47 replies to this topic

[El Bandito]

Khobai, on 27 January 2019 - 11:51 AM, said:

except lights shouldnt counter assaults if assaults cost 100 drop tonnage and lights only cost at most 35. if youre only paying 1/3rd the cost you shouldnt be able to counter an assault.

its no surprise you rarely see assaults in gamemodes with drop tonnage. because theyre unfairly punished by the whole drop tonnage system.

they need to get rid of drop tonnage and replace it with a proper point system instead. drop tonnage doesnt accurately reflect the power level of mechs. but a point system would.

itd be okay for lights to counter assaults if lights and assaults were actually costed proportional to their power level.

First of all, Lights counter Assaults if it is a 1v1 situation, or when the Assault is distracted. Also, It is PGI's own philosophy to make all classes equal in terms of overall effectiveness.

As for modes with drop tonnage, YES, it is unfair how a 20 ton Piranha was as effective as mechs much heavier than it, which is why it got nerfed a couple of times. IMO, in an ideal situation we should either get a separate stats for mechs in FP and mechs in QP, or get a modes with real role warfare but sadly those are not the case.

Edited by El Bandito, 27 January 2019 - 05:13 PM.

[Khobai]

dario03, on 27 January 2019 - 04:03 PM, said:

You don't pay a third the cost of an assault if you take a light. In most modes you get one mech, doesn't matter if its a light or assault. And in FP with 4 mechs you still only get 4 mechs no matter what mechs you take, you don't get extra mechs if you take a light or even go in at minimum weight.
And how are assaults punished in tonnage drops? By having to take lights to fit?

this topic is specifically about faction play, not other game modes. so yes you do pay three or four times more for an assault in drop tonnage.

and assaults are absolutely punished because they cost 3-4 times more tonnage than lights but arnt 3-4 times better.

El Bandito, on 27 January 2019 - 05:04 PM, said:

First of all, Lights counter Assaults if it is a 1v1 situation, or when the Assault is distracted. Also, It is PGI's own philosophy to make all classes equal in terms of overall effectiveness.

if theyre meant to be equal, then assaults shouldnt cost 3-4 times more in faction play. assaults shouldnt cost 100 tons while lights cost at most 35 tons. you cant say assaults and lights should be equal 1v1 and then make assaults cost several times more... thats totally illogical.

you also have mechs with the same tonnage that are drastically different in power level. Annihilator vs Atlas for example. Yet they both cost 100 tons. Thats not fair to the Atlas.

thats exactly why we need a point system instead of the tonnage system because the tonnage system doesnt work. a point system would be able to cost mechs appropriately according to their power level and it would increase mech diversity as a result.

Edited by Khobai, 28 January 2019 - 09:13 AM.

[dario03]

Khobai, on 28 January 2019 - 09:05 AM, said:

this topic is specifically about faction play, not other game modes. so yes you do pay three or four times more for an assault in drop tonnage.

and assaults are absolutely punished because they cost 3-4 times more tonnage than lights but arnt 3-4 times better.



if theyre meant to be equal, then assaults shouldnt cost 3-4 times more in faction play. assaults shouldnt cost 100 tons while lights cost at most 35 tons. you cant say assaults and lights should be equal 1v1 and then make assaults cost several times more... thats totally illogical.

you also have mechs with the same tonnage that are drastically different in power level. Annihilator vs Atlas for example. Yet they both cost 100 tons. Thats not fair to the Atlas.

thats exactly why we need a point system instead of the tonnage system because the tonnage system doesnt work. a point system would be able to cost mechs appropriately according to their power level and it would increase mech diversity as a result.

The issue is that tonnage isn't the main cost in FP, actually its barely a cost at all. Its more of a guideline to keep you from going with one extreme or the other. Notice that you can't take 4 lights to a FP match either.
The thing that actually matters in FP is mech slots. You get 4 mechs, no more, no less. As long as you are between the minimum and maximum weight you can enter the match with those 4 mechs.

So again, how are assaults punished? The only thing I see is that they have to take lights, which are weaker.

Edited by dario03, 28 January 2019 - 09:28 AM.

[Khobai]

dario03, on 28 January 2019 - 09:27 AM, said:

The issue is that tonnage isn't the main cost in FP, actually its barely a cost at all. Its more of a guideline to keep you from going with one extreme or the other. Notice that you can't take 4 lights to a FP match either.
The thing that actually matters in FP is mech slots. You get 4 mechs, no more, no less. As long as you are between the minimum and maximum weight you can enter the match with those 4 mechs.

So again, how are assaults punished? The only thing I see is that they have to take lights, which are weaker.

tonnage is absolutely a cost in FP because it prevents you from taking 4 assaults

yes you get 4 mechs. but if assaults are meant to be equal to lights then why can you take 4 lights but not 4 assaults? oh right because assaults cost more despite supposedly being equal. lol...

obviously assaults are punished.

the tonnage system inherently says the two arnt equal in terms of cost. but at the same time youre telling me PGI intends for lights and assaults to be equal in power level? which is it? thats contradictory. thats why the tonnage system is problematic. PGI cant have it both ways. they cant be equal in power level and then cost different amounts...

Again this is why a point system would be way better than tonnage. Because the best lights are probably at least equal to the worst assaults. A point system allows for mechs to be costed based on their actual power level rather than their tonnage, which means NOTHING, because theres huge disparities in power level within each tonnage bracket.

And using my other example: an atlas should cost less than annihilator despite them both being 100 tons. Because the atlas is a worse mech. A point system fixes that problem. No one will ever take an atlas as long as it costs the same as an annihilator, but if the atlas is cheaper, then there might be a reason to take it in some drop decks. Thats how you improve mech diversity. You make the cost of mechs proportional to their power level; its common sense.

Edited by Khobai, 28 January 2019 - 02:08 PM.

[dario03]

Khobai, on 28 January 2019 - 01:53 PM, said:

tonnage is absolutely a cost in FP because it prevents you from taking 4 assaults

yes you get 4 mechs. but if assaults are meant to be equal to lights why can you take 4 lights but not 4 assaults? the tonnage system treats them unequally.

obviously assaults are punished if you cant take 4 of them yet supposedly theyre equal to lights which you can take 4 of. youre absolutely wrong that tonnage doesnt matter in FP, it does, because I cant take 4 assaults because of tonnage limits.

the tonnage system says the two arnt equal. but im also being told PGI intends for lights and assaults to be equal? thats contradictory. thats why the tonnage system is problematic. PGI cant have it both ways.

You can't.
"Notice that you can't take 4 lights to a FP match either."
"As long as you are between the minimum and maximum weight you can enter the match with those 4 mechs."

[Khobai]

Quote

You can't.
"Notice that you can't take 4 lights to a FP match either."

you can take 4 mediums or 4 heavies though. so its a moot point really.

the point is if all weight classes are equal there would be no need to have restrictions on not being able to take 4 assaults.

that means one of two possibilities, either:

1) all weight classes arnt equal and cost different tonnages because heavier mechs are better
2) all weight classes are equal and cost different tonnages for no apparent reason

and again that leads to a contradiction... because if if all weight classes arnt equal then PGI telling people they want assaults and lights to be equal is a flat out lie. And if all weight classes are equal then PGI setting their cost in tonnage to different values makes no sense. either way theres a problem.

again a point system fixes that whole inconsistent mess... mechs could actually cost what theyre worth then.

Edited by Khobai, 28 January 2019 - 02:21 PM.

[Prototelis]

I really don't know why so many of you believe lights have parity with assaults.

Lights are the lowest scoring worst performing class in the game. Fast smol lights don't counter assaults, they counter potatos.

[dario03]

Khobai, on 28 January 2019 - 02:16 PM, said:

you can take 4 mediums or 4 heavies though. so its a moot point really.

the point is if all weight classes are equal there would be no need to have restrictions on not being able to take 4 assaults.

that means one of two possibilities, either:

1) all weight classes arnt equal and cost different tonnages because heavier mechs are better
2) all weight classes are equal and cost different tonnages for no apparent reason

and again that leads to a contradiction... because if if all weight classes arnt equal then PGI telling people they want assaults and lights to be equal is a flat out lie. And if all weight classes are equal then PGI setting their cost in tonnage to different values makes no sense. either way theres a problem.

Yeah so making all weight classes about equal and no drop weight limit would work the best for FP and QP.

[Angel of Annihilation]

BrunoSSace, on 25 January 2019 - 11:09 PM, said:

Lights are not the problem. Assaults boating LRMs without back up weapons, then crying about lights are.

Why cant I use my medium Lrm boat anymore? Because 20 missles get shot down to quicly. I use to beable to do thousands of damage, now I can't pull more then 300 cause the amount of tripple ams boats is ridiculous. Plus PGI gave out a free one.

I have mixed feeling about light mechs myself because certain lights are most definitely a problem and for the most part I feel light mechs in general are in a good place at least in what they contribute to the team.

The standouts problem lights for me are those that can mount 6 or more MGs because it is more of an issue with MGs than with light mechs themselves. The way crits and crits damage work is the issue and that seriously needs to be looked at. Some of the laser vomit builds are a bit over the top as well. This is coming from someone who does occasionally use a 12 MG PIR and knows how ridiculously OP it is.

As for many other lights, I think the cool down nerf on medium laser really hurt them alot. My Grinner and Purifier were both favorites of mine but my builds relied on medium lasers and going from a 3 second to a 4 second cooldowns was a HUGE dps nerf for both of them. I basically went from 400-500 damage matches to 250-300 damage per match which drastically reduced my count of kills and kmdds with each of them. They aren't very fun to play any more.

Overall though, collectively, I think they are in a fairly good place. A few well piloted lights carry tremendous influence on the outcome of a match and can carry a team to victory like no other class of mech.

[OrmsbyGore]

Darian DelFord, on 27 January 2019 - 10:55 AM, said:

This hurt lights almost as bad as it did assault mechs

while I have no doubt that desync negatively impacted lights' play style, it made some assaults completely unplayable. The Atlas used to be halfway decent, the kodiak used to be a monster (and they hit the spirit bear especially hard; it went from masc-capable to masc-dependent), hell you could even run an xp on the cyclops back in the day (it wasn't cl safe exactly, but that cut stuck out so much that people could hit your gut from more than 90 degrees off center, and the arms blocked most of your st, so the trade off in speed/accel/twist speed/weight saving was completely worth the risk imho).

they seem to have tried to give assaults a bit more armor/structure quirks, but that buys you maybe an extra second In a fight.

[Darian DelFord]

How many Jenners have you seen since the resize and the de-sync?

Lights were more impacted by that de sync then most heavier mechs. There are only a handful of viable lights. More than enough playable heavies and assaults compared to lights.

[The6thMessenger]

I honestly don't know what I am looking at.

Is it because them lights aren't vaporized the moment they looked at it?

[Curccu]

Darian DelFord, on 29 January 2019 - 04:30 AM, said:

How many Jenners have you seen since the resize and the de-sync?

Lights were more impacted by that de sync then most heavier mechs. There are only a handful of viable lights. More than enough playable heavies and assaults compared to lights.

I tried my jenner-D 2 weeks ago because of founders event IT WAS HORRIBLE, my ex-favourite mech in the whole game. without some major buff not gonna touch it again... ever.

[Darian DelFord]

Yeah the Jenner D was my all time favorite mech. 4 SPL's and 2 SRM 4's and it was a heck of a knife fighter. But All jenners are screwed the only one that has a decent chance now is the Oxide and don't even get me started on the stupid armor reallocation they did. Sure lets take most of the armor off of where the vast majority of your weapons are.

[Jman5]

El Bandito, on 26 January 2019 - 05:26 AM, said:

Why are people surprised by this? Everyone should know that Lights < Mediums < Heavies <Assaults < Lights. It is a proper rock-paper-scissors situation.

The game would be in a great place if this were true. However All skills being equal, A Wolfhound does not counter a Madcat MKII. There needs to be extenuating circumstances for the light to reliably trounce an assault in a fair fight.

[Bud Crue]

Jman5, on 29 January 2019 - 06:35 AM, said:

The game would be in a great place if this were true. However All skills being equal, A Wolfhound does not counter a Madcat MKII. There needs to be extenuating circumstances for the light to reliably trounce an assault in a fair fight.

I think PGI considers “extenuating circumstances” as an aspect of balance and perhaps even a dominant aspect.

I mean to their way of thinking a Spider 5V is balanced or more balanced now that it has its capping gigaquirk, right? The fact that it lacks the ability to actually go toe to toe, or even be a successful combatant against most other mechs, is irrelevant since it has this singular ability which applies in only very specific extenuating circumstances. That mech, in this game is balanced relative to a MKII-B in their view (otherwise they would give it more hard points as Russ once suggested or give it other bonuses to increase its combat potential presumably).

Speaking broadly, most lights are easily killed by a heavy or an assault (competently built and assuming a modicum of aiming ability and situational awareness...things that shouldn’t be exceptional or extenuating in an arena shooter), but PGI presumes the light and even many medium mechs to be equivelant performers because there is the extenuating circumstance of possible map and mode circumstances that allow these otherwise under performers to potentially shine. Sure the reality as that most of us play to shoot each other and that’s where we see the imbalance. PGI doesn’t see it that way, or they don’t care. Nothing for it.

Edited by Bud Crue, 29 January 2019 - 07:11 AM.

[Marquis De Lafayette]

Jman5, on 29 January 2019 - 06:35 AM, said:

The game would be in a great place if this were true. However All skills being equal, A Wolfhound does not counter a Madcat MKII. There needs to be extenuating circumstances for the light to reliably trounce an assault in a fair fight.

Imho....in various ways I think you are both right. In normal team play QP, FW, etc the thing an assault can get most distressed about is a light poking him in the back.....Especially while he is trying to make sure he addresses the main enemy body in front of him (or tries to stay with his team who is on the move). He can’t face both and the light also has the option of running if the assault engages him. So, a light behind you is a big threat as it puts that assault pilot in a bind. In team play it can serve as a counter to assaults....especially slow ones.

1 v 1 (edit: as in Solaris) the assault pilot wins....all things being equal, which they never are. Which is why in Solaris we see Fleas in Div 6. Now, I love fleas and think they are a very good qp mech (love them in qp!)...but they get owned in Div 6...by mechs that wouldn’t do as well in QP. Too many lights and mediums down there run things that easily counter a light 20 tonner like them. Personally, I have fought maybe 5 matches against them and it’s never been close. The piranha (pre-nerfs) is probably the only outlier where with skill being equal it would have a chance vs. meta assault.

Edited by Marquis De Lafayette, 29 January 2019 - 07:23 AM.

[Darian DelFord]

The only assaults I would say that a light has a leg up on are the ones with very limited torso movement, Direwolf, warhawk, Stalker are the top ones that come to mind. But even then, if they have room to back and or limit lines of fire of the light, they even the playing field against the light. All it takes is one well aimed shot.

[B L O O D W I T C H]

the equation for light mech' OP'ness:



In conclusion this equation not only scientifically determites the OP'ness of a light but also the degree of potatoism of the claimholding assault'mech pilot.

Edited by Toha Heavy Industries, 29 January 2019 - 07:39 AM.

[Variant1]

Darian DelFord, on 29 January 2019 - 06:24 AM, said:

Yeah the Jenner D was my all time favorite mech. 4 SPL's and 2 SRM 4's and it was a heck of a knife fighter. But All jenners are screwed the only one that has a decent chance now is the Oxide and don't even get me started on the stupid armor reallocation they did. Sure lets take most of the armor off of where the vast majority of your weapons are.

Well to be fair the jenners arms are pretty tiny and hard to hit. Most enemies shoot the jenners enormous ct anyways. If i had to guess the armor allocated to sides was to give xl engines more survivability or somethin.