163 replies to this topic

[mouser42]

No worries a few more rounds with the nerf bat an all our mechs will hit like this thing, oh hail the new nerf mod thing and or what ever. But the other stuff is cool.

Edited by mouser42, 10 December 2017 - 12:13 PM.

[Bud Crue]

JC Daxion, on 10 December 2017 - 12:07 PM, said:

Then you missed the part, that top mechs won't be playing against not top/meta mechs.. This means all your scrub mechs will be useful against other scrub mechs.

In solaris. In 1v1 and 2v2. In that environment even "scrub mechs" will be meta builds and nothing else. Such a closed/limited mode does not encourage build diversity (one of the goals by the way of PGI's 2016 efforts). Solaris is by its nature competitive to the extreme, even among the scrub tier mechs. Its also an admission that all of PGI's claimed chassis to chassis balance being "as close as it's ever been" a total lie (why do we need mech tiers if according to PGI they are all within an 8% range?). That may or may not be a bad thing, but it won't make a Panther 10P any better or competitive than it is now. Crap will remain crap and it won't get played, not because of Solaris, but because PGI and its understanding of balance.

Edited by Bud Crue, 10 December 2017 - 12:14 PM.

[Icebergdx]

THERE NEVER SHOULD HAVE BEEN A BALANCING BETWEEN CLAN AND IS MECHS!!!!! Clan mechs were built as better mechs. The ONLY balancing that should have ever taken place between Clan and IS was that the size of the teams should have been different. A clan team should only have a Binary of mechs (10 mechs, which is 2 stars). An IS team should have Company of mechs (12 mechs, 3 lances). And even then, according to Canon, the IS mechs are at a significant disadvantage. The true balance should be 1 Star of Clan vs 2 or 3 lances of IS mechs.

And as far as balancing mechs in the IS, maybe some of you should read the actual notes in the Battletech wiki about the various mechs. Most mechs WERE NOT DESIGNED TO BE BALANCES, they were designed to fulfil certain roles, and were therefore built to fill those roles. And mechs were not built to work alone. They were built to work as part of a lance. NO military builds a piece of equipment like a tank, or a plane, or a ship, to be the "Swiss Army Knife" and do everything. They build it with a specific role, or taks in mind. An Aircraft Carrier can control thousands of miles of area, but without its escorts, is meat on the table for a submarine. A submarine is the silent killer, but has limited utility in an air battle. Airplanes can have an impact on a battle, but no Air Force has ever been the sole winner of a war. Balancing mechs is a fiction, and a whine of people who do not want to accept the reality that THERE IS NO BALANCE, OR FAIRNESS IN WAR. The closest we get to balancing in this game is that we are allowed to (fairly easily and cheaply) modify mechs in ways that make then totally different than their stock builds. After that, it is all on the pilot to make it work.

But no one (including PGI) wanted that, so instead we get the mishmash pile of crap we have now. The game as it is now is 3 parts whining gash players moaning about balance, and 2 parts Russ actively trying to make Mechwarrior into something different then it was (WoT on legs).

I stopped spending money months ago, and now, I am very slowly, with breaks in between, playing down my thousands of hours of Premium time from when i believed that they were actually trying to fix the game.

Once that time is done, I am done as well... And this makes me sad, as I started in the Battletech Universe as a table top player, have played every version of Mechwarrior since the original 8 bit from Activision, and used to be a regular at a Virtual World that had the Mechwarrior PODS (Bellevue WA). It hurts my heart to see how they have ruined the game I loved. (I still Break out Mechwarrior 2 and Ghost Bear Legacy from time to time in emulate mode just to enjoy the soundtracks and the way the game was.)

Thank you for finishing off what was a great game, PGI.

Edited by Icebergdx, 10 December 2017 - 12:37 PM.

[Nameless King]

I will pay for stuff I want as long as I am still having fun playing it.

Thats all the reason I need.

[Khobai]

I wanna support the game I just cant get behind 1v1 solaris

not when the actual game needs massive improvements that are getting put off for at least another year because of solaris

[C E Dwyer]

Revis Volek, on 10 December 2017 - 11:25 AM, said:

Then why are you here? Its as 1v1 and 2v2 version of the game we already have and they made it deeper.


Whats wrong with that? You scared? Its prolly not for everyone im sure.

Not scared.

Just I'm not an insecure manchild that needs to prove he's bestest at playing with computer, or console toys

[JC Daxion]

@budcrue

as i've said before, real balance is kinda impossible.. How exactly do you balance a mech that can be built good.. and then built bad?

You just said a "scrub" mech will have a meta and no other way to play it.. So will it have some ways it works and plays well? Ok, if it does then i don't get your idea that it won't be played, or will be crap. Its a game that high level, a few % means a difference. But lower level mechs, only playing against those lower level mechs, could be lots of fun..

a few % is not total crap balance. I think balance might be able to get a bit better, but its only going to be done through manually adjusting every single mech, and really i think a lot of that would be nerfs but people don't like that. I just think this perfect world balance that people want is never going to happen and not because PGI doesn't want to do it, but because the game has far to many ways to build mechs, and hitboxes and hard point location is such a large part of it.


BT is NOT a balanced game. IMO there is no way to really balance everything. Maps are one way to make lesser balanced mechs shine though. Hard point location as a point, Higher = better more often than not, well if you had places that you could shoot under and not over, then low would be better..

But even then it would not be balanced. If in the spot that high was better, then high wins, If at a spot that low is better, then low wins. That is not balance, that is the exact opposite. BUT it would make certain mechs shine in different areas, and again that is not balance..


and going by your 8% statement.. while 8% isn't much, its actually quite huge.. Take the top 1k players, 8% is the top 80.. Go look at the leader boards, and how many of those 8% are the ones that played in the world finals.. But most players are not in that 8% so those things tend to wash over all.


Outside of limiting hard points, and builds which people don't seem to want, and manually adjusting heat and hitboxes on every mech, being able to globally balance mechs to perfect is just not possible. Even doing what i just said, i don't think it's really possible either.

Edited by JC Daxion, 10 December 2017 - 01:14 PM.

[fat4eyes]

King Alen, on 10 December 2017 - 12:31 PM, said:

I will pay for stuff I want as long as I am still having fun playing it.

Thats all the reason I need.

I'm about at this point too. I bought MC on this year's Black Friday sale even though I still had MC from LAST year's MC sale. Just putting some money in to keep the servers up.

[OrmsbyGore]

JC Daxion, on 10 December 2017 - 11:45 AM, said:

I honestly don't get some folks.. Complain for how long that PGI just needs to add more maps.. they add 2 new maps, Plus a new mode that is launching with 4 maps, and it's IM DONE!!! You do nothing for me PGI!!


They have said repeatedly, MWO is the only pvp version of the game, and its just going to keep growing slowly now.. Something it has done steadily sense launch.

My hopes is 1v1, 2v2 solaris, along with Co-op Singleplayer verse bots, and Turnbased BT grow this franchise and i can keep playing BT type games for another 10 years or more. Unlike the pervious 10 before i started playing MWO where there was basically nothing outside of a game that needed an old machine or hoops to run through to make run if you could find some folks to play with, and a Modded game that while is fun for the small player base that likes it is hardly a game that 10s of 1k's were playing.

Yet another thread that just proves no mater what PGI does, there will be someone complaining about it

Whenever you feel confused about why some players are perpetually pissed off at PGI, go to Google and look up what PGI originally promised that MWO would be, what they actually promised and accepted money in exchange for that promise, and now compare that to the product we have a few (5?) years after "launch."

To use an analogy: imagine going to a restaurant and seeing Kobe steak (or some other expensive item) on the menu. Imagine that you order That expensive item, and have to pay up front. And then the waiter brings you a bologna sandwich. Would you be upset? Would you tell everyone you know that the restaurant sucks? How many bologna sandwiches would the restaurant have to sell you before your anger dissipated? Would it help if they changed the decor?

We already had too many flavors of death match, I don't know why I would be excited about another. I understand some people have been asking for this, but there is still no sign of the online multiplayer mechwarrior game that PGI promised, that is why people are always mad.

[BlackDeathLegion]

Scout Derek, on 10 December 2017 - 10:43 AM, said:

I'll definitely be happy. Now I can just do 1v1s and know it's my fault I lost instead of incompetent teammates.

+1000000000000000 AGREED!

I hope in 1v1 mode I can still earn cbills + mech xp, a welcome new way to grind! No more losing the "PUG LOTTERY"!

[Wolfways]

JC Daxion, on 10 December 2017 - 11:45 AM, said:

Yet another thread that just proves no mater what PGI does, there will be someone complaining about it

Maybe if they actually do something they say people would complain less?
Where is faction warfare? It's an unfinished mess.

Solaris? Yay they're adding something we've been playing for six years...

8x8? Well at least they acknowledge that the game is dying...even if Russ considers MWO a success.

[MechaBattler]

LordNothing, on 10 December 2017 - 10:49 AM, said:

i dont see any reason to continue paying out. maybe next year if there is a loyalty mech i want, but the last batch were rather disappointing except the urbie. if russ wants to call us cheapskates for not wanting to spend more than $200 on this traiwreck, then by all means. i only play events now.

way i figure it if you buy one $20 mech pack a year you are supporting the very few major features that come out that year. or i can put my $20 into steam and get a whole game out of it.

Cheapskate reference was in regards to the number of people not buying into the module c-bill sink. Which I can say I was one of those people, happy not to buy into it. That's why the new skills each cost c-bills.

Just stop buying. If you're buying for the sake of development. You're going to be disappointed. I personally buy for what they're selling. Not any notion of things to come.

[MischiefSC]

Juodas Varnas, on 10 December 2017 - 12:10 PM, said:

I'd trade Solaris for quad mechs.

I would trade quads for a cup of coffee and less invisible walls on maps we already have.

[Mole]

How many years have we been begging for Solaris and now that they are giving it to us we are complaining?

[JC Daxion]

OrmsbyGore, on 10 December 2017 - 12:43 PM, said:

Whenever you feel confused about why some players are perpetually pissed off at PGI, go to Google and look up what PGI originally promised that MWO would be, what they actually promised and accepted money in exchange for that promise, and now compare that to the product we have a few (5?) years after "launch."

You say this like i don't know.. and wasn't here.. I signed up for this game the very first day, November 4th 2011. I followed what the game was going to be, and read everything i could. The only reason why i did not become a founder and spend the money for the smallest pack, was because I have never enjoyed pvp only games. Though i am still pissed i didn't just take the chance on the 30 bucks, i kinda had a feeling i would like it, and that would mean i would have a founders 4G or catapult sitting in my bays right now.

The game they said they would build was basically a arena shooter.. and that is basically what we got. I even asked Q's on the forums the very first day, and had them directly answered by PGI devs about what the game was, and was going to be. I think an lot of what people think "pgi promised" were their own interpretations. Because from everything i read, and saw.. it's basically what we are playing.

4 categories of mechs with different play styles and not a power crawl to the top.. A few modes that do play different, and while FW did come later i find it darn fun. It could be more fun if the community made more effort to get the warfar going by large units becoming the factions, but the base is there, and yes could be added to no question.

But i have no idea what all this stuff PGI lied to us about and how they failed certain people.. I've been following the game sense day 1, and actually sense i saw the first MWO 5 cinematic a few years prior.

I know when i started spending money on this game i did so, in the hopes that PVE and hopefully a mech commander game would return. My biggest surprise is how much i actually enjoy MWO and it's PVP only set up.. In fact in all my years of gaming, and that started with Pong, this is still the only pvp only game that has ever kept my attention past a few matches.

[Scout Derek]

Cathy, on 10 December 2017 - 11:24 AM, said:

I saw no incentives to play it.

It will just become a pointless exercise in epeen stroking, with silly bolted adon's

There are. But you know, you should pay attention to what's being said in the presentation for Solaris; I suggest you go watch it again.

Edited by Scout Derek, 10 December 2017 - 01:07 PM.

[OrmsbyGore]

Icebergdx, on 10 December 2017 - 12:27 PM, said:

THERE NEVER SHOULD HAVE BEEN A BALANCING BETWEEN CLAN AND IS MECHS!!!!! Clan mechs were built as better mechs. The ONLY balancing that should have ever taken place between Clan and IS was that the size of the teams should have been different. A clan team should only have a Binary of mechs (10 mechs, which is 2 stars). An IS team should have Company of mechs (12 mechs, 3 lances). And even then, according to Canon, the IS mechs are at a significant disadvantage. The true balance should be 1 Star of Clan vs 2 or 3 lances of IS mechs.

And as far as balancing mechs in the IS, maybe some of you should read the actual notes in the Battletech wiki about the various mechs. Most mechs WERE NOT DESIGNED TO BE BALANCES, they were designed to fulfil certain roles, and were therefore built to fill those roles. And mechs were not built to work alone. They were built to work as part of a lance. NO military builds a piece of equipment like a tank, or a plane, or a ship, to be the "Swiss Army Knife" and do everything. They build it with a specific role, or taks in mind. An Aircraft Carrier can control thousands of miles of area, but without its escorts, is meat on the table for a submarine. A submarine is the silent killer, but has limited utility in an air battle. Airplanes can have an impact on a battle, but no Air Force has ever been the sole winner of a war. Balancing mechs is a fiction, and a whine of people who do not want to accept the reality that THERE IS NO BALANCE, OR FAIRNESS IN WAR. The closest we get to balancing in this game is that we are allowed to (fairly easily and cheaply) modify mechs in ways that make then totally different than their stock builds. After that, it is all on the pilot to make it work.

Great points; I feel like having melee would have helped keep the 12v10 a bit closer to balanced, as well as having clans bidding on how small a team they would bring to face the IS team (maybe form a group before entering QP or whatever).

Also, maybe some variety within the factions (for example, maybe one faction is better at making medium lasers, so their mls have a slightly increased range or create slightly less heat), and have these bonuses tied to manufacturing plants on actual planets, so that conquering a planet bas long term effects and actually feels significant. Then there might even be a place for crap mechs as the cheap backbone of a faction' s forces, repaired more cheaply than a more exotic or customized mech. You know, the stuff that makes different sides balanced without being the same.

[Khobai]

Quote

How many years have we been begging for Solaris and now that they are giving it to us we are complaining?

because solaris should be free for all not 1v1 or 2v2

solaris isnt even being done right thats the worst part.


1v1 is crap. its just two mechs alphastriking eachother until one dies.

MWO literally could not get more boring than that.


8 mech FFA wouldve been awesome though. Because youd have to employ every skill in your arsenal to survive and be the last mech standing. Not just alphastrike over and over till you win.

Edited by Khobai, 10 December 2017 - 01:12 PM.

[Scout Derek]

Khobai, on 10 December 2017 - 01:10 PM, said:

because solaris should be free for all not 1v1 or 2v2

solaris isnt even being done right thats the worst part.

Where do you get the notion it should just be free for all? There were always times that there were 1v1s and 2v2s. Perhaps MW4 Mercs nostalgia is filling your mind with FFAs.

[Khobai]

Quote

Where do you get the notion it should just be free for all? There were always times that there were 1v1s and 2v2s. Perhaps MW4 Mercs nostalgia is filling your mind with FFAs.

I explained why. because 1v1 in this game is utterly stupid and boring.

I alphastrike. Now you alphastrike. Oh I alphastrike again. Now you get to alphastrike again. Oh I killed you with my third alphastrike. I win.

Who wants to play that? Thats garbage.


Im not saying there cant be 1v1 but it shouldnt be the whole thing. It should be done as part of a three round elimination match that starts as an FFA.

So first round would be 8 player FFA (top 4 players advance to round 2)
second round would be a 4 player FFA (top 2 players advance to round 3)
third round would be a 1v1

the top players for each round would advance. and your ranking would go up based on how far you advanced and what your placement was in each round.

Edited by Khobai, 10 December 2017 - 01:19 PM.