132 replies to this topic

[Bud Crue]

VonBruinwald, on 19 February 2021 - 10:36 AM, said:

Tell that to the Gulag.

They at least tying to get some level of specificity to their asks. That being said, I suspect PGI will mostly ignore their suggestions (again) regardless of what they are, and instead rely on their own super secret internal data (again), in the same manner as they have nearly always done so. The first balance pass scheduled for next month is as likely to have nerfs to the Spider 5V as it is to the Veagles. When they nerf the IV-4 they will probably nerf all mechs with high torso M hard points because "data". Prove me wrong PGI.

[The pessimistic optimist]

Lockheed_, on 19 February 2021 - 10:36 AM, said:

If more people would focus on the legs the pop tarting would easily be curbed. I run a lot of VGLs (but rarely the 3 PPC build and I dont even have an ATM in the first place) and I am always surprised that people dont go more for my legs. They are pretty long

And you can really twist to protect legs you can hit them for any angle just have to work on one and make sure you keep hitting the same one

Edited by SirSmokes, 19 February 2021 - 10:52 AM.

[Wolfos31]

Bud Crue, on 19 February 2021 - 10:45 AM, said:

They at least tying to get some level of specificity to their asks. That being said, I suspect PGI will mostly ignore their suggestions (again) regardless of what they are, and instead rely on their own super secret internal data (again), in the same manner as they have nearly always done so. The first balance pass scheduled for next month is as likely to have nerfs to the Spider 5V as it is to the Veagles. When they nerf the IV-4 they will probably nerf all mechs with high torso M hard points because "data". Prove me wrong PGI.

Nooo not the 5V! It's the secret meta light no one knows about! /s

[Heavy Money]

The concept of buffing underperformers up to the level up performers is good in general, but it doesn't work when you have a big outlier like the Vapor Eagle. The Veagle is a heavy medium that runs loadouts on par with heavy heavies and light assaults. Is any other mech running that much more firepower above its class without making massive sacrifices?


1-The Vapor eagle is here

2->>>Other Good mechs like the Madcat and hellbringer are here
3->>>Lots of decent mechs are here
4->>>Mediocre mechs

5->>>Tons of left behind mechs

Since the Vapor Eagle is the outlier, if you're buffing other mechs up to its level, you're talking about having to change every mech in the game as opposed to just changing the vapor eagle. And if you do this, you also have problems with power creep. You'll change the average baseline of offense vs defense, which messes up tons of other factors in the game, like TKK and alpha strike balance. The proper balance point for these things is probably category 3.5-2 in my above rough comparison.

People are saying not to change it because its "fun". Well no duh guys. Being more powerful than other people is fun. This is a terrible argument. Its not gonna ruin it to be moved to merely being 'very good' rather than 'uniquely out of proportion compared to everything else in the game.'

[The pessimistic optimist]

Heavy Money, on 19 February 2021 - 11:48 AM, said:

The concept of buffing underperformers up to the level up performers is good in general, but it doesn't work when you have a big outlier like the Vapor Eagle. The Veagle is a heavy medium that runs loadouts on par with heavy heavies and light assaults. Is any other mech running that much more firepower above its class without making massive sacrifices?


1-The Vapor eagle is here

2->>>Other Good mechs like the Madcat and hellbringer are here
3->>>Lots of decent mechs are here
4->>>Mediocre mechs

5->>>Tons of left behind mechs

Since the Vapor Eagle is the outlier, if you're buffing other mechs up to its level, you're talking about having to change every mech in the game as opposed to just changing the vapor eagle. And if you do this, you also have problems with power creep. You'll change the average baseline of offense vs defense, which messes up tons of other factors in the game, like TKK and alpha strike balance. The proper balance point for these things is probably category 3.5-2 in my above rough comparison.

People are saying not to change it because its "fun". Well no duh guys. Being more powerful than other people is fun. This is a terrible argument. Its not gonna ruin it to be moved to merely being 'very good' rather than 'uniquely out of proportion compared to everything else in the game.'

Good point just feel bad nerfing stuff but this makes perfect sense.

Edited by SirSmokes, 19 February 2021 - 11:52 AM.

[East Indy]

Heavy Money, on 19 February 2021 - 11:48 AM, said:

The concept of buffing underperformers up to the level up performers is good in general, but it doesn't work when you have a big outlier like the Vapor Eagle.

What do you nerf, though? There are those jump jet bonuses, and there are base agility stats — do either address what makes the 'Mech so powerful? VB's suggestion of a minimum engine rating might work if it were draconian.

On principle you're right about buffs and nerfs but in this game, superiority often comes from characteristics that aren't easily altered.

Let me put it this way: I hate overuse of the word "literally" but I have literally never dropped in a Clan 'Mech since 2012. I couldn't stand the couple years of "balancing" by assuming similar numbers of Clan tech on teams, and yet negative quirks — remember those? — on a handful of top performers were far less effective and interesting than positive quirks on dozens and dozens of average ones.

I'll say it for the millionth time: even if unintentionally, quirks are the lifeblood of the game since they increase likely purchase and play of variants tenfold.

[FupDup]

For the engine size idea, it is honestly kind of weird that all mechs (except Urbie) have their minimum set to 100. Having a min engine size properly enforced would actually be a great way to make mechs/variants less redundant and give the low-engine variants a situational advantage over the big-engine variants. Right now the fast variants generally get the best of both worlds.

This could also be used for a "power exchange" to buff some mechs like the Kodiak. Right now it has the agility of a space slug submerged in frozen maple syrup because it can pack so much firepower. If the KDK had a minimum engine cap of 350 or something then that would let us buff its agility significantly without it being overpowered.

Edited by FupDup, 19 February 2021 - 01:25 PM.

[Heavy Money]

East Indy, on 19 February 2021 - 01:04 PM, said:

What do you nerf, though? There are those jump jet bonuses, and there are base agility stats — do either address what makes the 'Mech so powerful? VB's suggestion of a minimum engine rating might work if it were draconian.

On principle you're right about buffs and nerfs but in this game, superiority often comes from characteristics that aren't easily altered.

Let me put it this way: I hate overuse of the word "literally" but I have literally never dropped in a Clan 'Mech since 2012. I couldn't stand the couple years of "balancing" by assuming similar numbers of Clan tech on teams, and yet negative quirks — remember those? — on a handful of top performers were far less effective and interesting than positive quirks on dozens and dozens of average ones.

I'll say it for the millionth time: even if unintentionally, quirks are the lifeblood of the game since they increase likely purchase and play of variants tenfold.

Yeah I know. I talked about these issues, and suggested a minimum engine size as a possible fix, in the original post. I suppose we've now reached the point in a thread's trajectory where people just click on the last page without context. Lots of posts are now just repeating back to me what I've already said >_<

So yes, the big question is if some new exception to the usual balance methods should be introduced in order to handle an outlier. This is a design philosophy question. On the one hand, the answer is Obviously Yes, because the balance impact is real and you shouldn't avoid fixing problems just because those fixes are outside of the sorts of fixes you've done in the past. On the other hand, the problem is obviously caused by a complex interaction of many factors, and is the tip of the iceberg of other problems in the overall balance paradigm, and so the fix should come from addressing those issues. But that's really hard and probably isn't going to happen. So if we wait for that, we'll just keep the status quo forever.

And then we also have the issue of if we introduce a new method of nerfing certain mechs via Minimum Engine size or negative quirks, who else should get them? Is there some consistency we need to enforce, or can we just target individual chassis/variants as needed?

These were all implicit or explicit questions in my original post. Now that it's been talked about a bunch, I think i've come to my own conclusion: Yes, we should use whatever method we need to bring mechs to the proper level of power, and we don't have to be super consistent about it.

The Vapor Eagle is supposed to be a fast skirmisher and duelist. Instead it is a slow, second line damage dealer. A Minimum engine size is a quick and easy fix. We don't have to think about if it should be applied to other mechs (although if we think about it enough, we can probably think of some.) PGI can just do what is necessary.

Of course, the Vapor Eagle will still be much more powerful than all the other skirmishers and duelists. That's because most mechs in this role are kind of left behind. So that's an area where others should be buffed up to compete. Maybe a slight agility nerf to the Veagle and removal of JJ quirks to make room for others in that role space.

Edited by Heavy Money, 19 February 2021 - 01:33 PM.

[East Indy]

Heavy Money, on 19 February 2021 - 01:33 PM, said:

Yeah I know. I talked about these issues, and suggested a minimum engine size as a possible fix, in the original post. I suppose we've now reached the point in a thread's trajectory where people just click on the last page without context. Lots of posts are now just repeating back to me what I've already said >_<

...

The Vapor Eagle is supposed to be a fast skirmisher and duelist. Instead it is a slow, second line damage dealer. A Minimum engine size is a quick and easy fix. We don't have to think about if it should be applied to other mechs (although if we think about it enough, we can probably think of some.) PGI can just do what is necessary.

Ah, geez! Sorry about that. Sometimes my skim-reading serves me poorly.

I still think the engine minimum is a sharp idea, and the argument of encouraging 'Mech role is a good one. PGI factor aside, I'd say this is strong enough for somebody's attention.

[Heavy Money]

FupDup, on 19 February 2021 - 01:24 PM, said:

For the engine size idea, it is honestly kind of weird that all mechs (except Urbie) have their minimum set to 100. Having a min engine size properly enforced would actually be a great way to make mechs/variants less redundant and give the low-engine variants a situational advantage over the big-engine variants. Right now the fast variants generally get the best of both worlds.

This could also be used for a "power exchange" to buff some mechs like the Kodiak. Right now it has the agility of a space slug submerged in frozen maple syrup because it can pack so much firepower. If the KDK had a minimum engine cap of 350 or something then that would let us buff its agility significantly without it being overpowered.

Whoop, there you go. As I was writing the post, someone expanded on the minimum engine size idea. I like this power exchange idea.

We already see different variants of the same chassis with different engine caps. Different Minimum sizes could be coupled with different quirks to encourage certain playstyles even more. There's a lot of chassis out there where only a couple of the variants are worth using because they are too similar but one has 5% more of some quirk and becomes the obvious choice.

We could see something like 1 variant with lower minimum engine, allowing it to go slower in return for more firepower. And another version with higher minimum engine, pushing it more towards lighter, shorter range weapons and skirmishing, but with stronger quirks. If done right, that could be good for the game.

East Indy, on 19 February 2021 - 01:41 PM, said:

Ah, geez! Sorry about that. Sometimes my skim-reading serves me poorly.

I still think the engine minimum is a sharp idea, and the argument of encouraging 'Mech role is a good one. PGI factor aside, I'd say this is strong enough for somebody's attention.

We've all done it, haha XD

[Vyx]

One of the things that MWO never took seriously into consideration (in a quantifiable way) is the geometry advantages and disadvantages of each mech. Armor, structure, hardpoints, quirks -- these can all be quantified and thus balanced. But geometry; not so much.

Geometry affects so many things in a 3D first person shooter. The reason mechs like the Vapor Eagle, Vulcan, Wolfhound, Piranha, Commando, etc. overperform is largely because the torsos (left, right, center) are so thin. There is a substantially higher chance that these mechs will spread damage across multiple torsos when hit with most weapons. This leads to a much longer lifespan, and thus a much longer period of lethality when compared to other mechs.

Things like high mounts also contribute to the a mech's non-quantifiable effectiveness -- another aspect of geometry. The Vapor Eagle has these as well.

The problem is: if a mech is to visibly resemble what the designers have envisioned, there really is no fix for this. Artificial engine capping or possible negative quirks? People don't want this. One might say: "Don't nerf -- raise the other mechs up!" But to achieve that -- realizing that geometry is the issue at hand -- the other mechs would have to be re-designed with an eye toward this goal ... and that is waaay too much work for the slackers at PGI.

In the end, I suspect we will just have to accept that some mechs are built better than others -- and simply live with it. The best we will likely get is some light quirkening for the under-performers (i.e., some armor here, some heat gen there). But I doubt that will truly address the root of the problem.

Edited by Vyx, 19 February 2021 - 01:57 PM.

[FupDup]

Vyx, on 19 February 2021 - 01:48 PM, said:

...Commando...

Just a nitpick here, but the Commando was a crappy mech for a long time (only truly good during the Raven 3L meta as a competitor to it). Quirks are what gave it ascension in the present day.

Edited by FupDup, 19 February 2021 - 01:50 PM.

[The pessimistic optimist]

Vyx, on 19 February 2021 - 01:48 PM, said:

One of the things that MWO never took seriously into consideration (in a quantifiable way) is the geometry advantages and disadvantages of each mech. Armor, structure, hardpoints, quirks -- these can all be quantified and thus balanced. But geometry; not so much.

Geometry affects so many things in a 3D first person shooter. The reason mechs like the Vapor Eagle, Vulcan, Wolfhound, Piranha, Commando, etc. overperform is largely because the torsos (left, right, center) are so thin. There is a substantially higher chance that these mechs will spread damage across multiple torsos when hit with most weapons. This leads to a much longer lifespan, and thus a much longer period of lethality when compared to other mechs.

Things like high mounts also contribute to the a mech's non-quantifiable effectiveness -- another aspect of geometry. The Vapor Eagle has these as well.

The problem is: if a mech is to visibly resemble what the designers have envisioned, there really is no fix for this. Artificial engine capping or possible negative quirks? People don't want this. One might say: "Don't nerf -- raise the other mechs up!" But to achieve that -- realizing that geometry is the issue at hand -- the other mechs would have to be re-designed with an eye toward this goal ... and that is waaay too much work for the slackers at PGI.

In the end, I suspect we will just have to accept that some mechs are built better than others -- and simply live with it. The best we will likely get is some light quirkening for the under-performers (i.e., some armor here, some heat gen there). But I doubt that will truly address the root of the problem.

Rescaling would help some a lot Black Knight looking at you

[Wolfos31]

SirSmokes, on 19 February 2021 - 02:03 PM, said:

Rescaling would help some a lot Black Knight looking at you

*shudder* I leveled my Black Knight up recently to get it badged and what a miserable experience!

It's so tall, and slow, and not agile at all. I ran 9 mpl on it, and I just never felt like I could do enough or get close enough. The mounts are low... I could go on. It's a shame because it was a cool mech in MW4 but in MWO it's just a liability I felt. I COULD get good matches in it but few and far between.

[FupDup]

Wolfos31, on 19 February 2021 - 02:10 PM, said:

*shudder* I leveled my Black Knight up recently to get it badged and what a miserable experience!

It's so tall, and slow, and not agile at all. I ran 9 mpl on it, and I just never felt like I could do enough or get close enough. The mounts are low... I could go on. It's a shame because it was a cool mech in MW4 but in MWO it's just a liability I felt. I COULD get good matches in it but few and far between.

The MW4-style artwork would've made the BK a more effective mech, if only for the somewhat higher hardpoints. It would also look way cooler.

[Heavy Money]

Vyx, on 19 February 2021 - 01:48 PM, said:

One of the things that MWO never took seriously into consideration (in a quantifiable way) is the geometry advantages and disadvantages of each mech. Armor, structure, hardpoints, quirks -- these can all be quantified and thus balanced. But geometry; not so much.

Geometry affects so many things in a 3D first person shooter. The reason mechs like the Vapor Eagle, Vulcan, Wolfhound, Piranha, Commando, etc. overperform is largely because the torsos (left, right, center) are so thin. There is a substantially higher chance that these mechs will spread damage across multiple torsos when hit with most weapons. This leads to a much longer lifespan, and thus a much longer period of lethality when compared to other mechs.

Things like high mounts also contribute to the a mech's non-quantifiable effectiveness -- another aspect of geometry. The Vapor Eagle has these as well.

The problem is: if a mech is to visibly resemble what the designers have envisioned, there really is no fix for this. Artificial engine capping or possible negative quirks? People don't want this. One might say: "Don't nerf -- raise the other mechs up!" But to achieve that -- realizing that geometry is the issue at hand -- the other mechs would have to be re-designed with an eye toward this goal ... and that is waaay too much work for the slackers at PGI.

In the end, I suspect we will just have to accept that some mechs are built better than others -- and simply live with it. The best we will likely get is some light quirkening for the under-performers (i.e., some armor here, some heat gen there). But I doubt that will truly address the root of the problem.

The solution to this sort of problem is to adjust the set point aka zero point of balance.
At the moment, the default is for mechs to have no quirks. If they are weak for whatever reason, they then get positive quirks. If they are strong for whatever reason, they don't get negative quirks, so they're just left strong.

This could be solved by doing something like reducing the cooldown of all weapons by 10%, and then making the baseline for every mech in the game to be 10% fire rate for each weapon type instead of nothing. Nothing would have changed, but now you have something to take away from stronger mechs without giving them a minus symbol.

This won't be done at this stage in the game of course. I'm just saying its not an insurmountable problem in theory though.

[The pessimistic optimist]

Wolfos31, on 19 February 2021 - 02:10 PM, said:

*shudder* I leveled my Black Knight up recently to get it badged and what a miserable experience!

It's so tall, and slow, and not agile at all. I ran 9 mpl on it, and I just never felt like I could do enough or get close enough. The mounts are low... I could go on. It's a shame because it was a cool mech in MW4 but in MWO it's just a liability I felt. I COULD get good matches in it but few and far between.

The center torso you can't miss...

[Heavy Money]

Lockheed_, on 19 February 2021 - 02:51 PM, said:

agreed, this is what freaks me out. it's not gonna be just a little nerf, and I do not think it needs on in the first place, it's gonna totally **** up the mech and possibly the weight class, weapons and other things depending on what they decide to do.



Amen!

Please see previous page of the thread.

The primary suggestion is a minimum engine size around 300. This is not a change that affects any of the things you are concerned about.

Heavy Money, on 19 February 2021 - 11:48 AM, said:

The concept of buffing underperformers up to the level up performers is good in general, but it doesn't work when you have a big outlier like the Vapor Eagle. The Veagle is a heavy medium that runs loadouts on par with heavy heavies and light assaults. Is any other mech running that much more firepower above its class without making massive sacrifices?


1-The Vapor eagle is here

2->>>Other Good mechs like the Madcat and hellbringer are here
3->>>Lots of decent mechs are here
4->>>Mediocre mechs

5->>>Tons of left behind mechs

Since the Vapor Eagle is the outlier, if you're buffing other mechs up to its level, you're talking about having to change every mech in the game as opposed to just changing the vapor eagle. And if you do this, you also have problems with power creep. You'll change the average baseline of offense vs defense, which messes up tons of other factors in the game, like TKK and alpha strike balance. The proper balance point for these things is probably category 3.5-2 in my above rough comparison.

People are saying not to change it because its "fun". Well no duh guys. Being more powerful than other people is fun. This is a terrible argument. Its not gonna ruin it to be moved to merely being 'very good' rather than 'uniquely out of proportion compared to everything else in the game.'

Edited by Heavy Money, 19 February 2021 - 02:55 PM.

[John Bronco]

You seem to think its vastly more powerful than other mech in the game. I'd put the vulcan, anni, madcat, and sleip right there with it, and of those it's the easiest to kill before they can kill you. Maybe it's just since it poptarts that you find it extra annoying.

I'll restate my opposition to the minimum engine idea since that guts all the builds including the ones that are not outsized in performance.

An ATM adjustment and removing the JJ quirks would address the problematic builds without ruining the whole mech.

And as many others have said, bring other mediums up somewhat.

[Heavy Money]

BlaizerP, on 19 February 2021 - 03:38 PM, said:

You seem to think its vastly more powerful than other mech in the game. I'd put the vulcan, anni, madcat, and sleip right there with it, and of those it's the easiest to kill before they can kill you. Maybe it's just since it poptarts that you find it extra annoying.

I'll restate my opposition to the minimum engine idea since that guts all the builds including the ones that are not outsized in performance.

An ATM adjustment and removing the JJ quirks would address the problematic builds without ruining the whole mech.

And as many others have said, bring other mediums up somewhat.

Arguing that it isn't vastly powerful because mostly top tier assault mechs are on its level is an argument for my position, not yours. Thank you for supporting my point.

The Veagle can run amounts of ATMS and PPCs that heavy mechs struggle to, and does so without relevant sacrifices. Why should it be able to do that? No other medium does that. How many lights can run a Medium's level of firepower without significant sacrifices? How many heavies can run an assault's level of firepower without significant sacrifices? The Veagle is an outlier. It is too efficient and powerful in proportion to other equivalent mechs, and its doing it in the wrong role. That it is still beaten in absolute terms by some other mechs isn't an argument. 55ton mediums are not supposed to be on the level of assault mechs. None of the others are.

ATMs on other mechs aren't really a problem. Are people complaining about ATM poptarting Huntsmen or Shadowcats? No. Are they complaining about ATM Ebon Jaguars, Sunspiders, Timber Wolves, Summoners, Orion 2's, etc? No. They complain about the Vapor Eagle. Because the problem is the Vapor Eagle.

Poptarting is silly, but again, its not being complained about on pretty much anything else. Its the Vapor Eagle. Ergo, the problem isn't poptarting, its the Vapor Eagle.

The Vapor Eagle needs to be demoted to its proper and intended position as a medium skirmisher. And yes, all medium skirmishers need to get a bit stronger.

Edited by Heavy Money, 19 February 2021 - 05:05 PM.