246 replies to this topic

[Kid Weeb]

As a newbie, I think that working towards getting a mech better suited to your developing skills would be great. A mech or two in each weight class would be a good start.

[Felicitatem Parco]

2-3 mechs per weightclass would be an Awesome launch portfolio, and it will certainly grow with time.

[Halfinax]

What I don't get is so many people seem to be assuming that a) all roles are combat roles, and b ) that all matches are going to be deathmatches. This seems to be the real crux of this issue.

Since the devs have already said the game isn't deathmatch centric, and has at least conquest mode as a mode (implied as primary gameplay mode) It makes the argument fairly moot about whether or not a light 'Mech can beat an assault 'Mech in a toe to toe fight. Since we know this [TDM] is not the case it, therefore; makes sense to have at least a 'Mech of each weight class to choose from at the beginning of a match/career.

To further that argument. Since no one will know right off the bat what role and 'Mech combination will work best for them when first starting out it makes the most sense to have a variety of 'Mechs that are free to play. Using a starting C-bill value to choose a starting 'Mech with forces a player to make a decision on what role and 'Mech they want as their career without any idea if it will be a good fit for them.

Edited by Halfinax, 05 March 2012 - 03:54 PM.

[Aegis Kleais]

Halfinax, on 05 March 2012 - 03:52 PM, said:

What I don't get is so many people seem to be assuming that a) all roles are combat roles, and b ) that all matches are going to be deathmatches. This seems to be the real crux of this issue.

Since the devs have already said the game isn't deathmatch centric, and has at least conquest mode as a mode (implied as primary gameplay mode) It makes the argument fairly moot about whether or not a light 'Mech can beat an assault 'Mech in a toe to toe fight. Since we know this is not the case it, therefore; makes sense to have at least a 'Mech of each weight class to choose from at the beginning of a match/career.

To further that argument. Since no one will know right off the bat what role and 'Mech combination will work best for them when first starting out it makes the most sense to have a variety of 'Mechs that are free to play. Using a starting C-bill value to choose a starting 'Mech with forces a player to make a decision on what role and 'Mech they want as their career without any idea if it will be a good fit for them.

You just have a better tactical comprehension of warfare roles and tactics than others. They are done in by finite numbers, the belief that 1 thing will be the best in all situations as well as labels and classifications. But your mind is open to deeper dynamics than what is just surface-deep.

[Psydotek]

12 Commandos will cream 12 Atlases if the Commandos are calling in artillery and the Atlases are decked out with only offense/defense modules.

[Outlaw2]

The problem isn't how do you balance 12 commandos with 12 atlases.

Its how do you balance mechs of the similar role and function with one another?

Just like I mentioned in the BV thread, some mechs will simply outclass other mechs in virtually every possible way you can think of. Its not always bigger is better (though generally that is the case). Often mechs are benched by other mechs of equal weight.

Edited by =Outlaw=, 05 March 2012 - 05:42 PM.

[Jake Grafton]

If I was a devious game developer I would show my potential gamers several mechs prior to launch day to get conversations going on what mechs are most desired. On launch day I would have a store open to purchase tech and "gasp!" why look there! Several mechs that haven't been shown yet. We'd all be falling over ourselves to purchase the additional mechs.

[Orzorn]

=Outlaw=, on 05 March 2012 - 05:40 PM, said:

The problem isn't how do you balance 12 commandos with 12 atlases.

Its how do you balance mechs of the similar role and function with one another?

Just like I mentioned in the BV thread, some mechs will simply outclass other mechs in virtually every possible way you can think of. Its not always bigger is better (though generally that is the case). Often mechs are benched by other mechs of equal weight.

Sometimes, a mech is just going to be better than another mech in the same weight class, due to date of release and the technology used. Some mechs aren't used at all because they're more for fluff than anything (Mackie). However, the one balancing factor that many people forget is simply cost. There are many mechs that are used that are technically inferior, but because of their cheapness, they are used over other mechs. MWO, due to its implementation of c-bills, will likely have this as an inherent factor. Newer, or down-on-their-luck players might use "inferior" mechs simply because of their cheap cost. Even veterans might use cheaper mechs for missions that they expect little resistance on, to avoid hefty repair costs that more expensive designs might entail.

[Zakatak]

Aye) Choose 1 mech per weight class to unlock
Bee) Start with 10 million C-Bills and purchase what you please

My 2 options, although I prefer B.

Edited by Zakatak, 05 March 2012 - 06:03 PM.

[Vexgrave Lars]

I'm Driving a light to begin with regardless of what available. 2 important reasons.

They are Cheap to Drive.. and Cheap lose and if I survive..cheap to reload/repair. (I am presuming the later is probable, yet inferred). Yes The rules governing EVE Online apply here.. don't drive what you can't afford to lose. (Killboards by tonnage, I would guess)

Light Mechs are awesome to training in, and we will all be training when this monster launches.. whether you like it or not. What you KNOW will apply I'm certain, but what you have to learn can be costly if you put all your eggs in one basket.. and lose it.

Should we by vote ( or the Devs, because of our vote ) dictate what is and isn't available... No.. leave it to open and the drivers decision.

Edited by Vexgrave Lars, 05 March 2012 - 06:14 PM.

[Colorfinger]

If you don't like your mech, sell it and buy a new one. Why not have the cbill shop go both ways?

[Maris]

I think there are still a lot of people who think of this game as your typical deathmatches and they wrongly assume that Assault Mechs are the Endgame.

That is not the case in MWO. The endgame is about filling out your team with different classes of mech fulfilling different functions and filling out all tactical roles you are going to need to win.

On a much more reduced lvl, WoT gives us sort of a glimpse into such gameplay. Many a times, I've seen a team decked out with heavy tanks with very little medium/scout tanks being totally wasted and outmaneuvered by a team that was decked out with a much more balanced Heavy/Medium/Scout tanks and arty support, even though pound for pound they outgunned and outarmored the other team.

Now, in MWO with the kits, modules and the tactical functions that come with them, I expect that the differences between a team with assaults against a much more tactically/function balanced team to be even more pronounced.

So it doesn't matter if all mechs are available at launch (which I hope it would be), its more of a matter of what ROLE and FUNCTION will you fulfill in a match, not just weight-classes.

[Thomas Hogarth]

Halfinax, on 05 March 2012 - 02:43 PM, said:

Same reason you don't see that issue in the TT. People like what they like, and the minis, nor the C-bill price are prohibitive or very different from any other chassis. You are assuming everyone will want to ride that ride simply because it's canonically rare. I've played the TT for quite sometime and guess what even without any limiting factor you still don't see them often.

The reason I don't have a problem with it is I just don't get twisted up about a Maurader IIc being rare in canon, but being potentially not in MW:O. It's not going to ruin my immersion, and I don't think it would ruin it for the vast majority of players. I'm sure if the devs want to find a way to make a chassis rare they can and will.

Hell they could make those super rare 'Mechs available only as prizes for certain events or something (assuming they still aren't superior to other 'Mechs). Now that would be something, and I'd be more impressed when I saw one on the battlefield because they would then be legitimately rare, and not forcibly rare through artificial means like extreme pricing. Having a Marauder IIC as a badge of honor for winning a tournament or something would be truly rare and really exciting when you do see one fielded.

MAD-II is not a MAD-IIC.

I'm surprised you haven't seen a bias towards certain 'Mechs in your TT experience.

You are incorrect in there not being a limiting factor in tabletop: There's always that voice in the back of your head asking "what will the other guy say if I bring this? Will he walk away from the table?" I certainly would tilt my head in exasperation if someone brought a lance of only Imps or MAD-IIs. In my experience, if the individuals in a group do not ask themselves this, they're not worth playing with.

Also, many people build their armies around canon-correct examples, or use RATs. I don't know why I'm telling you this - if you play TT, you know this. As such, you won't see someone playing a FedSun army with an Imp without a very good reason, and almost certainly not the entire formation.
MechWarrior is different. You have _one_ 'Mech to bring to the match, so there's a very real drive to make it a good one. Or at least, a very, very cool one. Rare and special snowflake is cool. Mark my words, if a MAD-II is as common as a Zeus, everybody is going to be rocking the Marauder-II.

I really really like the increased costs angle. Steal a page from World of Tanks: In that game, once you reach a certain level, usually by going heavier, it starts becoming impossible to make money on a match, and you play at a net loss. Which means you have to break out the low-tier tanks to make that money.

Adapt that for MWO, and we might be on to something. Medium 'Mechs make a good, baseline amount, while heavies make considerably less. Possibly not losing money less, but certainly not gaining as fast as a medium. Make lights make money rapidly. Assaults should be near-impossible to get a profit from.
[edit] All of the above is assuming a fairly decent win. If in a medium: Do poorly on a win and earn peanuts. Do well on a loss and make a bit more than peanuts. Do poorly and lose, and be ready to sell off that stock of Tharkad Winter Brandy. Do decently well and win in an assault, and you should still be paying some c-bills.

Further balance that by assigning additional profitability(or lack thereof) per chassis variant, based on rarity and unbalancing nature of the 'Mech.

I'd be happy with that. Truthfully, I'd be ecstatic about that.

Edited by Thomas Hogarth, 05 March 2012 - 06:48 PM.

[Fugu]

I voted yes but I don't want an Atlas.
I'd be mighty pissed if I had to walk around in a Commando at the beginning!
I am against unlocking but for making a heavier 'Mech more expensive in maintenance and all. I could live happy with my more expensive Catapult but I would hate to pilot a Jenner, just because I have to unlock stuff first.

You have all those skills to unlock, isn't that enough unlocking? That's already a lot to work towards, not even mentioning the costs of repairs so why would you want to have people all running around in light 'Mechs and 70% of them hating every second of it?

Maris, on 05 March 2012 - 06:27 PM, said:

I think there are still a lot of people who think of this game as your typical deathmatches and they wrongly assume that Assault Mechs are the Endgame.

That is not the case in MWO. The endgame is about filling out your team with different classes of mech fulfilling different functions and filling out all tactical roles you are going to need to win.

Edit:
Aditionally there is a pretty popular video on youtube about a group of players running around in a lance entirely made up of Atlases in MWLL. They loose because they are simply too slow to get anything done.

MW:O won't just be deathmatch. You'll actually have to do stuff in a match. Capture points, scout, defend, get intel and spread it around. You'd have a hard time doing all of that at 54 km/h.

On a much more reduced lvl, WoT gives us sort of a glimpse into such gameplay. Many a times, I've seen a team decked out with heavy tanks with very little medium/scout tanks being totally wasted and outmaneuvered by a team that was decked out with a much more balanced Heavy/Medium/Scout tanks and arty support, even though pound for pound they outgunned and outarmored the other team.

Now, in MWO with the kits, modules and the tactical functions that come with them, I expect that the differences between a team with assaults against a much more tactically/function balanced team to be even more pronounced.

So it doesn't matter if all mechs are available at launch (which I hope it would be), its more of a matter of what ROLE and FUNCTION will you fulfill in a match, not just weight-classes.

Yes!
It's like the difference between having one good sniper in your team that supports well and a team only made of snipers:
One or two can be helpful, when they serve their role, but all snipers would make a camping group that'd get nothing done outside of pure deathmatch.

Edited by Fugu, 05 March 2012 - 07:09 PM.

[Broccan Mac Ronain]

Sorry to say I have run in situations where you get paid as a merc meaning that you get paid for the kills you make and out of that you pay for repairs and ammo. That puts the light mechs and medium mechs at a gross disadvantage since they cant do the damage the heavies can. I have also played where you pick what ever you want, boring with nothing to look forward to. What I would like to see is something like the World of Tanks model where you get experience for what you do (not just killing) and can use that experience to buy upgrades to your mech and new mechs making it expensive enough that you do not have a massive stable of mechs. Also it would be nice if the starting mechs were based on what ever house you are allied to, mercs as well as household troops.

[Halfinax]

Thomas Hogarth, on 05 March 2012 - 06:45 PM, said:

You have _one_ 'Mech to bring to the match, so there's a very real drive to make it a good one. Or at least, a very, very cool one. Rare and special snowflake is cool. Mark my words, if a MAD-II is as common as a Zeus, everybody is going to be rocking the Marauder-II.

I can't help but disagree with the very premise of this assumption. I'd say the "very real drive" is to make it the one you are best with. Nothing is "cooler" than showing off how skilled you are. I'm not a front line kind of player in any game I play competitively. As a matter of fact I tend to be more of a support role type player, as such I choose my class based on my abilities, talent, and that desire to be more of a behind the scenes player. I don't get huge kill counts, but I know I've helped my team in the way that I was most effective. This is how most serious players play any competitive game.

We play the role we are best suited for with the equipment that best suits our playstyle within that role. You seem to assume that because you are a front lines gunner that likes the big and rare toys that that is the way everyone desires to play. People will use the 'Mech that best fits their play style and gives them the most satisfaction. What's more is what looks cool to one guy looks like an ugly pile to the next.

Not trying to be offensive here, but you need to stop assuming that everyone thinks and plays the same way you do.

[Outlaw2]

Orzorn, on 05 March 2012 - 06:00 PM, said:

Sometimes, a mech is just going to be better than another mech in the same weight class, due to date of release and the technology used. Some mechs aren't used at all because they're more for fluff than anything (Mackie). However, the one balancing factor that many people forget is simply cost. There are many mechs that are used that are technically inferior, but because of their cheapness, they are used over other mechs. MWO, due to its implementation of c-bills, will likely have this as an inherent factor. Newer, or down-on-their-luck players might use "inferior" mechs simply because of their cheap cost. Even veterans might use cheaper mechs for missions that they expect little resistance on, to avoid hefty repair costs that more expensive designs might entail.

Using out of game costs to balance in-game matches doesn't work out very well. We've seen this for years in resources based leagues.
At the end of the match its what people used that wins. If one team all uses top tier mechs against a team full of crap mech, they are probably going to win...which means they get more resources to continue using top tier mechs. Unless you go the dubious WoT route where using top tier tanks actually lose money. For all thats good, DONT DO THIS.

I'd much rather have BV attached to each mech based on their chassis, components and weapons. Then balance matches somehow with BV in mind, INCLUDING competitive matches....otherwise we'll have WoT syndrome where competitive matches are won with who has the most T10 tanks and 90% of the games content is only there to make you lose.

Edited by =Outlaw=, 05 March 2012 - 08:50 PM.

[Orzorn]

=Outlaw=, on 05 March 2012 - 08:14 PM, said:

Using out of game costs to balance in-game matches doesn't work out very well. We've seen this for years in resources based leagues.
At the end of the match its what people used that wins. If one team all uses top tier mechs against a team full of crap mech, they are probably going to win...which means they get more resources to continue using top tier mechs. Unless you go the dubious WoT route where using top tier tanks actually lose money. For all thats good, DONT DO THIS.

I'd much rather have BV attached to each mech based on their chassis, components and weapons. Then balance matches somehow with BV in mind, INCLUDING competitive matches....otherwise we'll have WoT syndrome where competitive matches are won with how has the most T10 tanks and 90% of the games content is only there to make you lose.

Oh, in no way am I using that as a single balancing factor. However, none of these factors will be in a vacuum and they all combine to create the real game atmosphere. Cheap mechs are still going to be used, at least for some time, by new players. I personally don't expect new players to be able to pick one of any mech in the game and just go at it, and the amount of c-bills they're given won't likely allow them to outright purchase an Atlas, or, if it does, they'd struggle to keep it repaired and fitted. Buying cheap at first will allow a player to pool their cash (cheaper repair/rearm) and buy up and still allow them to keep a wad of cash available.

Not much reason for c-bills if they aren't going to be important at some point, eh? I fully expect all but the most successful groups to have to struggle, at least somewhat, with repair, rearm, and customization while not breaking the bank.

[Thomas Hogarth]

Halfinax, on 05 March 2012 - 08:00 PM, said:

Not trying to be offensive here, but you need to stop assuming that everyone thinks and plays the same way you do.

You're not trying to be offensive by ignoring most of a post and focusing on one part? Also, not trying to be offensive, but accusing me of assuming what others play, while assuming I'm speaking of how I play? (and by extension, assuming how I play?)

No, you're trying to be offensive. Or at least hamfisting yourself into doing a really good job at it.

MW4 was an example of players being free to choose what they want. In that game, it sounds like we both played the same way. I like taking the underrated mediums personally. But you know as well as I do that lights and mediums are by far the most under-represented class in MW4. Sure, MWO with it's role warfare might shift that down some, but going from 85% heavies and assaults to 75% heavies and assaults isn't big enough of a jump.

Which is why I suggest an earnings bias towards lights and mediums, while making heavies and assaults more difficult to impossible to generate a profit in. You'd have to run your light/medium to pay for your assault. I don't see a major issue with this.

=Outlaw=, on 05 March 2012 - 08:14 PM, said:

Unless you go the dubious WoT route where using top tier tanks actually lose money. For all thats good, DONT DO THIS.

Why not? In WOT, they do it so even top-tier players are in tier V matches to make money, thus providing a healthy amount of lower tier games.

In MWO, it could provide a healthy amount of lights/mediums in relation to heavies/assaults.

[Sgt Peanuts]

I think every mech should be available, but the heavier ones should be out of price range.