Nastyogre wrote:So what do you suggest Max? I'll just grant that the The staff/council have made bad choices etc. What is a solution? Was it really better to have a 600-700 BV spread and have nearly unusable units on the ends of the spectrum (high and low) and face the same types of units and forces all the time?
We could just leave it. Let it play out, which is what I am inclined to do, yet I don't want the concerns to become something like weather or Air/Ground that caused a whole lot of problems and player exodus.
There is always a way to game the system. It's a question of just how egregious that is. 3 Warhammer-R's used to play with an Atlas at a 600 BV spread. It was the cheapest unit possible with an Atlas. I suppose an Atlas at 5200 BV or so is pretty scary but you can typically actually fight it. Damn hard to fight a Spartan at 3500 or an Osprey at 3100.
I'm all ears MMM.
If you are looking at a solution that would make everyonme happy there's none.
Casualy players might not bother about the outcome of the change, powers-that-be have to. That's why ruleset was criticised left, right and middle, and pretty often i must add.
'Abuse' of APCs as ini-sinks was pretty obvious (and was brought up in another suggestion thread), council voted to give it a try, ergo they assumed that this 'abuse' hurts less than bv-spread removal benefits the community.
All that pretty much means it falls onto the council to decide whose cries for a rulechange to ignore.
If the council chooses to solve the problem by removing set ammoun of units from play, when do they stop?
At 400 bv? When ppl start using Stinger to scout\ini-\bv-sink.
If so, isn't getting rid of the MAD-II and Highlander removes far less variety than getting rid of a dozen lower-bv designs?
As for a Fatlass, i just checked the buildtables, you can team it up with over 90% of house\common designs (90% is a pull chance) and at least 60% of the heavies (heavies vary greatly though from 60 to almost 80 depending on the faction, DRGs,JMs and RFLs apparently are no good for the statistics). AS+3 WHM isn't as scary as you make it sound, AWS-Q AWS-V WVR-M and a CRD-R have the same bv (give or take a few), pretty sure other houses can present something similar.
Reworking of the buildtables might be another solution if council decides the get back to bv-spread.
Relegating those questionable units to a BM-table and removing them from house tables would be one solution (as the BM is now open, and you can always scrap a salvage, non will be forced to play a unit he can't squese into an army).
Other solution would be to split buildtables into 2 (heavy-duty units and lighter units) assigning different factories for each one (RP pull tables as well),i guess that won't be very much of a change to a server setting (and won't take any coding). So if you want APCs or Vtols or some other cheap scout vee, and have a way to use them, pull from auxilary light vee factory, if not pull from the core light vee table.
Personally i always wanted more variaty in games (probably comes from the fact that i play a lot), but was aware of the imminent minmaxing that would follow, and so never actually insisted on the change. It was never worth it for me, other players apparently have other priorities. With the change in place i just don't care, i'll min-max if i feel like it, i will not if i don't feel like it. I've run into some really ugly stuff and fielded some myself. To me it's fun because it's new.
P.S. I belive this discussion is well beyond the 'Suggestions' thread and would ask admins to consider moving it to a "General discussion' thread.