347 replies to this topic

[El Bandito]

Peiper, on 12 February 2018 - 07:56 AM, said:

I'm not a mathhammer guy so I'm going to make up a comparison, and you car junkies can go ape s--t telling me I'm wrong later.

Clan Camero weighs 1.5 tons. It has a 400hp engine, top speed of 150mph (or 252345 kph, whatever you Canadians use), manual 6 speed transmission, turbocharged 424 V-8.
Battle value, er cost: $40K

IS Taurus is 1.5 tons. It has a 160hp engine, top speed of 90mph downhill, automatic 3 speed transmission, fuel efficient 4 cylinder engine.
Battle Value, er cost: $18K

PGI's solution.
Clan Camero weighs 1.5 tons. It has a 160hp engine, top speed of 90mph downhill, automatic 3 speed transmission, fuel efficient 4 cylinder engine.
It costs: $40k.

IS Taurus is 1.5 tons. It has a 160hp engine, top speed of 90mph downhill, automatic 3 speed transmission, fuel efficient 4 cylinder engine.
It costs: $18K

Except Clan tech has not been nerfed down to IS level yet. Far from it. Do the test yourself. Take all the IS mechs you know, switch their tech into Clan ones, and you will see ALL of them performing better.

[Luminis]

Peiper, on 12 February 2018 - 07:56 AM, said:

The solution is and always has been BATTLE VALUE.

And the problems that come with BV have always been the same, namely having low BV 'Mechs that are, effectively, cannon fodder. A stock MCII-1 is, according to TT BV2.0, roughly equal to 7.5 LCT-1Vs.

I also don't put too much faith into PGI's ability to implement a BV system that accurately judges a custom 'Mechs BV and their ability to set up fair matches accordingly.

[El Bandito]

Peiper, on 12 February 2018 - 07:56 AM, said:

My solution, use battle value instead of tonnage in matchmaker. Quit pretending all mechs are equal and rate them as they should be. Don't be scared that this is what they do when creating forces in Battletech, and any other tabletop game where armys have 'point' values. It's how the gaming world has balanced imbalanced forces for decades.

Negative. You will basically cut PGI's mechpack revenue by half or worse. There is no reason for most of us to buy low BV mechs. No reason to buy mechs that cannot compete.

Edited by El Bandito, 12 February 2018 - 08:06 AM.

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

El Bandito, on 12 February 2018 - 12:34 AM, said:

The day when best IS mechs can compete without quirks against best Clan mechs across all classes is the day I say cross faction balance is achieved.

Considering that all of balance seems to be based on IS mechs having quirks to differentiate them and give each one more unique specializations, IS without quirks would be rather boring. I'll keep my quirks, thank you. That's kinda the asym balance of this game, or at least how its supposed to go, Clans get better base tech, IS gets better quirks, then they equal out.

[Novakaine]

Lo! Every 2.3 weeks right on schedule.
Just stop.

[Luminis]

Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood, on 12 February 2018 - 08:21 AM, said:

That's kinda the asym balance of this game, or at least how its supposed to go, Clans get better base tech, IS gets better quirks, then they equal out.

PGI proclaimed that their goal is (or was at the time, at any rate) that quirks are not supposed to fix the tech gap. They're supposed to balance 'Mechs within their given tech, but the tech bases are supposed to be different but equal.

/edit:
It's also really, really, really annoying to be unable to judge how good an IS 'Mech is gonna be prior to release because it's 100% reliant on quirks.

Edited by Luminis, 12 February 2018 - 08:28 AM.

[El Bandito]

Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood, on 12 February 2018 - 08:21 AM, said:

Considering that all of balance seems to be based on IS mechs having quirks to differentiate them and give each one more unique specializations, IS without quirks would be rather boring. I'll keep my quirks, thank you. That's kinda the asym balance of this game, or at least how its supposed to go, Clans get better base tech, IS gets better quirks, then they equal out.

1. Except the factions NEVER equaled out, even after three years. PGI can't do it with quirks, period. What we need is base tech balancing. Not 1:1, but equal competence.

2. You will still get plenty of unique quirks for most of the IS mechs post tech balance. It's only the top IS mech variants that will not need quirks, once tech is finally balanced. Cause on both sides most mechs are not that meta.

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

El Bandito, on 12 February 2018 - 08:38 AM, said:

1. Except the factions NEVER equaled out, even after three years. PGI can't do it with quirks, period. What we need is base tech balancing. Not 1:1, but equal competence.

2. You will still get plenty of unique quirks for most of the IS mechs post tech balance. It's only the top IS mech variants that will not need quirks, once tech is finally balanced. Cause on both sides most mechs are not that meta.

So, considering I'm someone who isn't of the opinion that the top mechs between the factions are imbalanced, what would you do with IS tech to make it equal to clan tech exactly? I can see Clan gauss is a bit better than the IS one since the lower durability compared to an IS one doesn't come into play much, otherwise IS ballistics are better than Clan ones (same effective DPS per ton while being more precise), IS Missiles are equal with clans (don't get shot down by AMS as badly, much less spread), Clan has a bit of an advantage in lasers when it comes to just alpha striking stuff, as is the meta, but laser brawling goes to the IS. Then there's the whole engine debate, which you already know I'm on the side of keeping the engines are they are as long as more mechs get defensive quirks where there are none.

[Mole]

Well I don't know about working in a coordinated group but I find PUG vs. PUG FP to be somewhat balanced these days. Regardless of what side I am playing, I win some and lose some.

[Requiemking]

I would like to take a moment to remind the people here that, once upon a time, we almost had balance. April 2016(release of the Kodiak) to June 2016(the Rescale). That was the best balanced period in MWO's history. The only outlier of the time was Oxide but a nerf to that mechs rather insane durability quirks would have solved that issue.

[Peiper]

El Bandito, on 12 February 2018 - 08:01 AM, said:

Except Clan tech has not been nerfed down to IS level yet. Far from it. Do the test yourself. Take all the IS mechs you know, switch their tech into Clan ones, and you will see ALL of them performing better.

You CAN'T nerf clan tech exactly to IS level because you can put more stuff on a clan mech. I understand. But that's what PGI is TRYING to do, I believe, in order to make all mechs viable. It's a losing game for everyone. I want my non-nerfed clan mechs back, not to stomp crappy IS mechs, but because I enjoy playing them. If that means I have to fight other good clan mechs or heavier/better IS mechs - of similar battle value - fine. Better than playing my favorite mechs and having them feel like playing underwater against mechs unaffected by a fluid environment. (I know that's weird, but that's how playing my old favorites feel, whether it's my once awesome Heavy Metal jump-brawler or Timber Wolf.)

Luminis, on 12 February 2018 - 08:04 AM, said:

And the problems that come with BV have always been the same, namely having low BV 'Mechs that are, effectively, cannon fodder. A stock MCII-1 is, according to TT BV2.0, roughly equal to 7.5 LCT-1Vs.

I also don't put too much faith into PGI's ability to implement a BV system that accurately judges a custom 'Mechs BV and their ability to set up fair matches accordingly.

The matchmaker would pit cannon fodder vs cannon fodder in your example, or at least try to. Want to take a swarm of cicadas? With battle value, you won't be put up against a bunch of storm crows. You'll be put up against other mechs of similar battle value. It won't be perfect, because not everyone will play cicada swarms. But think about it.

You've got say, 12 Tier 0 players vs. 12 tier 5 players. The Tier 5 players want to play 12 Kodiaks. The Tier 0 players want to take assault mechs too, but of course, if they add their player value/tier to the battle value of a kodiak, they will find that they will still not be match-made against the T5 players. To play the T5 team with 12 Kodiaks, they might have to take 12 IS Orions, because in the hands of T0 players, they can perform equivalently to T5 players in the biggest, baddest mechs.

I agree with the statement that it will be a challenge to PGI to balance out/find the right battle values. At first. But then, think about it. Once they get it down pretty well, they won't even have to nerf or buff a single mech again, ever. They'll simply adjust the value of the mech and it's parts.

El Bandito, on 12 February 2018 - 08:06 AM, said:

Negative. You will basically cut PGI's mechpack revenue by half or worse. There is no reason for most of us to buy low BV mechs. No reason to buy mechs that cannot compete.

I disagree. Currently, some mechs are absolutely garbage. Sometimes PGI puts out mechs of questionable value as it is already. The Black Lanner is equal to a Storm Crow or Bushwacker? I don't think so (but I'm not going to debate). The point is, a Black Lanner, with battle value, won't be matchmade against an equal opposing pilot in a stormcrow, if the stormcrow has a better battle value. The stormcrow would go against a rifleman or warhammer, let's say. The Black Lanner pilot would go up against a griffon pilot of equal ability, because the Black Lanner and the Griffon are battle value if in the hands of equal pilots.

__________________

Other examples of how you'll find fodder in drops.

So, let's say a good team wants to drop, but knows they can't find any matches because no other good teams are on. Sick of waiting for another good team, they will lower their battle value by taking crappier mechs. Then, they'll be facing well equipped but mediocre pilots - the majority of players out there - but with a handicap caused by battle value. Both teams will have a blast.

This is assuming that in team matches, both BV and Pilot Tier are taken into account. But even if you ignore pilot tier as they do now, you'll have some more balance than we currently do, because right now, the matchmaker doesn't differentiate between an Atlas and a Kodiak, or an Orion vs. a Timber Wolf. Which is the root cause of the over-nerfing and over-quirking of mechs in the game. A dragon is not equal to a Mad Dog. With Battle Value, they will no longer be considered equal.

Worst case scenario. The matchmaker can't find people of equal battle value + pilot skill tier. Stomps happen. But they already do. I would say, if the disparity is too much: T0 team in all the best mechs vs. T5 team in a variety of values, then put up a statement when the matchmaker times out stating: your BV/Tier score is THIS compared to the other teams in the queue which is THIS. Then teams can consider what they might have to do to find a match. I think it would be a lot of fun. It can also be used as a tool to help a newer guy level up. Put the new guy in the best mech, and the rest of the team take lesser mechs. Then the new guy will have a better chance at scoring. (Sure, you could put a T0 guy in a great mech and the rest take lesser mechs, but such charity would only go so far as the others want their fair share. Helping a new guy isn't the same as hero worship.)

[dario03]

Requiemking, on 12 February 2018 - 09:08 AM, said:

I would like to take a moment to remind the people here that, once upon a time, we almost had balance. April 2016(release of the Kodiak) to June 2016(the Rescale). That was the best balanced period in MWO's history. The only outlier of the time was Oxide but a nerf to that mechs rather insane durability quirks would have solved that issue.

Wait what?

[Luminis]

Peiper, on 12 February 2018 - 09:14 AM, said:

The matchmaker would pit cannon fodder vs cannon fodder in your example, or at least try to. Want to take a swarm of cicadas? With battle value, you won't be put up against a bunch of storm crows. You'll be put up against other mechs of similar battle value. It won't be perfect, because not everyone will play cicada swarms. But think about it.

I did. With the current population, there's just absolutely no way PGI can splinter the queue into dozens upon dozens of BV brackets. At best, both teams could hope to get roughly equal BV, but I don't believe for a second that the population is sufficient to create two teams that essentially only consist of three to four different 'Mechs of both sides. Plus, I'd hate to see diversity take that sort of hit. 'Mech diversity is bad enough as is, no need to kill it completely.

Peiper, on 12 February 2018 - 09:14 AM, said:

You've got say, 12 Tier 0 players vs. 12 tier 5 players. The Tier 5 players want to play 12 Kodiaks. The Tier 0 players want to take assault mechs too, but of course, if they add their player value/tier to the battle value of a kodiak, they will find that they will still not be match-made against the T5 players. To play the T5 team with 12 Kodiaks, they might have to take 12 IS Orions, because in the hands of T0 players, they can perform equivalently to T5 players in the biggest, baddest mechs.

We need a proper, zero-sum PSR system first, matchmaker needs to fit teams with roughly equally skilled players on both sides. That's far more important than some artificial handicaps. Actively punishing players for being good at the game is, frankly, pants on head ********.

Plus, if T0 players queue up in max BV Assaults (aka. the new meta), what are they supposed to be match up against?

Peiper, on 12 February 2018 - 09:14 AM, said:

I agree with the statement that it will be a challenge to PGI to balance out/find the right battle values. At first. But then, think about it. Once they get it down pretty well, they won't even have to nerf or buff a single mech again, ever. They'll simply adjust the value of the mech and it's parts.

I'd rather they make all the stuff worth having instead of just outright labelling some stuff as garbage and trying to just match garbage with garbage.

[Hobbles v]

sycocys, on 12 February 2018 - 07:40 AM, said:

I've never had a problem with MS, you guys have always seemed to at least attempt to find other groups to face. The units that follow you back and forth though so they can deliberately attempt to avoid coordinated units by letting you drop against them is another story though.

Ha. Those of us in BCMC and EVIL (probably kcom too) have actually had to remove all members of MS except for bandito and kwea from our friends lists because the rest of them dodge us.

[Abisha]

one supoce to take this serious.... for real?? 7 better agility
MUAHHAHAA hell good joke mate their is no Clan that go's slower then 60KM/H
Clan is almost superior in all aspects.

Edited by Abisha, 12 February 2018 - 09:42 AM.

[Marquis De Lafayette]

As said elsewhere....the only time Clans really have to worry is when the IS gets their brawlers up close and personal...if they can do that without taking too much damage then most Clan mechs (Clan brawlers excepted) are in real trouble. Other than that...this post was good for a laugh.

[Hobbles v]

Alex Just wants to play his erll supernova or war hawk on every map and doesn't want to play to the map instead. Seems a lot of high level mrbc comp team guys do the same when we see them in faction play. This trend can be seen in map voting for the worlds champs, they always pick the same few maps that favour long range with jump jets.

They normally play in an environment where the 2-2-2-2 tonnage class split is in effect. so comp assault pilots are used to being more durable than most of thier enemies because theres only 2 enemy assaults out there not 12 and on clan side those enemy assaults are often larger because of IS Tonnage. You wanna counter that on less sniper friendly maps? Play something less safe and more mean like a vomit maurauder, a deathstrike or even brawlers. Alternatively just go with 65 ton heavy spam and trade evenly with the IS assaults early on and take the lead later in the game at even tonnages.

Edited by Hobbles v, 12 February 2018 - 02:19 PM.

[Peiper]

Luminis, on 12 February 2018 - 09:27 AM, said:

I did. With the current population, there's just absolutely no way PGI can splinter the queue into dozens upon dozens of BV brackets. At best, both teams could hope to get roughly equal BV, but I don't believe for a second that the population is sufficient to create two teams that essentially only consist of three to four different 'Mechs of both sides. Plus, I'd hate to see diversity take that sort of hit. 'Mech diversity is bad enough as is, no need to kill it completely.

Peiper: I think you missed something in there. First, there wouldn't be a series of new brackets. Simply that those who were close enough to each other in combo of BV and Tier would be matched up.

Luminis: We need a proper, zero-sum PSR system first, matchmaker needs to fit teams with roughly equally skilled players on both sides. That's far more important than some artificial handicaps. Actively punishing players for being good at the game is, frankly, pants on head ********.

Peiper: There's no punishment intended. I was attempting to illustrate what might happen if T0 players in high BV mechs found no one anywhere near their matchmaker score to play with. Ideally, if the BV system works, MORE people will be playing and everyone could find someone near their matchmaking values to play with. I was illustrating how the BV system would be different from what we currently have, which causes many of my more casual player friends much frustration.

Plus, if T0 players queue up in max BV Assaults (aka. the new meta), what are they supposed to be match up against?

Ideally, others of similar skill and BV. As it is now, group queue ignores Tier, which is the cause of much frustration. (Best players) in a (best mech) will always beat me (okay player) in a (best mech). BV allows for things that we currently don't see as well. That's players playing mechs they enjoy, because they know they're more likely to find a good fight. Now, good players will STILL have a lot of fun with this as they'll bring out their own fun mechs, like the noisy cricket with PPC's, for example. Right now, mediocre players feel forced to play in their best mechs all the time or they feel they'll let down their team. With BV, you could drop in a match and hope to do well because you're more likely to find yourself facing a similar variety of mechs/skills. A group of great pilots in bad mechs might end up facing poor players in great mechs, or vice versa, which would be a blast, I think. Ideally, many matches will be a variety of mechs and skills vs. the same. BV allows for all those scenarios.

Luminis: I'd rather they make all the stuff worth having instead of just outright labelling some stuff as garbage and trying to just match garbage with garbage.

Peiper: Of course, which is why BV helps. It gives mechs a value equal to the actual value of the mech, instead of tonnage, which would help matchmaker put it up against like mechs. I have an image of a Shadowcat with a couple PPC's or LPL doing very well in a match, that's a dream of mine. It's not something I can get away with against great players with great mechs, but maybe against great players in other not so great mechs or bad players in great mechs. Don't you see the possibility?? I really don't understand why you're rejecting the idea. Are you and Bandito putting down this idea because you see it as a distraction from the current efforts to balance the game? Or because you see the change would be too big?

I say, continuing to try to balance the game the way PGI has is the problem. PGI is trying to make everything perfect, which in effect, makes everything the same. I want to see variety and a lot more builds. (Of course, stock mode is on my list as well, but even there, BV would have to be used because not even all variants of the same mech are anywhere near equal sometimes.)

[El Bandito]

Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood, on 12 February 2018 - 08:49 AM, said:

So, considering I'm someone who isn't of the opinion that the top mechs between the factions are imbalanced, what would you do with IS tech to make it equal to clan tech exactly? I can see Clan gauss is a bit better than the IS one since the lower durability compared to an IS one doesn't come into play much, otherwise IS ballistics are better than Clan ones (same effective DPS per ton while being more precise), IS Missiles are equal with clans (don't get shot down by AMS as badly, much less spread), Clan has a bit of an advantage in lasers when it comes to just alpha striking stuff, as is the meta, but laser brawling goes to the IS. Then there's the whole engine debate, which you already know I'm on the side of keeping the engines are they are as long as more mechs get defensive quirks where there are none.

The exact balance choices per weapon types would take too much time to write out. But I first need to correct one thing you said. Clan ballistics have better DPS/T than IS ones, not equal. A simple check on Smurphy will tell you that.

As for tech balance, not only weapons and engine, but Endo/FF/DHS/CASE/BAP/NARC/LAMS/TC etc should all be addressed, as Clans currently have superior versions of them without a downside. Gotta be thorough in eliminating the imbalance.

Edited by El Bandito, 12 February 2018 - 10:33 AM.

[El Bandito]

Peiper, on 12 February 2018 - 09:14 AM, said:

You CAN'T nerf clan tech exactly to IS level because you can put more stuff on a clan mech. I understand. But that's what PGI is TRYING to do, I believe, in order to make all mechs viable. It's a losing game for everyone. I want my non-nerfed clan mechs back, not to stomp crappy IS mechs, but because I enjoy playing them. If that means I have to fight other good clan mechs or heavier/better IS mechs - of similar battle value - fine. Better than playing my favorite mechs and having them feel like playing underwater against mechs unaffected by a fluid environment. (I know that's weird, but that's how playing my old favorites feel, whether it's my once awesome Heavy Metal jump-brawler or Timber Wolf.)

Of course you can nerf the Clan tech or buff the IS tech to have them in same level competence, while keeping them different. PGI simply is not doing it. There is absolutely no excuse for IS XL to stay strictly inferior than Clan XL for 3 years, for the MP only game. Quirks aint working well cause base tech is not equal. Tweak them into same level competence and suddenly you won't see 80% of the mechs used in MWOWC being Clan mechs for two years in a row.

Peiper, on 12 February 2018 - 09:14 AM, said:

So, let's say a good team wants to drop, but knows they can't find any matches because no other good teams are on. Sick of waiting for another good team, they will lower their battle value by taking crappier mechs. Then, they'll be facing well equipped but mediocre pilots - the majority of players out there - but with a handicap caused by battle value. Both teams will have a blast.

That will simply force people to play mechs they do not want to play. That's a negative.

Peiper, on 12 February 2018 - 09:14 AM, said:

This is assuming that in team matches, both BV and Pilot Tier are taken into account. But even if you ignore pilot tier as they do now, you'll have some more balance than we currently do, because right now, the matchmaker doesn't differentiate between an Atlas and a Kodiak, or an Orion vs. a Timber Wolf. Which is the root cause of the over-nerfing and over-quirking of mechs in the game. A dragon is not equal to a Mad Dog. With Battle Value, they will no longer be considered equal.

That will result in even more complicated MM formula and longer wait time, without the benefit of better MM.