89 replies to this topic

[Equuleus]

The feature that was not put into mech warrior and the reason it never balances or makes sense.

They switched heat for that which should have been reactor power. In other words, to mount energy weapons, you need to mount the energy to shoot them. This game just assumes that comes along with it and then it looks ridiculous that you can put a huge energy weapon on a tiny frame with zero reactor or energy mount to run it. Secondly, it just pretends a ballistic drop with the idea of a range and reduced damage which is cheap and not done correctly. Thirdly it assumes that all your weapons converge on a target that is not targeted no matter what range it is. It assumes this by you looking at it, and then makes what this game calls stealth and shooting at stealth also seem ridiculous as my weapons somehow know to converge on it without targeting it and so they say the computer is doing that for you, which is not logical, because if it is doing it, then it should also be able to target it. So, you are saying my computer sees the stealth to converge my weapons on it, but it cannot target it. That does not make sense. And then this stealth is running around right next to you shooting weapons which are making heat and other things that are not stealth, and yet I still cannot target it because my AI computer is now a dumbazz and my radar is a moron. If a stealth vehicle starts shooting weapons it is not stealth anymore until it can evade radar.

Then you put in a bunch of skill tree stuff that completely alters the existing state of what something is and everyone using it differently to experiment to the side of upscaling their rig, which is doing what? Trying to unbalance the scale in favor of your idea build including putting stuff in such as critical hit theory script kiddie?

and how many variants of mechs are in your game now?

and then you think you can talk about this word

"BALANCE"

The game idea says you are doing the opposite of that.

There is no real balance you are going to find with that, just illogical guesses based on incomplete data.
A script kiddie board game is not a FPS.

[a 5 year old with an Uzi]

How does this relevel the playing field exactly

[Meep Meep]

There are two ways to relevel the field. One is to equally buff all weapons and mechs etc so that all are viable. But that leads to unintended consequences like greatly decreased ttk due to all the high alpha and dps flying around. The other is to do a general set of nerfs which have the same intended leveling effect but now you won't get insta melted from full health because two redline snipers focused you on a peek. This also opens back up targeted buffs of certain mechs and weapons to restart the flavor of the month power creep all over again. Eve online uses this balance model and it keeps the game always fresh.

[Bud Crue]

Meep Meep, on 07 May 2025 - 04:18 PM, said:

There are two ways to relevel the field. One is to equally buff all weapons and mechs etc so that all are viable.

How do you "relevel" the field so that a mech like the Panther 10P is as "viable" to the same level as a Stone Rhino or whatever mech you think of as the ultimate meta?

Without quirks, beyond what was considered "giga" quirks (of old), it simply isn't possible.

[Meep Meep]

Bud Crue, on 07 May 2025 - 08:31 PM, said:

How do you "relevel" the field so that a mech like the Panther 10P is as "viable" to the same level as a Stone Rhino or whatever mech you think of as the ultimate meta?

Without quirks, beyond what was considered "giga" quirks (of old), it simply isn't possible.

Balance isn't making each mech a carbon copy of each other. It's to ensure they can be used. With 1400 mechs and many of them with terrible hardpoints and/or geometry there is never going to be a situation where every mech is viable. Cauldron had done a fairly decent job so far and if the little birdy I hear is correct we are in for a fairly substantial nerf patch when it finally rolls around.

[Void Angel]

Quicksilver Aberration, on 25 March 2025 - 06:51 AM, said:

There's been a bit of a consensus among some in comp circles that dakka is the highest form of "skill expression" (I'm growing to hate this term), but I'm slowly starting to think that stare weapons like x-pulse, MGs, RACs, and some other dakka are actually not good for the game because they themselves don't encourage users to twist in between shots. I don't think it's just longer cooldowns like we had in MW4 (cERPPC had 8s, PPCs had 6s, Gauss had 7-8s, etc, etc), but shorter bursts of damage from face stare weapons (which they'll need compensation for).

Oh, dakka and laser burn weapons definitely build bad habits - I found that in myself during the Solaris event. My ping was higher than human reaction time, as well, but I found my twisting skills had decayed terribly.

As for adding new stuff to reign in overperforming weapons... That's not a good idea. You'll just end up with randomly effective builds whose performance depends on what happens to be on the other team, constantly playing a guessing game against other people who are also trying picking builds based on what seems to be trending at the moment...

[pald84]

The game is quite well balanced in my opinion, almost every play style are viable :
- close range with snubs or SRM (but you need mobility)
-dakka
- lasvom
-gauss / er large
-hag boat
-poptart (long range or short range)
- Light are good as well (dogfight/ poke / snubs)

Of course some mech are better than others but we have many good choices

Edited by pald84, 08 May 2025 - 12:45 PM.

[Brizna]

My test mech for general DPS state of the game is the Vindicator-SIB, it's a45T mech heavily quirked for resistance and good hit boxes--much better than Blackjack--used to be that you could actually endure a lot of punishment head on before going down, nowadays that's not so true any more.
I think that some degree of face tanking is part of what makes stompy robots stompy, nowadays getting shot at is too punishing, imo. I am not talking about a huge nerf to general DPS, making mistakes should be punished, but getting shot at is way too punishing at the moment, and the right answer is always don't.
So a moderate general increase of time to kill would improve player experience as a whole in my opinion

[Void Angel]

I think you are correct. The first big dip in Time to Kill wasn't the new weapons - it was 12v12. With more enemy 'mechs on the field, there was more firepower available to punish people for bad exposures or positioning - and this made a difference in how players reacted to enemy fire, tactically. With more weapons, and underperforming 'mechs being buffed up to parity, the amount of boom out there is... just a lot. The game's not unplayable by any metric, but I think it could be better, and slowing down the pace of combat to make it easier for players to practice (and learn) damage spreading would be an improvement.

Edited by Void Angel, 14 May 2025 - 03:59 AM.

[LordNothing]

1453 R, on 27 February 2025 - 08:41 PM, said:

Sure. If everything gets reined back, then no singular nerf will be nearly as painful. I honestly prefer sweeping, large-scale Nerf Patches that whammy half the game (whatever game it is) to individual stabs here and there. Huge whammies that hit half the game shake things up, makes stuff spicy again; individual nerfs mostly just suck.

Not what we're going to get of course, but still.

a bit of churn is good, better than growing bored with the same unchanging metas.