Jump to content

Clan Mechs Balancing


30 replies to this topic

#21 Inappropriate1191

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 147 posts

Posted 25 December 2012 - 11:53 AM

You know, looking at Sarna, I think I found what could be the best compromise with Clan balancing. Simply speed up the timeline for when the Inner Sphere gets access to what I call the, "Cheap, Chinese knock-offs" of Clan tech. I'm talking, X-pulse lasers, Light Fusion Engines, and Endo-Composite internal structures.

Those things act kind of like Clan tech, and are superior to most IS tech, but not quite as good as Clan. They're somewhere in between. For instance, the Light Fusion Engines only save you 25% of engine weight, but only take up an additional 4 crit slots, and if you lose a side torso, you don't die, merely take a hit to your speed. Endo-Composite is only 7 crit slots, but gives 2.5% more tonnage instead of 5%. Things like that.

It's still not as good as just letting IS have Clan tech, but it does help close the gap a little, and make balancing easier.

#22 Dirkdaring

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • 685 posts
  • LocationTwycross

Posted 25 December 2012 - 03:14 PM

Qultar had it right - just not put so elegantly.

Range is what gives Clantech the biggest gain bar none. In table top btech and even in btech muds, range rules (or ruled) all. 1-2 more hexes per range category is huge. Huge huge. But in MWO the maps don't support long range very well (easy to get our of los in any map) , and you already know how targeting works.

#23 Suskis

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 276 posts
  • LocationItaly

Posted 25 December 2012 - 03:29 PM

The devs have stated we're getting 12 players matches someday.
12 IS mechs vs 8 Clan mechs is ok to me.

#24 IceSerpent

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,044 posts

Posted 25 December 2012 - 05:56 PM

View PostSuskis, on 25 December 2012 - 03:29 PM, said:

The devs have stated we're getting 12 players matches someday.
12 IS mechs vs 8 Clan mechs is ok to me.


The only way a Clan unit would field 8 mechs is for them to drop a binary and have 2 discos at the start of the match.

#25 Sears

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • 973 posts
  • LocationU.K

Posted 26 December 2012 - 08:05 AM

Cost should never be used in balance, you just put power into the hands of premiums like myself. I don't know how you balance something that is just better in canon. Perhaps they'll go for more power = More heat route.

#26 Gremlich Johns

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 3,855 posts
  • LocationMaryland, USA

Posted 30 December 2012 - 09:29 AM

PGI could avoid all this hubbub and reset the game to 3015 like they originally intended

#27 IceSerpent

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,044 posts

Posted 31 December 2012 - 10:46 AM

View PostGremlich Johns, on 30 December 2012 - 09:29 AM, said:

PGI could avoid all this hubbub and reset the game to 3015 like they originally intended


That would be unwise from a financial point of view.

#28 Gremlich Johns

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 3,855 posts
  • LocationMaryland, USA

Posted 31 December 2012 - 01:23 PM

View PostIceSerpent, on 31 December 2012 - 10:46 AM, said:


That would be unwise from a financial point of view.

Not quite so sure. Imagine not having to worry about it and most people familiar with the BT milieu know 3025 very well. Even though I am a Clan-centric player, I would still play as a Merc in the IS, maybe even as part of Wolf's Dragoons or the Minnesota Tribe.....

I am more concerned that they fix things like ECM instead.

(Ice, come back to our forums, mate, see how we've been doing)

Edited by Gremlich Johns, 31 December 2012 - 01:25 PM.


#29 IceSerpent

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,044 posts

Posted 31 December 2012 - 03:23 PM

View PostGremlich Johns, on 31 December 2012 - 01:23 PM, said:

Not quite so sure. Imagine not having to worry about it and most people familiar with the BT milieu know 3025 very well. Even though I am a Clan-centric player, I would still play as a Merc in the IS, maybe even as part of Wolf's Dragoons or the Minnesota Tribe.....


I am not really worried about it - there's literally a truckload of ways to balance Clantech, not to mention that one of its main advantages is already negated in MWO (superior weapon range is pretty much useless on the maps we have).

Quote

I am more concerned that they fix things like ECM instead.


Oh, come on! We both know how to use Eyeballs Mk I ™ as primary targeting system from NBT-HC days, so ECM only makes life difficult for configs heavy on lock-on missiles. It's certainly something PGI will have to tweak, but it's far from being a huge deal breaker even as it sits now.

Quote

(Ice, come back to our forums, mate, see how we've been doing)


Are you guys still playing MWLL or did you move to MWO already (as a unit, I mean)?

#30 Gremlich Johns

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 3,855 posts
  • LocationMaryland, USA

Posted 01 January 2013 - 11:13 AM

Quote

Are you guys still playing MWLL or did you move to MWO already (as a unit, I mean)?


We still play MWLL from time to time and we cannot play CBS as a unit since it is a Homeworlds Clan. Maybe after the Harvest Trials.....

Re: ECM and using eyeballs, I agree, and I generally have no issues unless I round a corner and get pounded by 5 mechs under the golden shroud. However, the developers are so ignorant about some of its capabilities. If it can disrupt a TAG laser, then it should also be able to somewhat disrupt a laser weapon. If it can disrupt a NARC (which is voice comms frequency range), they better be making everybody use in-game voip so that can be affected too. If ECM is on, nobody's radar, comms, etc should work, not the opposing mechs, not the friendly mechs and not the ECM mech. I don't mind ECM, but it needs to conform to science, not fantasy. I've operated said equipment and I laugh at what PGI has produced, because it is crap, copied from really ignorant fiction writers who did not do enough research past a dictionary definition.

#31 IceSerpent

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,044 posts

Posted 01 January 2013 - 12:04 PM

View PostGremlich Johns, on 01 January 2013 - 11:13 AM, said:

We still play MWLL from time to time and we cannot play CBS as a unit since it is a Homeworlds Clan. Maybe after the Harvest Trials.....


You can play as a merc unit for the time being...

Quote

Re: ECM and using eyeballs, I agree, and I generally have no issues unless I round a corner and get pounded by 5 mechs under the golden shroud.


That's no different from a setup without ECM - if they all are behind a corner and none of your teammates has LOS, you are still in for a nasty surprise after rounding that corner.

Quote

However, the developers are so ignorant about some of its capabilities. If it can disrupt a TAG laser, then it should also be able to somewhat disrupt a laser weapon. If it can disrupt a NARC (which is voice comms frequency range), they better be making everybody use in-game voip so that can be affected too. If ECM is on, nobody's radar, comms, etc should work, not the opposing mechs, not the friendly mechs and not the ECM mech. I don't mind ECM, but it needs to conform to science, not fantasy. I've operated said equipment and I laugh at what PGI has produced, because it is crap, copied from really ignorant fiction writers who did not do enough research past a dictionary definition.


Yeah, it's not strictly realistic in terms of disrupting TAG. For the rest it's debatable, as ECM can be made to only disrupt certain wave lengths. So, it is technically possible to disrupt enemy radar/comms only. Regardless, a lot of BT stuff is not exactly realistic, and from the game balance perspective the only problem with current implementation of ECM is that it almost completely disables guided missiles.





2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users