 3 waves and when it's down to mistlynxes for them you have assassin's and finish up. You won't win every match that way, but you will win more than you lose. Hell, we bring that same deck to Boreal because it stands a chance at surviving the sniping at the gate. It really boils down to having 12 people playing for the team rather than for their own stats.

Edited by ccrider, 28 November 2017 - 05:50 AM.

[eXizt]

Fishbaws, on 28 November 2017 - 05:28 AM, said:

It pretty much summizes the feeling of attacking with IS vs Clans in FW. Since the maps are usually just one massive chokepoint vs a firingsquad, one could imagine that the lack of guns on the russian side in this situation is the lack of range on IS weaponry. You may still overrun the clans, but its mostly just blind luck they didnt target you if you manage to survive that initial breach.

And now imagine you try the same assault but with less tonnage and less armor (ok, without disarmed Mechs and friendly fire). If you make just one mistake, you will waste the first wave and can do the same **** with a 65t mech, while the defenders can roll out there next assault mech, if they want and they have still have the better position. That's the clan situation. Don't tell me you were disadvantaged. It's just not true. The siege maps are bad for everyone, especially for attackers and the op clan tech is a myth. It's just another playing style and you have to change your playing style too when fighting against clan.
And what is most important: you can't compensate player skill with nerfs and restrictions.

[Invictus XVII]

FritzKrieg, on 28 November 2017 - 06:01 AM, said:

And now imagine you try the same assault but with less tonnage and less armor (ok, without disarmed Mechs and friendly fire). If you make just one mistake, you will waste the first wave and can do the same **** with a 65t mech, while the defenders can roll out there next assault mech, if they want and they have still have the better position. That's the clan situation. Don't tell me you were disadvantaged. It's just not true. The siege maps are bad for everyone, especially for attackers and the op clan tech is a myth. It's just another playing style and you have to change your playing style too when fighting against clan.
And what is most important: you can't compensate player skill with nerfs and restrictions.

Female k9 - please.
EVERY clan assault outperforms IS assaults. Carebare stare kodiaks with excellent hardpoints and outragous weapon loadout options. Agility speed is worth way more than being a massive near stationary target with a max weaponrange of 280m.

New angry kitten assaults doesnt help your plight either, freakishly good mech, while the only assault IS have that can stand toe to toe with clans are battlemasters with large lasers, thats it! thats the only option.

[eXizt]

Fishbaws, on 28 November 2017 - 07:54 AM, said:

Female k9 - please.
EVERY clan assault outperforms IS assaults. Carebare stare kodiaks with excellent hardpoints and outragous weapon loadout options. Agility speed is worth way more than being a massive near stationary target with a max weaponrange of 280m.

New angry kitten assaults doesnt help your plight either, freakishly good mech, while the only assault IS have that can stand toe to toe with clans are battlemasters with large lasers, thats it! thats the only option.

No. That's not true.
Btw the Kodiak time is over. There's not much situations were you can use them. I don't believe you when you try to tell me, you get confronted with a bunch of Kodiaks in every single FP match and a Cyclops, Annihilator, Mauler, Atlas, whatever wouldn't be good machines.
And as you said before, slaying clan kiddy's isn't a problem for you.
You get your A beaten when a solid team drops in your comfort zone and that's your problem. It has nothing to do with mech and weaponry difference. You want it easy. You want a nice KDR without thinking about tactics, communication and Teamplay. That's the real reason why you moaning. I bet, when you play on clan side, you will also get your A beaten when you think you could dominate the game as a loneranger with a funbuild and cry over IS.

[McGoat]

*cough*

[KingCobra]

I think the key to better balance in this game has always been deletion of the Alpha shot in the game PGI could have fixed this issue long ago by replacing the alpha shot with chain fire and a 2-5 second delay between shot fired and yes this would have made kills and battles longer but it might have made more new players and older players stay with the game long enough to get hooked and fund MWO more.

But Russ and PGI wanted the down and dirty days of NHUA back in MechWarrior 4 Mercenaries on the MekTek server which was total crappola where every mech melted in .2 seconds under heavy alpha shot fire.MWO is not suited to be a E-SPORT 1 shot 1 kill game.

[eXizt]

@KingCobra

I dont think so. I see the main problem in the fact that you have just one life. Without a respawn, it is truly very anoying, especially for new players, to see your mech blown up for every little mistake and than waiting the next 10 minutes watching your buddies having fun. I cant find a con for a respawn system. If we would have one, mistakes wouldn´t cause in your "final death", you would earn more XP, more C-Bills and you could faster skill your mech and THE BIGGEST ADVANTAGE you would have much more real gaming time and less waiting for something else. For me, the biggest flaw in a game is when you spend more time for waiting, than for gaming (see waiting times for groups in FP or QP).
I enjoyed the MW4/MekTek time. You could do what you want and even the enoying jumpsniper could be beaten with the right tactic. If you screwed up the first attack, just try again. It was fine and as a Non-Pro-Mechwarrior you could spend more time in the cockpit and less as a spectator. Removing Alpha Strikes and raising the TTK didn´t solve the problem and takes MWO (again) one more step away from its Battletech base.

Edited by FritzKrieg, 28 November 2017 - 12:49 PM.

[KingCobra]

FritzKrieg, on 28 November 2017 - 12:45 PM, said:

@KingCobra

I dont think so. I see the main problem in the fact that you have just one life. Without a respawn, it is truly very anoying, especially for new players, to see your mech blown up for every little mistake and than waiting the next 10 minutes watching your buddies having fun. I cant find a con for a respawn system. If we would have one, mistakes wouldn´t cause in your "final death", you would earn more XP, more C-Bills and you could faster skill your mech and THE BIGGEST ADVANTAGE you would have much more real gaming time and less waiting for something else. For me, the biggest flaw in a game is when you spend more time for waiting, than for gaming (see waiting times for groups in FP or QP).
I enjoyed the MW4/MekTek time. You could do what you want and even the enoying jumpsniper could be beaten with the right tactic. If you screwed up the first attack, just try again. It was fine and as a Non-Pro-Mechwarrior you could spend more time in the cockpit and less as a spectator. Removing Alpha Strikes and raising the TTK didn´t solve the problem and takes MWO (again) one more step away from its Battletech base.

Well fritz I will agree with you on a re spawn mode it would have been nice to have it for QP.CW/FP is a re spawn mode but I personally believe placing pugs and new players against teams was a huge mistake on PGI'S part it should have been segregated from day 1 of CW.

As far as the removal of the Alpha shot from MWO I think it should still be done and replaced and let players use a modified chain fire system.

[Wolfways]

FritzKrieg, on 28 November 2017 - 12:45 PM, said:

@KingCobra

I dont think so. I see the main problem in the fact that you have just one life. Without a respawn, it is truly very anoying, especially for new players, to see your mech blown up for every little mistake and than waiting the next 10 minutes watching your buddies having fun. I cant find a con for a respawn system. If we would have one, mistakes wouldn´t cause in your "final death", you would earn more XP, more C-Bills and you could faster skill your mech and THE BIGGEST ADVANTAGE you would have much more real gaming time and less waiting for something else. For me, the biggest flaw in a game is when you spend more time for waiting, than for gaming (see waiting times for groups in FP or QP).
I enjoyed the MW4/MekTek time. You could do what you want and even the enoying jumpsniper could be beaten with the right tactic. If you screwed up the first attack, just try again. It was fine and as a Non-Pro-Mechwarrior you could spend more time in the cockpit and less as a spectator. Removing Alpha Strikes and raising the TTK didn´t solve the problem and takes MWO (again) one more step away from its Battletech base.

The only reason I heard for not having respawn is that players would Yolo into the enemy and just respawn again over and over. But some players do that now anyway, and tbh there are ways of punishing a player for too many deaths like reduced C-bills and/or XP per death.
Respawn with a Battlefield type ticket system terrain control (also done in MWLL) would have been great for FW. There could have even been bays in the bases that you capture where you enter and power down for a short time to restock ammo which would help ammo-based weapons in longer matches.

Well I can dream...

[MischiefSC]

I'm ambivalent on a respawn system, though all it's really going to do is mean good players farm more bads. It's also going to screw ammo builds, because I can take a laservomit MAD IIC every time and rock a nice 5 or 10 KDR and a billion cbills every match. It means suicide rushes are pretty much the best possible strategy because they have 0 cost or risk.

Respawns work well in games that are pretty much 1 shot 1 kill and a TTK measured in < 1 second. In a game like MWO where everyone has hitpoints that degrade and do not heal it would overall make for an incredibly, incredibly shallow experience.