13 replies to this topic

[Acersecomic]

Is being less and less respected.
Offense, Defense, Mobility. Three crucial factors in creation and balancing of mechs, tanks, characters etc.

Glass cannons, Endurance fighters etc.
Three factors, 30 points to spread between them. Do you balance the mech in favor of defense and offense while making it slow? Is it tanky but moves well and has decent firepower? Maybe it is easy to kill but has excellent mobility and firepower, maybe you try to balance it as a jack of all trades master of none?

That... seems to not be the case with some recent releases. Mechs with terrible survivability and mobility and mediocre firepowers, mechs in which you struggle to do what with others can be achieved with little stress...

We all see a Corsair or a Bludgeon on the field and just open on them knowing that we won's suffer much and they won't suffer for long, cuzz they'll be dead cuzz they are too slugish, too big, can't pack much punch, ****** hitboxes etc or all of the above.
Well... we have a new member in the club. Marauder 2. Mobiliy of an Annihilator if not even worse than it, torso as bad as on the WarhammerIIC, nonexistant armor quirks, some have some structure quirks but we all know how much that is of no use... and the hitboxes don't look to be too promising...

So... we don't have any mobility, we don't have any defense, we got all the heavier and larger IS equipment so... good firepower.
Clans are mobile ans have good firepower but lack the defensive quirks of IS, while IS has excellent defenses that compensate for less range and alpha.
Marauder2 seems to will have only good firepower on its side. Quirks on it are... to put it midly, utter dog feces..
I feel like it will be smarter to run the mech at 48kmph so you at least won't have to deccelerate for 10 seconds before you can start going in reverse after a peek around or above something.

Marauder 2 needs something... give it excellent mobility, or quirk it defensively like the KingCrab or Atlas, or give it amaizing weapon quirks in cooldown and heat so that when this slow, lumbering dry twig of a mech comes round the corner it can put the H into HURT. Give it something! Respect the holy trinity.
Mobile and Armored that fights over time instead of with alpha.
Mobile and punchy but lacking defenses.
Armored and Punchy but having poor mobility.
Or since it is a Marauder give it decent mobility, decent firepower and decent defenses. Jack of all trades master of none.

And start followinf that rule on other top-end heavies and all Assaults.
I MEAN FFS A CHARGER HAS INSANE ARMOR QUIRKS AND IS MOBILE AND CAN PACK REAL NICE PUNCH! An 80t mobile defended punchy mech!

Come on PGI, what's going on? What is up with these blind, ignorant moves in which legitimate and argumented cases fall on deaf ears?

Edited by Acersecomic, 13 April 2019 - 04:56 AM.

[FRAGTAST1C]

I think a rethink of hitboxes will do wonders. Just 'cause a mech has huge ST or CT or whatever, doesn't mean you need to create hitboxes exactly around it. I'm not saying that all mechs should have the hitbox of a Flea. Just work on functionality in terms of targeting specific components and if one has easily targetable component than another of the same weight class, then rework the hitbox.

Edited by FRAGTAST1C, 13 April 2019 - 05:08 AM.

[Captain Caveman DE]

so.. is this the traditional "Mech X is DOA" - thread?

just asking.

I for one will wait and see how it's ingame - and then start to cry. but yeah.. can tell you right now that it'll suck in QP_Nascar, so nevermind: let the tears flow ;-)

[Acersecomic]

Captain Caveman DE, on 13 April 2019 - 05:26 AM, said:

so.. is this the traditional "Mech X is DOA" - thread?

just asking.

I for one will wait and see how it's ingame - and then start to cry. but yeah.. can tell you right now that it'll suck in QP_Nascar, so nevermind: let the tears flow ;-)

DoA? No, I don't believe in DoA.
I'm just saying based on everything we know so far, it is slow, slugish, big, soft. It won't do good in nascar but nothing does. But it doesn't look like it will do good in a brawl either. It is just... meh on all fronts the way it is now.

[Athom83]

Acersecomic, on 13 April 2019 - 04:56 AM, said:

We all see a Corsair or a Bludgeon on the field and just open on them knowing that we won's suffer much and they won't suffer for long, cuzz they'll be dead cuzz they are too slugish, too big, can't pack much punch, ****** hitboxes etc or all of the above.

Well, I can see it with the Bludgeon quite a lot, and by connection other Warhammer IICs. However the Corsair is a different beast, it heavily depends on the build and who is piloting it. Some of the builds put out such an insane DPS that if you try to open up on them like you describe, then they'll usually beat you out and kill you before they're opened up. I mean, they'll probably have red armor on at least 2 torso sections, but they'll still have armor left.

The Warhammer IIC on the other hand, if you're playing like a 90-100 t assault you're just doing it wrong. Play it like you would the normal Warhammer and you'll mostly be fine.

Acersecomic, on 13 April 2019 - 04:56 AM, said:

Well... we have a new member in the club. Marauder 2. Mobiliy of an Annihilator if not even worse than it, torso as bad as on the WarhammerIIC, nonexistant armor quirks, some have some structure quirks but we all know how much that is of no use... and the hitboxes don't look to be too promising...

I mean, I know the size comparison charts aren't up yet but you're ignoring 1 major thing. This thing is squat as all hell. Its going to be like the Corsair in that its going to have the smallest frontal profile of all the mechs of its weight. If you're basing it off the Mad IIC, just don't. All the pictures so far point in favor of the Mad II NOT getting a billboard above the cockpit.

Acersecomic, on 13 April 2019 - 04:56 AM, said:

Marauder 2 needs something... give it excellent mobility, or quirk it defensively like the KingCrab or Atlas, or give it amaizing weapon quirks in cooldown and heat so that when this slow, lumbering dry twig of a mech comes round the corner it can put the H into HURT. Give it something! Respect the holy trinity.
Mobile and Armored that fights over time instead of with alpha.
Mobile and punchy but lacking defenses.
Armored and Punchy but having poor mobility.
Or since it is a Marauder give it decent mobility, decent firepower and decent defenses. Jack of all trades master of none.

Do you... not see the amazing hardpoints this thing has? The 4HP is going to be the next Scorch. The 5A and 6S with those extremely high mounted ballistics. Et cetera.

[Nesutizale]

So basicly you want better quirks for the Marauder II.

[Acersecomic]

Athom83, on 13 April 2019 - 06:11 AM, said:

Well, I can see it with the Bludgeon quite a lot, and by connection other Warhammer IICs. However the Corsair is a different beast, it heavily depends on the build and who is piloting it. Some of the builds put out such an insane DPS that if you try to open up on them like you describe, then they'll usually beat you out and kill you before they're opened up. I mean, they'll probably have red armor on at least 2 torso sections, but they'll still have armor left.

The Warhammer IIC on the other hand, if you're playing like a 90-100 t assault you're just doing it wrong. Play it like you would the normal Warhammer and you'll mostly be fine.

I mean, I know the size comparison charts aren't up yet but you're ignoring 1 major thing. This thing is squat as all hell. Its going to be like the Corsair in that its going to have the smallest frontal profile of all the mechs of its weight. If you're basing it off the Mad IIC, just don't. All the pictures so far point in favor of the Mad II NOT getting a billboard above the cockpit.

Do you... not see the amazing hardpoints this thing has? The 4HP is going to be the next Scorch. The 5A and 6S with those extremely high mounted ballistics. Et cetera.

Corsairs certainly do not lack in the forepower department and I enjoy my Broadside's output, but due to hitbox spread on it your RT and CT will suffer badly and thus result in less facetime compared to other mechs.

And that is what I do with my Bludgeon, 2 LPL, 3 MPL, 1 SRM6A, works good enough. But it doesn't destract from the fact that it is now larger with minor minor compensation for it, while still being terrible to move around due to terrible acceleration and turn rates...

This I do have to concede to to a degree... but you have to take into account that it is sloooow, good hitboxes won't save you when you can't utilize them properly. So I guess that one is left to be seen...

And about those hardpoints, do not forget how much space and weight everything takes on IS side. KingCrab Kaiju (MAD2-5A) and Fafnir-6U (MAD2-4L) have identical hardpoints, go and mechlab them a bit, see how much you can fit and how effective that would be.

Nesutizale, on 13 April 2019 - 06:23 AM, said:

So basicly you want better quirks for the Marauder II.

Basicaly, yeah, since they failed on the mobility department so fantasticaly. Needs them if it is to stand toe to toe with other IS assaults as right now it has no defense nor mobility. So it has to excell at firepower, which it probably won't and it will just be good. Good is fine, but other goods have other goods going for them.

[Sjorpha]

I does look very underwhelming for a 100 tonner. My preferred adjustment would be to give it unusually good agility rather than stronger quirks.

[LordNothing]

i think too much effort goes into balance as it is. if something stands out like a sore thumb then nerf the living **** out of it. but sometimes it feels like the only things the devs do. tweaking variables because of salt and then changing them back also because of salt. perfect balance is both unrealistic and undesirable.

id rather see things with a little more staying power. like maps have staying power, newtech has staying power. do stuff that fleshes out the game.

Edited by LordNothing, 13 April 2019 - 09:13 AM.

[WrathOfDeadguy]

At least one variant does excel at firepower. The 4HP is going to be a very nasty murdermuffin, regardless of the state of AMS. It's the splatboat the IS has always wished it had, but which the only other 'Mech with comparable hardpoints (the ARC-5W) couldn't deliver on for lack of tonnage and decent hitboxes.

The others look more or less average.

The 4A's 8E isn't exactly awe-inspiring, but LPL+ERML vomit is still at least good and it can run the sinks to back that up (on a STD even, to avoid torso loss penalties) while still offering mobility advantages over the other two high-tonnage energy boats (faster than the Annihilator, and has jets unlike either that or the Banshee). There aren't any IS assaults with more than 8E, so it literally has as much firepower as any IS assault laserboat ever has... just with the defensive advantages of the Marauder's great spreading profile, and a little more hill-climbing ability thanks to JJ.

The MAD-5A is a Boar's Head with Marauder hitboxes and a high-mounted main gun instead of a missile hardpoint. Not great, but not unworkable. The MAD-6S is just the MAD-5A with its hardpoints rearranged, but with a bonus second AMS. The MAD-4L and the Alpha are both essentially KGCs with lower arm actuators, with the 4L swapping the missiles for an ECM. All meh, but not bleugh.

Are their better 'Mechs already in the game for any build the Marauder II can run? Yes, in all cases except the 4HP, which will easily claim the top spot for IS assault missile builds. Are any of them bad? Not really. They're all but guaranteed to have the same wiggle-to-spread hitboxes as every other Marauder so far, they're more mobile (not more agile, but more mobile) than any other IS 100-tonner to date (even a crappy Class I JJ is still a JJ), and while the hardpoints aren't spectacular they do still support a decent variety of viable builds. Any claims of the TooMad's early demise are greatly exaggerated.

*edit- Realistically, there only ever end up being one or two favored variants out of an entire chassis lineup, so the 4HP being the obvious standout best while the others are meh isn't anything unusual.

Edited by WrathOfDeadguy, 13 April 2019 - 11:41 AM.

[Koniving]

FRAGTAST1C, on 13 April 2019 - 05:07 AM, said:

I think a rethink of hitboxes will do wonders. Just 'cause a mech has huge ST or CT or whatever, doesn't mean you need to create hitboxes exactly around it. I'm not saying that all mechs should have the hitbox of a Flea. Just work on functionality in terms of targeting specific components and if one has easily targetable component than another of the same weight class, then rework the hitbox.

I agree.
An age old concept was sub-divisions of the hitboxes.

Consider this.
Lets assume a mech has 50-70-50 armor, spread across LT, CT, and RT.
As opposed to LT, CT, and RT, what if it was Upper-middle-lower for each, 9 boxes instead of 3.
Now the armor setup wouldn't change, it'd still be 50-70-50.
But now 50 / 3, 70 / 3 and 50 / 3.
Wait, there's more...
Now you have to lose "all 3" in order to lose the torso.

This basically renders massive focused alphas worthless, as when you do 70+ damage in an alpha and the target only has 23 armor in that body section.. that's a lot of wasted heat, as the structure would also be sub-divided...and now you need to pump out 3 shots at the very minimum to kill an IS XL engine mech.

Course one could expand into this a fair bit more, but as just a teaser... what do you think? This is a change somewhat necessary for an MW5 mod plan in order to have weapons with front loaded damage removed and reduced to damage over time and still feel powerful as well as make mechs tankier abuse sponges while running stock 1x armor/structure.

Here it could have some benefits, but it may as well. Would make Solaris less of a cheese fest, but... would it survive PGI's broken FLD?

[VonBruinwald]

The Holy Trinity of Balance is actually an Unholy Binary:

Clan Tech and IS Tech.

Balance will never be achieved while these two exist together.

[DaZur]

Individual mech chassis "balance" is a fallacy...

What is or isn't balanced has more to do with the pilot, their skill level and does the chassis fit their individual playstyle.

[Khobai]

DaZur, on 13 April 2019 - 10:27 AM, said:

Individual mech chassis "balance" is a fallacy...

What is or isn't balanced has more to do with the pilot, their skill level and does the chassis fit their individual playstyle.

um no theres definitely mechs that are so bad that theres no reason to ever use them.

like the spider-5V with 2 hardpoints.

PGI absolutely needs to update a lot of the older mechs. The spider-5V, for example, needs a minimum of 5 hardpoints to compete with similar mechs. Even then it would still be bad but it would be playable at least.

But I agree if you stick to the mechs that arnt completely bad, pilot skill becomes the main factor. But lets not ignore the fact that there are so many unusably bad chassis out there. We like to pretend they dont exist but they do.

Quote

The Holy Trinity of Balance

Offense, Defense, Mobility

...went out the window the moment CXL was added to the game.

clans get all 3. but they pilot like garbage trucks and get less/worse quirks.

IS mechs have to choose 2 of the 3. but they get better agility and more/better quirks.

and thats the state the game is precariously balanced in using unfun agility nerfs and lopsided superquirks because of PGI's shortsighted unwillingness to just balance the tech fundamentals of the game (i.e. engines, ES/FF, and heatsinks)

making ISXL survive side torso blowout like CXL would be the best thing PGI could do for balance. followed by buffing ISES/FF and buffing ISDHS. Then they could remove the atrocious clan agility nerfs and IS superquirks.

Edited by Khobai, 13 April 2019 - 12:45 PM.