845 replies to this topic

[Eli The Chaldean]

Mighty Spike, on 05 August 2018 - 11:11 AM, said:

someone else saw that? :News:
https://mwomercs.com...oming-podcasts/

It's pretty cool that they noticed this whole problem with balance. The point is not in the alpha damage at 94. This is the problem as a whole in the balance of the clans. Outwardly, at first glance, for a beginner they may seem steeper. On the second - the same. And the third - it becomes clear that the clans have anything, but not what gives them some advantage.

Edited by Eli The Chaldean, 05 August 2018 - 03:30 PM.

[Lily from animove]

And again i say, just 30 heatscale, but oh noez some "internal testing" said its unfeasable.

but with 30 heattreshold, people would have to take serveral setups for various ranges on bigger mechs, because the Alpha is limited.

[Shadowomega1]

Lily from animove, on 06 August 2018 - 05:59 AM, said:

And again i say, just 30 heatscale, but oh noez some "internal testing" said its unfeasable.

but with 30 heattreshold, people would have to take serveral setups for various ranges on bigger mechs, because the Alpha is limited.

I don't know how many times I posted about that, and the one post I did that was pretty comprehensive over on reddit got down voted hard.

[SilentFenris]

Lily from animove, on 06 August 2018 - 05:59 AM, said:

And again i say, just 30 heatscale, but oh noez some "internal testing" said its unfeasable.

but with 30 heattreshold, people would have to take serveral setups for various ranges on bigger mechs, because the Alpha is limited.

Shadowomega1, on 06 August 2018 - 10:42 AM, said:

I don't know how many times I posted about that, and the one post I did that was pretty comprehensive over on reddit got down voted hard.

You'll find feedback advocating Lower Heat Cap and higher Heat Dissapation in the PTS threads as well as this one; you'll find it in threads advocating replacement of ghost heat...heck, you'll find it in posts dated 2012.

It is a good idea, just one of those things that has never gotten support from the majority of the playerbase or PGI. Players like their 90 damage laser vomit too much.

[Lily from animove]

SilentFenris, on 06 August 2018 - 03:44 PM, said:

You'll find feedback advocating Lower Heat Cap and higher Heat Dissapation in the PTS threads as well as this one; you'll find it in threads advocating replacement of ghost heat...heck, you'll find it in posts dated 2012.

It is a good idea, just one of those things that has never gotten support from the majority of the playerbase or PGI. Players like their 90 damage laser vomit too much.

I actually wonder how MW5 is going to handle this? do we get the same ******** instant vaporizing alphas?

[TheCaptainJZ]

Lily from animove, on 07 August 2018 - 12:47 AM, said:

I actually wonder how MW5 is going to handle this? do we get the same ******** instant vaporizing alphas?

MW5 won't have customization mechs last I heard. A Jenner D is a Jenner D and you can't make (many) changes to it. So variants actually mean something. Now, that plan could have changed in development.

[process]

TheCaptainJZ, on 07 August 2018 - 11:40 AM, said:

MW5 won't have customization mechs last I heard. A Jenner D is a Jenner D and you can't make (many) changes to it. So variants actually mean something. Now, that plan could have changed in development.

That would be really dumb, especially in the absence of PVP. Don't do it PGI.

[Shadow1212]

your major and overall approach is broken read the lore the clans were always more powerfull but had to fight in smaller numbers and sustainable alpha laser damage is still in is favor clearly you don't play clan mechs did you ever stop to consider when looking at the overall picture your approaching it the wrong way I have played a lot of cw and as a clan pilot there is almost no way to beat a first drop of 8 duel heavy gauss builds with the 4 mechs behind them running mrm 140 builds no matter what the clans bring seeing as you have killed all of our 100 tonners beyong even being usable

Edited by Shadow1212, 07 August 2018 - 09:46 PM.

[Shadow1212]

and for the record ms goon and many other organized units bring that sort of cw drop deck

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

Lily from animove, on 07 August 2018 - 12:47 AM, said:

I actually wonder how MW5 is going to handle this? do we get the same ******** instant vaporizing alphas?

A significant part of the massive alpha "problem" will be alleviated by the tech base. Last we heard, it will be set in the 3025 era. When you take away double heat sinks and gauss rifles, the issue almost goes away.

[Kynesis]

Bigbacon, on 11 June 2018 - 02:00 PM, said:

Just make heat freaking matter A LOT MORE!!!!

seriously. You would want alpha that 90 point loadout, go for it but you will insta-pop and die. You have this thing called HEAT which in BT was a serious consideration with serious risk. you didn't go around mashing alpha over and over like we do in MWO.

Make bad things happen as heat rises.
Make even more bad things happen if your heat spikes quickly.
Make heat saturation a thing. You can saturate the mech with heat and bad things happen.

MAKE PEOPLE MANAGE THEIR HEAT.

The key to this being that heat penalties should progress up the heat scale (just like it has in tabletop for 40 years), such that 'riding' the heat scale is a measured risk rather than all-or-nothing, as pointed out the above mentioned common method essentially erases the heat cap for most practical purposes.

[Kynesis]

thievingmagpi, on 11 June 2018 - 07:00 PM, said:

I've got a risky solution

Maps.


Yeah, people are getting tired and cranky because this game is hemorrhaging skilled players and everyone is bored of the same handful of maps. It's not high alpha boats that people find un-fun.

All these minor spreadsheet adjustments are just poor bandaid fixes.

New maps and UI/QOL improvements are what players need. Balance is fine.

Something tells me we won't get that and all we'll get is continued wankery until everyone is smacking each other with rubber mallets for 15 minutes on the same 2 maps.

More than anything, interesting things to do.
More maps won't extend, evolve or improve the formula. Almost every match is the same, with a different skybox and variety of obstacles. The devs clearly recognise this and for this reason, judge that more maps aren't really worth the investment.
Instead of addressing the issue though and evolve the formula, the current solution is to very rarely make a new map.

Objectives are largely irrelevant (at least until _after_ the winner is obvious) while pursuing objectives in their current state is nearly always a guaranteed loss, because just a few mechs difference in a fight makes such a dramatic difference.

By contrast, if we pop into Warframe (which attracts a great many MWO players and is wildly successful by comparison) the options and goals to work toward are almost too numerous to count and nearly all offer at least a reasonably rewarding path.

In MWO the only option is to join an arena fight either with a team or more often, a completely random mix of people and mechs.

[Kynesis]

AccessTime, on 14 June 2018 - 06:46 AM, said:

For LASER vomit balancing, why not use the movement and accuracy heat penalties of the original game. http://www.sarna.net...t_Effects_Table You already have movement penalties in the game for leg loss, XL/UL engine torso loss, etc. These could be expanded to heat. Already have cockpit / reticle shake for getting hit with high-impact weapons, this or some form of weapon malfunction / misfire could be added (ie. chance that LASER fires for only half or third of the duration, and does that much less damage). This would also fix the fact that the current most optimal way to play is the ride the top of the heat scale rather than the more balanced type of play you see in tabletop.

This does raise the skill level required for all levels of play and as such will impact new / less proficient players more than more proficient players.
Lots of things will do this though - all the more reason to better regulate the tiers and if necessary, reduce effects like this for players in T4/5.

[Tarl Cabot]

Shadow1212, on 07 August 2018 - 09:45 PM, said:

your major and overall approach is broken read the lore the clans were always more powerfull but had to fight in smaller numbers and sustainable alpha laser damage is still in is favor clearly you don't play clan mechs did you ever stop to consider when looking at the overall picture your approaching it the wrong way I have played a lot of cw and as a clan pilot there is almost no way to beat a first drop of 8 duel heavy gauss builds with the 4 mechs behind them running mrm 140 builds no matter what the clans bring seeing as you have killed all of our 100 tonners beyong even being usable

Just a tip about LORE. Lore did NOT have a mechlab, where ANYONE could change up their load out in a hearbeat...Have you ACTUALLY reviewed stock mechs for both IS and Clans and Star League? Clan mechs fielded way more weapons, more specialized setups, aka omni mechs, than IS or Star League mechs, which were more swiss knife type setups, a little bit at different ranges and encounters.

Or to put it in a ANOTHER way, when FASA playtested Clans with their batchall and such, Clans were using STAR LEAGUE era mechs/technology.. ya know, isXL isERLL, isML, etc and IS forces brought Clans to a STANDSTILL very early. That is when FASA developed Clan tech and Omnimechs, mechs that allow a commander to instruct the techs on how to set them up, allowing omnimechs to be reconfigured in a few hours with a specific payload. That is as far as anyone got to a quick mechlab. For battlemechs one would be looking at weeks or months to make changes and said changes may not even work at 100%.

So no, when speaking of Lore and the power of the Clans, one has to look at it without the use of a mechlab. Nor are we rolling dice where averagfe Clan pilots have better gunnery/piloting skills than average IS pilots.

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 08 August 2018 - 07:27 PM.

[Khobai]

mechlab op ban mechlab

silvertalonhawk, on 04 August 2018 - 11:48 AM, said:

Stop downgrading clan. It seems to be every change that is made is detrimental to clans. You need 2 viable sides to have a game. You are rapidly making one side unplayable. Stop please.

pretty much

it doesnt even matter if the nerfs are justified

when you repeatedly nerf one faction over and over you kill any desire to play that faction

which is why buffing IS as much as possible and nerfing Clans as little as possible makes far more sense

balance is an entirely relative thing. but nerfs feel bad. and buffs dont.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

the most not have a less TTK while weapons to high ...Factor 1:is bad tactical Awarness, bad and skilless playing and ..thats the guys thats crying Laser to high and run with a IS LRM assault in the 150m Range to fight...When 4 mechs with 2 Large lasers can hit a Single Target thats not use mobility and Cover ...than=less TTK ...Teamplay and Tactical Awarness is OP and in FW the Old Maze Maps bad designed with like Boreal ..its for the Defender a Doveshooting.

And the Lore based of a bad designed Table Top (with the clans) and only Dice luck with Weaponranges who only AI less Bots can miss shots...oh great my Dice say im hit with my shoulder Mounted Weapon the rigt feet from my Target in 30m away in shut down Mode.

All will plays mechs with a Gigantic arsenal of Weapons and crying thats the TTK is to less ? plays Tankgames with only a Maingun and a good hit over 1500 m and you Crew is with one hit dead.

Edited by Old MW4 Ranger, 19 August 2018 - 01:21 AM.

[SilentScreamer]

Khobai, on 18 August 2018 - 11:49 PM, said:

mechlab op ban mechlab



pretty much

it doesnt even matter if the nerfs are justified

when you repeatedly nerf one faction over and over you kill any desire to play that faction

which is why buffing IS as much as possible and nerfing Clans as little as possible makes far more sense

balance is an entirely relative thing. but nerfs feel bad. and buffs dont.

This is why children have parents that make decisions for them. "Mama, I do not want to go to school/ eat my vegetables/ take a bath." Sorry, but PGI is Mamma for everything MWO. Holler and cry all you want, the decision is theirs not ours.

If you want to attempt to sway their decision, words like "it doesn't matter if it is justified" are not what should come out of your mouth/keyboard.

[Tarl Cabot]

Khobai, on 18 August 2018 - 11:49 PM, said:

mechlab op ban mechlab

pretty much

it doesnt even matter if the nerfs are justified

when you repeatedly nerf one faction over and over you kill any desire to play that faction

which is why buffing IS as much as possible and nerfing Clans as little as possible makes far more sense

balance is an entirely relative thing. but nerfs feel bad. and buffs dont.

Just to note, PGI tried buffing IS with quirks then reduced most of the quirks to a sliver.. Though to be fair, Chris wasnt working for them at the time and several of their decisions had plagued us for awhile. He did mention something along the line that increasing the the HP was not really a valid option since the outstanding issue would still be there. Of course in early beta w/F&F PGI slashing the cooldown timers before doubling the armor (and inadvertently structure), it did setup things up. PGI could eventually increase the overall Armor/Structure value after slightly increase IS weapon values to roll in at majority of the weapon quirks that are used, a 1 pt or such on damage values while setting the max heatscale limit currently in play.

Lets be fair. What if PGI had started off with Clan base instead of IS base, would they have tripled the armor instead of doubling it after slashing the cooldowns? Then when PGI added IS base, would the isXL have been setup to destroy an IS with the loss of one side torso?

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 19 August 2018 - 08:58 AM.

[Khobai]

Tarl Cabot, on 19 August 2018 - 08:57 AM, said:

Just to note, PGI tried buffing IS with quirks then reduced most of the quirks to a sliver..

And we also told them at the time thats not how quirks should be used. Quirks arnt for balancing the tech bases. Quirks are for differentiating otherwise similar mechs.

The only way to balance the tech bases is to actually balance the tech bases. Thats what PGI still needs to do.

[SilentScreamer]

Tarl Cabot, on 19 August 2018 - 08:57 AM, said:

Just to note, PGI tried buffing IS with quirks :) then reduced most of the quirks to a sliver.. Though to be fair, Chris wasnt working for them at the time and several of their decisions had plagued us for awhile.

Having the meta change with every quirk pass was annoying, though it created some interesting dropdecks. Thunderbolts with ERPPCs at half heat reduction and locusts/commandos with 50% range boosts to ER Large Lasers. As others have said, this practice was a band-aid fix which made specific builds on specific mechs viable.

Tarl Cabot, on 19 August 2018 - 08:57 AM, said:

Lets be fair. What if PGI had started off with Clan base instead of IS base, would they have tripled the armor instead of doubling it after slashing the cooldowns? Then when PGI added IS base, would the isXL have been setup to destroy an IS with the loss of one side torso?

I believe the flaw in tech base balance is that PGI still believes 1 ton Clan should equal 1 ton IS. Leting go of that preconception would help MWO.