Should the devs re-balance between Aeros and Vehicles?

[Virt]

There are many comments in many threads about how powerful/survivable Aeros are vs Vehicles.     

In fact, reading all those comments, I sometimes feel like there must be two versions of MWLL out there... the one where Aeros can be easily shot from the sky by vehicles with all manner of weapons, and the one where Aeros are hard to damage but deliver devastating damage from above with impunity.    There seems to be a real polarization of points of view.

So for my own interest only, I'd like to try to get a sense of proportionally how the overall community sees the current balance between Aeros and Vehicles.    (And by "Vehicles" I mean ground based-assets, including Mechs and Tanks).

My poll asks you to put aside all the side issues and considerations of Aeros vs Vehicles (damage dealt, survivability, realism, differences between Mechs and Tanks, pricing, etc) and nett it all down to one response on the one big question at the root of this issue...

That is, taking v0.3.1 as your baseline, would you like to see the next version of MWLL rebalanced in favour of Aeros, or in favour of Vehicles, or leave the balance just the way it is?

EDIT: the term "re-balancing" is intended to encompass any change to the balance.   It could range from a minor tweak to a major overhaul.   I'm just interested in whether net net you think the balance is "just right", or whether you think the balance should be shifted in favour or Aeros, or Vehicles.

In your comments, it would also be interesting if you'd mention whether you tend to spend more time fighting in Aeros, or fighting in Vehicles, or a fairly equal mix of the two.   

Thanks in anticipation of your response and comments.

PS: No need to tell me "this poll will make no difference".   I already know that.   It's the devs' game.   Their game, their choice.    I'm just interested to get a sense of proportionally where the community sits on this hot topic, given the frequent comments and seeming polarization of points of view.

[DFDelta]

Currently the balance is pretty good, so I'd like it to stay the way it is.
I spend a lot of time in different Hawkmoths and in the Partisan B (RAC Variant), and sometimes in a Sulla.

I have been on both sides of a AA vehicle and I think it is balanced very well.
If the AA was to be buffed in any way it should be in a indirect way, not trough raising their damage. The repair delay for ASF or the rocking of ASF when hit with AA guns are good examples for that.

[MerfMerf]

Tricky vote!
I think the overall balance seem to be working well, but I see (and understand) dedicated AA-players being frustrated.

I (like Delta) think the balancing should be indirect. I think a lot of the frustration may be alleviated by things like improving speed for the AA tanks (or just their general ability to climb hills and remain stationary on a non-flat surface). There may also be a need to make the AA more useful in a support role against other targets then Aero.

All in all. The actual balance seem fine (I vote no change). If one factor in enjoyment (in lack of a better word) I feel there is work to be done...

/Merf - ¿<><

[Buzz_Litebeer]

I have so far enjoyed the balance of the game.  I have used mechs that have autocannons now.

Thats just amazing!

[Virt]

I (like Delta) think the balancing should be indirect. I think a lot of the frustration may be alleviated by things like improving speed for the AA tanks (or just their general ability to climb hills and remain stationary on a non-flat surface). There may also be a need to make the AA more useful in a support role against other targets then Aero.

I'd have netted that out as "Rebalance to strengthen Vehicles", as you're saying the capabilities of certain vehicles should be improved.   But hey, it's your vote

[NSallaNuto]

Voted the third option but I feel that the problem is not just in vehicles (making them stronger) but in the whole complex balance between AA and ASF classes, mainly in the fast repair cycle for ASF units and under performing AC/UAC AA units.

Currently I feel that changing server is often a more attractive option than start using an AA unit, it is matter of doing the best use of the precious free time, it is simply not fun nor rewarding enough.

[KingLeerUK]

I don't know if it makes a difference or not, but I view balance as an organic entity that must constantly be re-assessed with each development cycle.  We've already had some pretty radical swings in aero v. ground balance over the life of the public MWLL build.  At the current time, I think that in terms of "pure durability" (which you may interpret as armour, or damage) the balance is pretty good.  To qualify this, I see a nearly equal number of "aeros are overpowered" to the "I do just fine with the AA facilities made available" type messages.
 
Future balancing will come with small tweaks to some of the weapon damage modifiers, but the main mechanics for balancing will be new features, new assets, and non-durability changes to the aerospace role.  Just last night I was talking through a new asset with another developer that will give aero pilots something to genuinely be concerned about.  It's not quite ready for release as I want to really TEST it for balance purposes first.

[MerfMerf]

I (like Delta) think the balancing should be indirect. I think a lot of the frustration may be alleviated by things like improving speed for the AA tanks (or just their general ability to climb hills and remain stationary on a non-flat surface). There may also be a need to make the AA more useful in a support role against other targets then Aero.

I'd have netted that out as "Rebalance to strengthen Vehicles", as you're saying the capabilities of certain vehicles should be improved.   But hey, it's your vote

With the way the vote is posed it is implied the balancing of the two assets are in comparison to each other. I do not want a rebalance that "strengthens" vehicles against Aeros. Thus the vote on "leave it". I want changes to both the Aeros and the Vehicles, but I don't want the numbers-game between the two to change much.

/Merf - Simplicity is advanced

[Virt]

I want changes to both the Aeros and the Vehicles, but I don't want the numbers-game between the two to change much.

Fair enough.   Thanks for clarifying.  I agree you selected the poll choice that most accurately represents your view.

[Virt]

To qualify this, I see a nearly equal number of "aeros are overpowered" to the "I do just fine with the AA facilities made available" type messages

Interestingly, the last time you made a comment about that, you said "I know the balance is right when I see equal numbers of complaints from both sides."

Now you're saying that the ideal balance occurs when there's equal support for the middle ground (ie those who think the current balance is ok) and one extreme (ie those who want Vehicles strengthened).     So, the absence of support for the other extreme (ie Aeros need to be strengthened) since 0.3.1 apparently isn't factoring any more in your calculation of perceived balance.

Personally, I think you were right the first time... Balance is the mid point between the two extremes... not the point between the middle and one extreme.    In fact, I created this poll because I thought the distribution of opinions, between and including both extremes, would be interesting and instructive.   

Standard disclaimer: it's your game, your call.     I'm just a passionate fan with a perspective.

[KingLeerUK]

I do receive complaints that Shivas are too slow, and thus too easy to destroy.  To some extent I agree, especially considering their extraordinary cost.  If any AA are even half-competent a Shiva can be brought down if it is within their sphere of fire.

[~SJ~Azov]

the only thing i would like to see is a buff in ASF weapons doing more damage to other ASF. The Sulla A for example can shoot a shiva for a good 2 minutes before the shiva is destroyed. Same thing with a Sparrowhawk to a Sulla. maybe you could replace the 2 LBX2s with a pair of LBX5s only.

[Tsorevitch]

I vote for more low cost AA. 
8*Mgun haraser for Clan and IS for starting credits will mostly solve the frustration from current situation with extremely expensive and insanely slow AA assets

[=KoS= Eldragon]

I'm hoping the new net code in Warhead reduces the lag-shield, which IMHO is most of the problem. But I voted "Strengthen Vehicles" because I think Tanks across the board need a price reduction, or at least give us an AA Partisan that costs < 49000 credits.

[NSallaNuto]

A modest contribution to this discussion.

This table represents the level of threat for a class from other classes (threat for the vertical class from the horizontal class). Of course it is subjective and open to discussion but I think it shows how some classes have obvious weak spots while others have much less.

Of course each class is to be considered in average, within a class there are differences.

[attachment deleted by admin]