96 replies to this topic

[LordBraxton]

Relating to another thread, I wanted to create a similar discussion to avoid hijacking or derailing the previous one, which concerned agility in relation to laser balance.

What did the agility desync achieve?

Was the point to make lighter mechs more viable through gimping agile assaults? This game is still dominated by (mostly clan) heavies and assaults, so clearly that failed.

In my opinion, most of the meta mechs are the same as before (besides TWolf), and the desync did little to nothing to further balance, or to increase the viability of a greater number of chassis. Most mechs succeeded or failed based on their geometry, weapon placement, hard points, and access to clan tech. This is still the case today.

So what did the desync do for MWO besides ruin a large selection of older IS assaults?

[Imperius]

Made assaults a pain to play. Pretty much not fun or worth buying anymore.

[El Bandito]

LordBraxton, on 20 May 2018 - 09:37 AM, said:

Was the point to make lighter mechs more viable through gimping agile assaults? This game is still dominated by (mostly clan) heavies and assaults, so clearly that failed.

I doubt the likes of Piranha/Assassin would have been as deadly if engine wasn't desynced, so I do not think it failed. Sure, PGI had not been good at giving appropriate amount of values to each individual variants, but I personally like the engine desync--and this is coming from a guy who mains Assaults the most. Basically, the idea was good, the implementation was spotty.

Edited by El Bandito, 20 May 2018 - 10:07 AM.

[Tarl Cabot]

Like many things, too many things were happening at one time. Engine Desync happened at the SAME time as the new Skill Tree, but lets roll that back some.

Previous Mech Tree, if a player was going to get the full usage out of it, needed to have all of the components purchased. Basics, then all 4 Elite slots to double up on the effectiveness of the Basics then Master to get extra module slot. So the following slots improved the base engine stats, and put in a higher engine rating, itself with improved "agility" already still saw an additional improved performance: Speed Tweak, Kinetic Burst, Anchor Turn, Hard Brake, Twist Speed (iirc), with their percentages doubled once a mech was elited.

Again, the previous Mech Tree, it was basically all mandatory, whereas the new Skill Tree a player has to pick and chose, there is no required linear progression, overall. Now, if the engine desync had happened with the old Tree, would it have been as critical? /shrugs. PGI had already reduced Speed Tweak percentage previously at least once.

Imho, with the new Skill Tree, instead of pulling both triggers PGI could have reduced the engine agility from its previous numbers instead of putting in a flat baseline sync'd to the weight/weight class. Then reduce it further down the line.

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 20 May 2018 - 10:50 AM.

[Khobai]

the point of engine desync was to give all mechs of the same tonnage consistent agility across the board. the base agility of a mech was supposed to be determined by its tonnage (rather than its engine rating) and then the mech might get like +/- 15% agility based on its specific role.

thats all PGI had to do. but they went way beyond that and used engine desync as a way to majorly nerf agility on assaults and clan mechs and basically sucked all the fun out of playing them.

and the best part is... we still dont have consistent agility for mechs of the same tonnage. we still have horrendous outliers and theres still no consistency at all.

so not only did PGI completely fail at what engine desync was meant to accomplish. They also made the game LESS fun in the process.

actually its the combination of engine desync along with the new skill tree removing all the free mobility skills thats made the game way less fun in the last year or so. we used to get all the mobility skills for free and now we have to pay skill points for them, and theyre not worth it anymore, since weapons and armor and operations are all better investments. they tried to fix it by buffing the mobility skills but 5% is still totally insignificant.

Edited by Khobai, 20 May 2018 - 10:23 AM.

[LordBraxton]

El Bandito, on 20 May 2018 - 10:06 AM, said:

I doubt the likes of Piranha/Assassin would have been as deadly if engine wasn't desynced, so I do not think it failed. Sure, PGI had not been good at giving appropriate amount of values to each individual variants, but I personally like the engine desync--and this is coming from a guy who mains Assaults the most. Basically, the idea was good, the implementation was spotty.

I certainly agree with the implementation being poor

However the assassin has fallen out of the quickplay scene completely, likely only surviving for as long as it did due to armor quirks, and I still see virtually no light mechs. Only time I am killed or threatened by a light is when my team has already been butchered and there is no cohesion left.

The issue is, most heavies were already better than the mechs who were ruined by the desync, like the awesome, Banshee, and zeus. It was just another stupid PGI decision which punished crappy mechs and did nothing to change the overall meta of the game.

If PGI would be aggressive with balance changes this might not be such a buzzkill. The banshee NEEDED the xl380 agility it used to have to Shield its torsos with big gorilla arms. If they would give the awesome and banshee and zeus the same agility as they used to have with huge engines, it wouldn't hurt so bad.

Im sick of piloting the same few mechs to feel competitive, and I miss my hipster mechs, which were never good, but at least used to be FUN

[theta123]

Compared to other games, PGI has actually been pretty okay with balancing work.

Play warthunder, and you will find out what i mean

[Seranov]

El Bandito, on 20 May 2018 - 10:06 AM, said:

I doubt the likes of Piranha/Assassin would have been as deadly if engine wasn't desynced, so I do not think it failed. Sure, PGI had not been good at giving appropriate amount of values to each individual variants, but I personally like the engine desync--and this is coming from a guy who mains Assaults the most. Basically, the idea was good, the implementation was spotty.

I agree with this. Luckily for me, I actually started playing like, two days before the engine desync patch went live, so I only have my experience with the mechs as they are now. There are very few I've played where I was frustrated with how slow they can react, and I imagine most of people's issues with engine desync is just that they don't like that they can't play the effected mechs the way they used to.

I could probably buy a NTG right now and do reasonably well in it, because I won't know any better. I run mostly assaults and heavies anyway.

[Khobai]

Quote

I could probably buy a NTG right now and do reasonably well in it, because I won't know any better. I run mostly assaults and heavies anyway.

yeah but theres still absolutely no reason the NTG should have the same agility as a 95 ton mech.

Its a pocket assault, so itd probably be okay to give it the agility of an 80-85 tonner. but a 95 tonner? why?!

[FireStoat]

It was a directed nerf to over performing Assaults as well as a general Clan mech nerf dressed up in the guise of 'balance between weight classes for their roles'. That last part is probably one of the most baldfaced lies that PGI ever gave to the community. At the time the pair of mechs causing the most problems for game balance were the Marauder IIC and Kodiak chassis, with the Scorch and KDK-3 being the variants being seen at the top of the heap. The Night Gyr was also a major offender in terms of being frightening with how often it was used and how well a person could do with it.

In preparation for the Civil War tech and the Skill tree, PGI's teams first looked at every mech and made some odd decisions on what each chassis should have as a baseline agility profile, and then this was further adjusted by someone else when the engine decouple from agility went down. The proof that the offered reason of intent was a lie was found in mechs like the Dragon which retained an agility profile better than numerous Light mechs with its weight being 60, and the 75 ton Timberwolf being given an agility profile equal to an 85 ton Warhawk, while retaining its negative quirks for mobility on top of this new base. Mechs like the MAD IIC ( B and (D) were given the same agility as the Scorch even though they were in vastly different realms of performance, which is what also happened to the Spirit Bear being given a nearly identical base agility equal to the KDK-3.

It's a sore subject in these parts for some. Many could call it a success for what it accomplished, but many more still look at PGI for having lied to sell what they wanted.

Edited by FireStoat, 20 May 2018 - 10:39 AM.

[Luminis]

El Bandito, on 20 May 2018 - 10:06 AM, said:

the idea was good, the implementation was spotty.

If that ain't the name of the game for MWO, I don't know what is.

LordBraxton, on 20 May 2018 - 10:19 AM, said:

If PGI would be aggressive with balance changes this might not be such a buzzkill. The banshee NEEDED the xl380 agility it used to have to Shield its torsos with big gorilla arms. If they would give the awesome and banshee and zeus the same agility as they used to have with huge engines, it wouldn't hurt so bad.

The big issue I personally have with PGI in that regard is how averse they are to buffing Mechs. It most certainly doesn't take a lot of work to change a few lines of text in an XML file - and if they need to, I'll gladly write them a little tool to alter the stats on several Mechs at once if need be; there's just no rational reason why underperformers like the Banshee don't get their agility back. No reason at all.

[VonBruinwald]

theta123, on 20 May 2018 - 10:26 AM, said:

Compared to other games, PGI has actually been pretty okay with balancing work.

Play warthunder, and you will find out what i mean

Shhh... War Thunder is perfectly balanced, and there's certainly no Russian bias going on. If there was don't you think they'd be discussing it on their forums...

As far as the desync went... it's a good idea that works, in theory, but they need to tweak individual 'mechs (something that was originally intend and seems to be forgotten about). It's biggest boon was the reduced dependence of IS mech's on XL engines.

[Khobai]

Luminis, on 20 May 2018 - 10:42 AM, said:

If that ain't the name of the game for MWO, I don't know what is.


The big issue I personally have with PGI in that regard is how averse they are to buffing Mechs. It most certainly doesn't take a lot of work to change a few lines of text in an XML file - and if they need to, I'll gladly write them a little tool to alter the stats on several Mechs at once if need be; there's just no rational reason why underperformers like the Banshee don't get their agility back. No reason at all.

Pretty much all 90+ ton mechs need their agility back.

The banshee isnt exactly known for being agile. I dont see why the banshee should get special treatment.

[Luminis]

VonBruinwald, on 20 May 2018 - 10:58 AM, said:

Shhh... War Thunder is perfectly balanced, and there's certainly no Russian bias going on.

Also gonna make you feel way better about the grind in MWO. And make the prices look downright fair.

Khobai, on 20 May 2018 - 11:06 AM, said:

Pretty much all 90+ ton mechs need their agility back.

The banshee isnt exactly known for being agile. I dont see why the banshee should get special treatment.

The Banshee in particular shouldn't, but underperforming Mechs in general - which the Banshee is an example of - should definitely be first in line to get their agility increased.

Edited by Luminis, 20 May 2018 - 11:11 AM.

[Kanil]

In general, the desync made running smaller engines more viable. In particular, it makes swapping an XL engine out for a smaller LFE not as big of a deal.

There are some issues with it, and those issues are made worse by PGI using mobility to nerf certain 'mechs that they otherwise don't know what to do with (IE: any top clan 'mech) but overall I think it's a good thing.

[Mystere]

Luminis, on 20 May 2018 - 11:06 AM, said:

Also gonna make you feel way better about the grind in MWO. And make the prices look downright fair.

Considering I currently play more of WT and less of MWO, while having much paid less into the former as opposed to the latter, all I can say is:

Of course, my new Samsung HMD Odyssey might also have something to do with it.

[Nightbird]

Intent to was slow Clan assault and heavy mechs down. When agility was tied to engine size, clan mechs were far more agile than IS assault/heavies because they would take larger C-XL engines.

[Luminis]

Mystere, on 20 May 2018 - 11:17 AM, said:

Considering I currently play more of WT and less of MWO, while having much paid less into the former as opposed to the latter, all I can say is:

Let me know when you're grinding out a jet. And start playing it before it's spaded. Spoilers: It ain't pretty.

[Khobai]

Quote

The Banshee in particular shouldn't, but underperforming Mechs in general - which the Banshee is an example of - should definitely be first in line to get their agility increased.

I dont agree. I think a mech's role should determine its agility.

just because the banshee underperforms doesnt mean it should have better agility. because its role isnt to be agile.

the banshee should instead get quirks that buff the role its supposed to perform. the banshee's role is primarily brawling. so it should get armor quirks and brawling weapon quirks, much like the atlas.

but as far as agility goes, the banshee should have the same baseline agility as all other 95 tonners. theres no reason it should be more agile than any other 95 tonner.

however, like I said above, pretty much all 90+ mechs need agility buffs. so yeah the baseline agility for all 95 tonners needs to be raised, and that would include the banshee, but every other 95 tonner as well.

Edited by Khobai, 20 May 2018 - 11:22 AM.

[Nightbird]

Of course, PGI couldn't resist nerfing some IS mechs at the same time.