126 replies to this topic

[MetalGhost]

The sad thing is non of the clan weapons really need nerfing but some buffs instead. All the groups that would stomp us while we are clans we just stomped pretty easy when we moved to IS yesterday. The problem is a few of the devs hate clans and that hate has unprofessionally moved over into the game, and allowed to persist.

[Y E O N N E]

MetalGhost, on 22 July 2018 - 10:49 AM, said:

The sad thing is non of the clan weapons really need nerfing but some buffs instead. All the groups that would stomp us while we are clans we just stomped pretty easy when we moved to IS yesterday. The problem is a few of the devs hate clans and that hate has unprofessionally moved over into the game, and allowed to persist.

You know our balance guy was a CGBI member, yes?

[MischiefSC]

I don't get why some people equate recognizing that OP Clan tech was an abject failure in TT and is, amazingly, an even worse failure in a FPS with being bias against Clans. It's why balance debates are hard to take seriously. You've got people who equate wanting a fun, well balanced game with being anti-Clan. Ironically this just shows exactly why the bad Clan balance was such a failure.

All the best balance recommendations have tried to keep Clans as distinct but balanced. That balanced doesnt mean "one side is inherently better" is a sticking point for some people just makes the topic all but a waste on a public forum.

[Naglinator]

MischiefSC, on 22 July 2018 - 11:04 AM, said:

I don't get why some people equate recognizing that OP Clan tech was an abject failure in TT and is, amazingly, an even worse failure in a FPS with being bias against Clans. It's why balance debates are hard to take seriously. You've got people who equate wanting a fun, well balanced game with being anti-Clan. Ironically this just shows exactly why the bad Clan balance was such a failure.

All the best balance recommendations have tried to keep Clans as distinct but balanced. That balanced doesnt mean "one side is inherently better" is a sticking point for some people just makes the topic all but a waste on a public forum.

Nothing really unbalancable with lopsided tech. Starcraft, Warhammer 40k and most WW2 games manage to have factions with different techs and abilities and make it work. ONLY PGI can't. Plus in TT, BV(when done right) was more then enough to balance the clans. This game either needs a tier system like WoT or BV back. tonnage is a poor indicator of strength.

[FupDup]

Naglinator, on 22 July 2018 - 11:36 AM, said:

Nothing really unbalancable with lopsided tech. Starcraft, Warhammer 40k and most WW2 games manage to have factions with different techs and abilities and make it work. ONLY PGI can't. Plus in TT, BV(when done right) was more then enough to balance the clans. This game either needs a tier system like WoT or BV back. tonnage is a poor indicator of strength.

Most of those are top-down strategy games where you control multiple units...

[Y E O N N E]

Naglinator, on 22 July 2018 - 11:36 AM, said:

Nothing really unbalancable with lopsided tech. Starcraft, Warhammer 40k and most WW2 games manage to have factions with different techs and abilities and make it work. ONLY PGI can't. Plus in TT, BV(when done right) was more then enough to balance the clans. This game either needs a tier system like WoT or BV back. tonnage is a poor indicator of strength.

Referencing games where you control armies vs. games where each player is responsible for one unit is not a valid comparison.

There have been games where each player is one unit with differences in factions, like Nosgoth, but they were not lopsided. They were equal, but different.

BV was never enough to balance Clans, that's why it got reworked twice and there is still work being done.

[Erik Krieger]

I really can't understand why pgi nerfs and nerfs and nerfs and nerfs.... as if you had no chance with IS Mechs against Clan Mechs... this just isn't true...

But whoever and whatever causes this in the first place, I have only ittle hope they will listen to us in their delirious "nerf fever"...

Edited by NobleSavage, 22 July 2018 - 12:30 PM.

[Naglinator]

FupDup, on 22 July 2018 - 11:39 AM, said:

Most of those are top-down strategy games where you control multiple units...

Yeonne Greene, on 22 July 2018 - 11:39 AM, said:

Referencing games where you control armies vs. games where each player is responsible for one unit is not a valid comparison.

There have been games where each player is one unit with differences in factions, like Nosgoth, but they were not lopsided. They were equal, but different.

BV was never enough to balance Clans, that's why it got reworked twice and there is still work being done.

How is warthunder and WoT top down strategy games?!?!?!?! Throw me a pug here. Mechs should be by tier in QP and CW doesn't matter because PGI long ago lost interest in it.

[Y E O N N E]

Naglinator, on 22 July 2018 - 02:46 PM, said:

How is warthunder and WoT top down strategy games?!?!?!?! Throw me a pug here. Mechs should be by tier in QP and CW doesn't matter because PGI long ago lost interest in it.

WT and WoT don't have the level of unit customization that MWO does, a feature which can make even the best 'Mech be garbage-tier.

And, really, the only difference in those games is good, better, best. There really isn't a play-style difference because, IRL, there isn't really a difference between firing a 7.62 mm and firing a 30 mm except that one can blow bigger holes in things. Mechanically, it's the same.

[Naglinator]

Yeonne Greene, on 22 July 2018 - 03:54 PM, said:

WT and WoT don't have the level of unit customization that MWO does, a feature which can make even the best 'Mech be garbage-tier.

And, really, the only difference in those games is good, better, best. There really isn't a play-style difference because, IRL, there isn't really a difference between firing a 7.62 mm and firing a 30 mm except that one can blow bigger holes in things. Mechanically, it's the same.

No, but you need a way to put over performing chassis and variants away from the others. You punish clan lasers for a mech like a deathstrike and you end up over punishing the crappy ice ferret. If you simply make all the lasers and weapons the same... well why play a battletech game? If WT made the sherman 75 identical to the tiger 88.. i wouldnt ever play again.. What's the point?? So since this will never get solved, ever, ever, anyone see the Shazam! and Aquaman Trailers?? I think they are objectively worse then even this upcoming patch.

Edited by Naglinator, 22 July 2018 - 04:22 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

Naglinator, on 22 July 2018 - 04:22 PM, said:

No, but you need a way to put over performing chassis and variants away from the others. You punish clan lasers for a mech like a deathstrike and you end up over punishing the crappy ice ferret.

Well, that's what you get when the community b*tched and moaned about negative quirks. It was the perfect solution, but now PGI has vowed not to do it ever again because people are scared of red text.

Quote

If you simply make all the lasers and weapons the same... well why play a battletech game? If WT made the sherman 75 identical to the tiger 88.. i wouldnt ever play again.. What's the point?? So since this will never get solved, ever, ever, anyone see the Shazam! and Aquaman Trailers?? I think they are objectively worse then even this upcoming patch.

We have no less than three concurrent threads showing how to make the weapons different without being better and without murdering Lights and such.

[Naglinator]

Yeonne Greene, on 22 July 2018 - 04:27 PM, said:

Well, that's what you get when the community b*tched and moaned about negative quirks. It was the perfect solution, but now PGI has vowed not to do it ever again because people are scared of red text.



We have no less than three concurrent threads showing how to make the weapons different without being better and without murdering Lights and such.

They were fine when the clan mechs were released and they are fine now. Even when they were first released the same amount of people play IS as now and the world didn't end. People worked around the problem. . Give all IS mechs a 20 percent armour buff, boom, done, Next. Plus PGI made up their minds BEFORE they posted the test server notes. They are just saving face by even having a test sever. So no comment on the trailers!?!?!

[OmniFail]

NobleSavage, on 22 July 2018 - 12:29 PM, said:

I really can't understand why pgi nerfs and nerfs and nerfs and nerfs.... as if you had no chance with IS Mechs against Clan Mechs... this just isn't true...

But whoever and whatever causes this in the first place, I have only ittle hope they will listen to us in their delirious "nerf fever"...

The balance team gets paid to balance.
If the balance team balances the game.
The balance team will not be needed.

Where is the incentive.

Think about it. How is it that a five year old game is always in a preternatural state of heavy balancing?

Edited by OmniFail, 22 July 2018 - 04:43 PM.

[Rafe Yomin]

Naglinator, on 22 July 2018 - 11:36 AM, said:

Nothing really unbalancable with lopsided tech. Starcraft, Warhammer 40k and most WW2 games manage to have factions with different techs and abilities and make it work. ONLY PGI can't. Plus in TT, BV(when done right) was more then enough to balance the clans. This game either needs a tier system like WoT or BV back. tonnage is a poor indicator of strength.

So what would you mean by tier? Start out the game in a commando, buy heavier mechs of higher tier and only be able to play your commando in Tier lowest+1? That sounds more like heavily restricting what can face eachother. You realize your example of WoT (Have no idea what BV is, nor TT. Could you maybe write the game names out?), doesn't have a matchmaker which takes skill into account, right? It takes players of the same tier in the same kind of tank (so basically straight up matching weight classes) and throws them in a match. Just like MWO does .

Edit: Nevermind the question in parenthesis, just got it, battlevalue on tabletop. Damn i'm slow

Edited by Rafe Yomin, 23 July 2018 - 02:08 PM.

[MischiefSC]

Naglinator, on 22 July 2018 - 04:35 PM, said:

They were fine when the clan mechs were released and they are fine now. Even when they were first released the same amount of people play IS as now and the world didn't end. People worked around the problem. . Give all IS mechs a 20 percent armour buff, boom, done, Next. Plus PGI made up their minds BEFORE they posted the test server notes. They are just saving face by even having a test sever. So no comment on the trailers!?!?!

No, in Tabletop Clan/IS balance was horrible and the games designers have even said so. So it was bad in TT and was even worse in a FPS. By your logic there is no such thing as good game balance, just dice it up into different parts of the game by splitting everything up? Your logic is literally that no game should really bother with trying to balance anything, people will probably play it anyway just because of nostalgia.

Do you work for EA?

Edited by MischiefSC, 26 July 2018 - 10:26 AM.

[OmniFail]

For the love of God, can we just go get rid of Paul now? I just know that eliminating one crack head would make a world of difference for all of us. PGI included.

[MischiefSC]

OmniFail, on 26 July 2018 - 10:40 AM, said:

For the love of God, can we just go get rid of Paul now? I just know that eliminating one crack head would make a world of difference for all of us. PGI included.

I dont know Paul. The only things I've ever heard from people who've met him is that he's a really nice guy.

Not a fan of personal attacks and to be honest they're not relevant. I dont have an issue with anyone who works for PGI - I dont know them but assume they're largely nice people, like the vast majority of folks in the gaming industry. Honestly you can often make more money with the same resume outside gaming but it tends to attract people who like games and playing with people.

The problem is that we're chasing the metric of balance without trying to keep the game fun. I'm a huge proponent of good balance - however I'm not finding the current direction nearly as fun. I dont think I'm alone in that.

THAT is what I can speak to. For all I know Paul wasn't involved in these decision overmuch because he was delivering puppies to homeless children.

Edited by MischiefSC, 26 July 2018 - 01:05 PM.

[Rafe Yomin]

MischiefSC, on 26 July 2018 - 01:05 PM, said:

I dont know Paul. The only things I've ever heard from people who've met him is that he's a really nice guy.

Not a fan of personal attacks and to be honest they're not relevant. I dont have an issue with anyone who works for PGI - I dont know them but assume they're largely nice people, like the vast majority of folks in the gaming industry. Honestly you can often make more money with the same resume outside gaming but it tends to attract people who like games and playing with people.

The problem is that we're chasing the metric of balance without trying to keep the game fun. I'm a huge proponent of good balance - however I'm not finding the current direction nearly as fun. I dont think I'm alone in that.

THAT is what I can speak to. For all I know Paul wasn't involved in these decision overmuch because he was delivering puppies to homeless children.

While i don't agree with the personal attack made in the post you quoted, i know/knew many people who are nice people, but who are completely incompetent at their jobs (I worked a helpdesk, and the biggest part of our customers got through to the general generic callcenter which was recruited/trained on social skills (who's the biggest talker in the group job interview) instead of technical skills....).

There are definitely some people who could use some more common sense though. The changes do almost nothing to the mechs they're supposed to target, and screw over lights and mediums basically: That's incompetence at the job.
The person who came up with the colorblind mode which adds lines around your reticule, of the color which most people have problem with, and thinks that helps: that's incompetence at the job.

Edited by Rafe Yomin, 27 July 2018 - 04:25 AM.

[Xeno Phalcon]

MischiefSC, on 26 July 2018 - 01:05 PM, said:

For all I know Paul wasn't involved in these decision overmuch because he was delivering puppies to homeless children.

(Paul gets flakk cause hes made poor choices before, im looking at you weapon modules with 0.003% increase to lbx spread)

[MischiefSC]

As I don't work at PGI and am not present for the conversations and decisions being made, who makes them and has what input I can't really say who is and isn't good at their job. As such trying to attribute anything to a specific person is a baseless assumption.

I can however say "I don't like the current approach PGI is taking to balance, it's not fun. I want balance but I want it to be fun".

When you attempt to attribute a specific person for something you devalue your point because you've taken it from a criticism of a specific balance function (this thing that I have direct experience with doesn't make me happy) and turn it into a easily dismissed personal attack (this guy I don't know, have never met and know nothing about who I'm assuming does this thing in this process I'm totally disconnected from is terrible because of reasons I can not justify).

Unless your problem is 'Paul PMed me and said I suck eggs, thus I am angry at Paul' then throwing names around just dilutes your point.