It would be good to bring back the past efficiency of the Jenners, they brought back those rusted Dragons and now they are better, why not should that happen with some lights, specially the classic Jenner ?
Over time, PGI has favored some mechs (specially new ones) and nerfed plenty that once were popular. If any was "over-performing" or was being used too much by the players, whether IS or clan mechs, they were notably reduced in their efficiency.
We saw what happened to Timber-wolves, Kodiaks, Night Gyrs, Black Knights, Centurions or Fire-starters, to name a few, nerfed to hell. Some may still be kind of good performers but now are nothing compared to what they used to be.
If you find a mech out there old or new that does great, you better not spread the word, as soon as their efficiency gets known and its fame spreads out, the inevitable destiny of the "over-performing" mech will be to receive a restraining nerf.
Taking out the fun seems to be a goal from PGI for the sake of their questionable idea of "balance". Oh but they have refused for years to bring a fair and decent match-maker...
Probably not that much will be done, this game has had so many pitfalls and bad changes, its probably past time to try to make PGI to listen to the community.
Aside from the sudden rush of people that claimed the season giveaways, the population numbers have gone down, and refuse to grow.
So, at least we had past good times with Jenners and Ravens, we were there when they shined, but now, by PGI's current agenda, or lack of it, its probably time to sadly say goodbye or just troll around with them. Maybe odd builds ? Well, I might still do that with my Ravens.
The most frustrating thing for me is the weak arms.
Before they moved the armor around I thought the Jenner was "okay". It wasn't really that good but not really that bad either. Putting the armor back on the arms is the first thing I think they should do to help the Jenner.
You know as well as I do that that pgi ain't going to do anything but nerf them more some how. they're dead set on mw5 and all things mw5. Mwo is dead as far as active development but the mech packs and endless cyle of nerf/buff will continue until they flip the server offline.
I rarely use my jenners for all the problems you've named. I use them for that unicorn riding a jenner reaction once in a blood red moon while during a solar eclipse. Spider 5v outperforms the jenners, that is how much pgi hates them. As much as I want them to be fun and competitive pgi doesn't know balance from a bag of burning dog doo doo. Jenners are my troll mechs
I know, and that is what irritates me. While the Jenner is all but dead, it is not alone. To fix this problem for this mech, and many others, a few easy fixes here and there, will make dead mechs very viable. I mean seriously how many times have we seen bad mechs turned good again due to a few easy tweaks.
Quote
Is there some great need of more Jenners on the field?
Also meta in shooters is binary. Something is either optimal or it isn't. Absent an external reward or restriction that modifies the payout the optimum will always be chosen over time.
So you like 1 to 2 piranhas in almost every match? Optimal has nothing to do with it unless your talking Community Warfare. There are plenty of people who do not play the meta. I am one of them, but I can make the non meta stuff work (at least in lights). I just think it set a horrible precedence that good mechs get nerfed into the ground after a newer shiny mech comes along. The vast majority of players agree the Jenner has been crapped on for a long time. The other 35 tonners can at least spread damage easier. Really the only thing we ever asked for for the Jenner was a decent quirk to the torsos. That was 5 years ago. What we have now is just something that was drawn up in a bathroom stall somewhere.
Quote
Claiming things become obsolete 'by design' is a redundant excuse - it's admitting they're only obsolete because that's the way PGI wants it... As in they're doing it for 'reasons', most likely to continue driving sales of new Mech Packs. It's a digital, imaginary environment they have total control over which means whatever they do (or don't do) is intentional.
There is also no reason for the gap separating optimal Mechs from sub-optimal Mechs to be so glaringly wide to the point, as you said, we have 20 peak varients and several hundred absolute garbage ones. The difference could be a matter of one varient having .01 better heat dissipation and that's it.
Agreed
Quote
Unless you have a time machine and the ability to rewrite the TROs, you just can't fix bad hitboxes, bad locked engines and bad weapon options. It's not even a matter the weight class -- between Adder, Uziel, Thanatos, Zeus and Executioner, they're all trash and have been since the moment we switched from dice to mice. A lot of Mechs are going to be better simply because of their ancestral design.
While you can't fix bad hitboxes, it is possible to make up for them. For Example the Locust 1V. One whopping energy point, but when it was correctly quirked it was a threat, now its damn near useless. Same with the Jenner, no one really ever asked to fix the hit boxes, we knew that could not be done. However they tried anyways and screwed it up even more. All we wanted were simply quirks. Instead of doing it an easy way the around the elbow to get to your nose is almost always used in the name of balance.
Quote
EDIT: I also remember Chris(? maybe Paul) saying that they didn't want to give every light the Urbie treatment to make them viable in game. Which is bunk imo given that they haven't shown they can improve viability any other way for lights in the past 6 years.
Most folks are not asking for the Urbie treatment in regards to balance. However a few easy things to implement is not out of the realm. The rescale killed most light mechs, and NO compensation was given. Yet the rescale was sold using the shrink of the catapult as the poster child. Had the community as a whole knew that most mechs would in fact be made much larger and easier to hit, the community would have revolted.
They can easily fix what they have broken, they just choose not to.
Quote
Agreed, but PGI won't reverse that horrific re-scale because its "too much work". Of course it wouldn't have been any work if they had left it alone as it wasn't even one of the mech's people asked to be changed to begin with.
But PGI gonna PGI...
Aye the entire community was bamboozled on the rescale premise.
Quote
The most frustrating thing for me is the weak arms.
Before they moved the armor around I thought the Jenner was "okay". It wasn't really that good but not really that bad either. Putting the armor back on the arms is the first thing I think they should do to help the Jenner
Yeah I logged this into the 2nd most dumb thing they did in the name of balance for the Jenner, the first being the re-scale. I do not think anything else they ever do will top that..... but who knows.... PGI has proved me wrong before.
I would like to thank everyone so far. This thread has not broken down into a flame fest and that is actually refreshing.
I think we all agree that there are simple things that can be done to fix the Jenner and a lot of other mechs that are within the scope of the programming. The question is will PGI fix it.
Or have they forgotten the power of this community
Edited by Darian DelFord, 29 December 2018 - 07:30 AM.
Jenners simply are too big. Full stop. If you want them to be worth running and not trash tier then need to be 3/4 the size they now are. They’re nearly as big as the 65 ton Catapult. That can’t be right.
When you scale using volume, mechs with little arms get fat torsos.
LocationPacifica Training School, waiting for BakPhar shares to rise
Posted 29 December 2018 - 01:56 PM
Darian DelFord, on 27 December 2018 - 06:40 AM, said:
I understand that PGI wants to get rid of the quirks
I'm not so sure about this. When he came in, Chris Lowrey pushed to remove all large, signature offensive quirks on one hand and on the other introduce massive defensive quirks for select 'Mechs.
The first design philosophy fell on its face. Skill Tree isn't made to overcome in-game disadvantages, and Chris' utility quirks haven't borne out. In fact, the return of signature quirks like Heat Scale limits has added value to a few chassis.
The second philosophy, though a little disorienting since it effectively adds tonnage, has worked out better — if for no other reason than some up-armoring is required to compensate for weird but lore-appropriate geometry.
Jenners, specifically, are one of the several chassis left behind with their random, rounds-to-zero offensive quirks and first-generation structure quirks. For Inner Sphere Jenners, at least, I think it's pretty simple:
Change the Oxide's structure buffs to armor
Apply armor quirks to all variants
Give each variant 15-20ish percent cooldown/range/heat quirks (e.g., missile velocity is silly)
Give the K a little more offensive power
Give the Oxide additional accel./decel./turn quirks
Give other variants jump jet quirks
According to Tarogato's poll, which remains accurate every year, the Jenner's is the second-lowest-rated light. There's nothing to lose by giving it some edge.
Honestly that is why people played the Oxide, it was actually able to survive a direct hit or two. The rest of the variants could not. More importantly they did not have any of the quirks to make up for their lack of survivability. I understand not wanting to overquirk. However a happy median must somehow be reached in order to make all the variants viable. Even the Oxide is screwed with everything that has happened to Jenners. However just to try it out, I used my WLF Gunner, and the difference is quite literally night and day in regards to performance.
LocationPacifica Training School, waiting for BakPhar shares to rise
Posted 31 December 2018 - 06:44 AM
Darian DelFord, on 31 December 2018 - 05:30 AM, said:
I understand not wanting to overquirk.
I think you're just being polite.
Even if armor buffs were limited to legs and torsos, players still need to contend with geometry. The theoretical question is, why would you choose a Jenner over a Wolfhound? The answer should probably be something like jump jets, missile options, maneuverability, and high-mounted hardpoints. Without armor, of course, there's no comparison; you or I will play our Jenner Ds because we want to prove something. And even with armor, the Jenner's going to be less effective as a poker, so it needs something to assist in the striker/skirmisher role.
Again, I think it's just one that they've forgotten about.
4
Some may still be kind of good performers but now are nothing compared to what they used to be.
Maybe odd builds ? Well, I might still do that with my Ravens.
(
