129 replies to this topic

[Mcgral18]

thievingmagpi, on 06 October 2018 - 09:55 AM, said:

play mechs that are fun.

PGI has nerfed all of those though

[Tarl Cabot]

Mystere, on 06 October 2018 - 04:28 AM, said:

Stop beating around the bush and ask for a "real" critical hit system.

Trying to stir the fires there? Though I would not be against it, I do not believe that is even in the realm of MWO reality... and would require a major overhaul, ie taking a significant more dev hours than modifying the current system in place, changing the outcome of when a flag is flipped. The whether the engines occupy more than one section, they are likely considered only one component, and remember at one time PGI said engines can be crit but nothing happens with said crits. Right now it is 1st ST destroyed, check for cXL/LFE > penalties applied, isXL > dead mech, STD > nothing happens.

I do wonder though, how PGI is applying TT rules to MW5 with regards of engine crits, crits in general, heatscale.. but that is another discussion.

[thievingmagpi]

Khobai, on 06 October 2018 - 10:02 AM, said:

There is Clan vs IS. Its called Faction Play.

Fp isn't mwo. Just like solaris isn't mwo.

Mwo is sq/gq.

Nor does fp suffer from engine-inequality based balance issues.

[Tarl Cabot]

thievingmagpi, on 06 October 2018 - 11:43 AM, said:

Fp isn't mwo. Just like solaris isn't mwo.

Mwo is sq/gq.

Nor does fp suffer from engine-inequality based balance issues.

FP makes up a portion of MWO, just like Solaris does. MWO made up for inequalities, primarily player base but Russ also twitted it was partially due to tech by providing IS with a higher max tonnage. The last time max tonnage was the same was pre Dec 2016.

https://mwomercs.com...-tonnage-change

https://mwomercs.com...change-12152016

The other thing to consider are the few new players and returning players, among others who initially rely on Trial mechs. To have such a wide gulf on penalties, from movement/heat dissipation penalty vs death, never mind when those first mechs are purchased, especially the ones with isXL engines, or said engines purchased to replace stock engines then to find out if a side torso and not the CT is lost the mech dies. Nor do mech gain increased agility from a higher rated engine, be it an Omni or Battlemech.

I do wonder how PGI will handle the crit damage in MW5, if it will mirror MWO setup or if they will make changes to it, then there is the crossover from MW5 to MWO.

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 07 October 2018 - 12:25 PM.

[thievingmagpi]

Tarl Cabot, on 07 October 2018 - 12:18 PM, said:

FP makes up a portion of MWO, just like Solaris does. MWO made up for inequalities, primarily player base but Russ also twitted it was partially due to tech by providing IS with a higher max tonnage. The last time max tonnage was the same was pre Dec 2016.

https://mwomercs.com...-tonnage-change

https://mwomercs.com...change-12152016

The other thing to consider are the few new players and returning players, among others who initially rely on Trial mechs. To have such a wide gulf on penalties, from movement/heat dissipation penalty vs death, never mind when those first mechs are purchased, especially the ones with isXL engines, or said engines purchased to replace stock engines then to find out if a side torso and not the CT is lost the mech dies. Nor do mech gain increased agility from a higher rated engine, be it an Omni or Battlemech.

I do wonder how PGI will handle the crit damage in MW5, if it will mirror MWO setup or if they will make changes to it, then there is the crossover from MW5 to MWO.

So when the two were pitted against each other there were unique ways of mitigating it that play into the gameplay mechanics. Next.

New players using trial mechs is an issue with trial mechs and NPE, not engines. Next.

[Khobai]

thievingmagpi, on 07 October 2018 - 02:24 PM, said:

Mwo is sq/gq.

and the game doesnt regulate how many clan mechs can be on a team in sq/gq.

so if one team gets more clan mechs in sq/gq that can potentially result in imbalanced teams in sq/gq.

so even in sq/gq, IS vs clan still needs to be balanced.

thievingmagpi, on 07 October 2018 - 02:24 PM, said:

So when the two were pitted against each other there were unique ways of mitigating it that play into the gameplay mechanics

it didnt work though. clan vs IS was unbalanced back then and its still unbalanced now.

the only way theyll ever be adequately balanced is if PGI first balances the tech base fundamentals (engines, heatsinks, and FF/ES)

once again PGI fails miserably at asymmetrical balance. its clearly not something they should still be attempting.

Edited by Khobai, 07 October 2018 - 02:46 PM.

[thievingmagpi]

Khobai, on 07 October 2018 - 02:41 PM, said:

and the game doesnt regulate how many clan mechs can be on a team in sq/gq.

.

LMAO

Why would it?

Khobai, on 07 October 2018 - 02:41 PM, said:

so if one team gets more clan mechs in sq/gq that can potentially result in imbalanced teams in sq/gq.

.

Bring better mechs, EZ.

Khobai, on 07 October 2018 - 02:41 PM, said:

so even in sq/gq, IS vs clan still needs to be balanced.

.

Is vs clan doesn't exist in sq/gq

Khobai, on 07 October 2018 - 02:41 PM, said:

it didnt work though. clan vs IS was unbalanced back then and its still unbalanced now.

.

Is vs clan doesn't exist in sq/gq

[Jay Leon Hart]

Just so I have this straight, the argument is;
"IS / Clan balance doesn't matter (or exist), because FP doesn't matter and you can always choose to bring a better 'mech in Solo or Group Queue"

So, even if Clan 'mechs had 200% health to all components and IS 'mechs could only do 1 damage with weapons every 10s, there would be no IS / Clan imbalance and IS / Clan balance would not mater? Just to take that train of thought to a logical extreme, to show how terrible it is.

[FupDup]

thievingmagpi, on 07 October 2018 - 02:53 PM, said:

Bring better mechs, EZ.

So you're acknowledging an imbalance, yes? If A is better than B that means either one of them is too weak or one of them is too strong. You can't have something be both inferior and balanced at the same time. That's like telling a "truthful lie" (i.e. being a lie makes it untruthful by definition).

I'm not agreeing with Khobai's solutions mind you, I have entirely different ideas than he does.

Edited by FupDup, 07 October 2018 - 03:17 PM.

[thievingmagpi]

Jay Leon Hart, on 07 October 2018 - 03:07 PM, said:

Just so I have this straight, the argument is;
"IS / Clan balance doesn't matter (or exist), because FP doesn't matter and you can always choose to bring a better 'mech in Solo or Group Queue"

So, even if Clan 'mechs had 200% health to all components and IS 'mechs could only do 1 damage with weapons every 10s, there would be no IS / Clan imbalance and IS / Clan balance would not mater? Just to take that train of thought to a logical extreme, to show how terrible it is.

When making comparisons it's good to use ones that are even remotely appropriate.

But sure, I just wouldn't touch the ****** mechs. I don't own an Awesome and I don't own a Hellspawn. i own mechs that are fun I don't give a **** about faction loyalty or lore.

I find lots of IS XL mechs fun and effective.

[thievingmagpi]

FupDup, on 07 October 2018 - 03:16 PM, said:

So you're acknowledging an imbalance, yes? If A is better than B that means either one of them is too weak or one of them is too strong. You can't have something be both inferior and balanced at the same time. That's like telling a "truthful lie" (i.e. being a lie makes it untruthful by definition).

I'm not agreeing with Khobai's solutions mind you, I have entirely different ideas than he does.

There being good and bad mechs doesn't point to an engine based inequality between an arbitrary "faction" selection.


Bringing better mechs doesn't mean no IS XLs, just bring good ones.

Edited by thievingmagpi, 07 October 2018 - 03:25 PM.

[Jay Leon Hart]

thievingmagpi, on 07 October 2018 - 03:21 PM, said:

There being good and bad mechs doesn't point to an engine based inequality between an arbitrary "faction" selection.

Bringing better mechs doesn't mean no IS XLs, just bring good ones.

So you don't think the Clan XL >>> IS XL?

Or you don't care, because some IS 'mechs can still make it work, meaning engine balance doesn't matter?

Or something else?

[Jay Leon Hart]

Interesting...

thievingmagpi, on 28 July 2018 - 02:37 PM, said:

Commando with a CXL...
Javelin with a CXL...
Locust with a CXL...

I'm salivating. My kdr and WL just quintupled.

[thievingmagpi]

Jay Leon Hart, on 07 October 2018 - 11:31 PM, said:

So you don't think the Clan XL >>> IS XL?

Or you don't care, because some IS 'mechs can still make it work, meaning engine balance doesn't matter?

Or something else?

It's irrelevant.

Jay Leon Hart, on 08 October 2018 - 01:19 PM, said:

Interesting...

That's right. It's not needed.

[Tarl Cabot]

In your opinion it is not needed, opposite of our opinions. And we have attempt to show why it is needed, not just now but in a possible future if PGI introduces IS Omnimechs with the current Omni locked components. Never mind Loyalty/Special/Hero mechs which come with advanced XL engines. This also talks to the PGI's bottom line also. Have you shown how making said change would be detrimental, unbalanced for the game?

For now, ignore the only HARD rule PGI is using for the engine crit that ONLY pertains to isXL, the 3 engine crit rule, just remember that cXL/LFE are not taken out by that one hard rule, it takes min 4 engine crits (both side torsos) to take out a mech. The LFE+both XL should be following a standard rule set made for this type of environment while simply using the TT for flavor/inspiration. The game has a high learning curve as it is for new players, who would be using trial mechs both clan and IS mechs which are equipped with XL engines, but where cXL can still do things while isXL dies with the ST loss.

Now bring in FP. Paul/Russ wants to "enhance" it but it takes a population for it to really matter. For many the current isXL benefit is as long as it was IS vs IS, same weapons, ranges, etc but with Clan vs IS, that is like adding on an additional multiplier on Clan mechs with lighter and/or smaller components, most weapons dealing more damage at longer ranges without the one major vulnerability of isXL.

In the end, all we can do is keep poking. Things will either pop and go away, or something may actually happen. In the end, tis PGI bottom line with milking the mech packs, since nostalgia will only go so far, and that isXl and cXL is one of the biggest differences between the techs in that they provide the same weight savings but with one being survivable vs non-survivable difference.

[thievingmagpi]

enjoy an increasingly bland, samey product where every mech and weapon system is the same.

[Mcgral18]

thievingmagpi, on 09 October 2018 - 02:35 PM, said:

enjoy an increasingly bland, samey product where every mech and weapon system is the same.

Better than the majority being worthless; far more variety actually

[Tarl Cabot]

Mcgral18, on 09 October 2018 - 08:05 PM, said:

Better than the majority being worthless; far more variety actually

Quoted so I can like it again!!

[Mystere]

Mcgral18, on 09 October 2018 - 08:05 PM, said:

Better than the majority being worthless; far more variety actually

There are already many other more worthless things in MWO. I'd rather PGI started with those first. Otherwise so-called "variety" will still be very much missing.

Edited by Mystere, 10 October 2018 - 03:07 PM.

[Mcgral18]

Mystere, on 10 October 2018 - 03:06 PM, said:

There are already many other more worthless things in MWO. I'd rather PGI started with those first. Otherwise so-called "variety" will still be very much missing.

True, they do fail on almost every aspect

Which is quite sad