40 replies to this topic

[Ryoken]

I do understand that a lance of:
1 assault mech
1 heavy mech
1 medium mech
1 light mech

would fit best into your company class limit system of:
3 assault mechs
3 heavy mechs
3 medium mechs
3 light mechs

But by pure logic because of the different movement speeds of those classes it is a highly unlikely composition of mechs. Either the assault gets left behind or the light mech of the team can not live up to its speed.

Imagening
faster teams of lights/medium mechs (1-3lights and 1-3mediums maybe 1-2 fast heavy)
medium pace teams of medium/heavy mechs (1-3 mediums and 1-3 heavy maybe 1-2 light/assault)
and slow teams of heavy/assault mechs (1-3heavy and 1-3 assault maybe 1medium/light)
is what you have to consider.

Yet there are mentionalbe exceptions! So a team of a light spotting mech together with a heavy/assault mech LRM faction together in one lance does work ingame and by lore.

So please do not think about forcing 1-1-1-1 on us as it would further diminish the team game aspect of mwo that you allready kicked in the guts for a year.

Edited by Ryoken, 04 March 2014 - 06:44 AM.

[Mordin Ashe]

How is making teams more balanced diminishing the team aspect of MWO? Eventually it all turns out what builds people have and if they can handle them well. This plan of theirs made me upgrade my clan package to Adder and will probably see further upgrading at late april when this gets implemented.

[Ryoken]

Mordin Ashe, on 04 March 2014 - 12:12 AM, said:

How is making teams more balanced diminishing the team aspect of MWO? Eventually it all turns out what builds people have and if they can handle them well. This plan of theirs made me upgrade my clan package to Adder and will probably see further upgrading at late april when this gets implemented.

Where did I say I do not want teams to be balanced? I do welcome the 3-3-3-3 company weight class limits! But I want to point out that a 1-1-1-1 weight class limit on lances will put team oriented players on a even more forbidding position than they are at allready.

Because a company is:
1x light/medium lance
1x medium/heavy lance
1x heavy/assault lance

and NOT:
3x allweightclass mashup lances

I wanted PGI to know that the 1-1-1-1 lance Bryan envisioned in the NGNG podcast has a severy drawback. The 3-3-3-3 company is allright and will balance weight classes.

Edited by Ryoken, 04 March 2014 - 12:26 AM.

[Mordin Ashe]

Why does it matter what company consists from when we see many builds altering original qualities of Mech default setups so much? Many heavies do job of mediums, heavies and assaults, just as some crazy builds of fast assaults can do medium job. In this regard it makes little sence to insist on having lances similar weight tonnage/class.

Though it should be nice if after grouped players are put into lance all other players would be split into lances according their speed. I sincerly doubt it will make players stick together more than they do now, but it should make at least some use of what advantages weight classes have right now.

[Alex Warden]

that´s why a commander can rearrange lances

[Chemie]

I imagine most clans will take 3 assault and a heavy (maybe a light). Why? Because now there are only 3 slots, why would you allow a pug in 3PV running an awesome take that slot? I actually think this change will cause more stomps because now you take the terrible MM out of the equation which could give 9 assaults to one side and 2 to the other. Under that, who cares if your 4-man has 4 assaults out of 9?

Now, with target calling, you have much better time killing everything if the other team has 3 pug assaults.

What I don't know is the impact of 6 light/medium. Maybe it is an option to take those slots (3 shadowhawks, 1 oxide) and do the death swarm too?

Anyway, I think teams get a big boost now composition is fix.

[Ryoken]

Chemie, on 04 March 2014 - 04:18 AM, said:

I imagine most clans will take 3 assault and a heavy (maybe a light). Why? Because now there are only 3 slots, why would you allow a pug in 3PV running an awesome take that slot? I actually think this change will cause more stomps because now you take the terrible MM out of the equation which could give 9 assaults to one side and 2 to the other. Under that, who cares if your 4-man has 4 assaults out of 9?

Sorry to tell you this. But according to pure logic 12-2/0 stomps can not be avoided by a matchmaker even in pure solo player teams.

It's just how numbers and stochastics do roll. Once one team looses one player it is no longer 12v12.

It is 12v11, and on what team will you bet? Yupp the 12 got an advantage here.

So 12v10 is the much more likely next step. (Not 11v11)

So you now get an idea how the avalanche starts? It's nothing the premades can be blamed for.

And yes a 3 Assault/1Heavy 4man might have more impact now than the 4 Assault 4man may have now, due to everyone and his dog driving around in assaults.

Edited by Ryoken, 04 March 2014 - 04:44 AM.

[Morang]

Alex Warden, on 04 March 2014 - 01:58 AM, said:

that´s why a commander can rearrange lances

It does little good now. First, it can do only harm to premades (oh, I understand that many people actually want to do them harm ). The purpose of having lance with similar speed is to allow it to operate easily as a single unit. Voice comms of a premade group serve the same purpose. With a 1-1-1-1 lance you can't have both features in a single lance.

Second, with current respawn pattern when lances are spawned far from each other and reassigned members still spawn on their old position, reassignment can just create some confusion and delay deployment.

Still it looks that 1-1-1-1 for premades is the only sane way to achieve more or less equal quantity of each weight class (though it's the admission that PGI failed at mech balance and must now force artificial diversity). I think though that for a 12-man team, both in PUG queue and organized 12-mans, limits should be relaxed to "between 2 and 4 mechs per class". And tonnage balance between teams should not consider individual mechs and classes at all, if possible.

Edited by Morang, 04 March 2014 - 04:56 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Mordin Ashe, on 04 March 2014 - 12:12 AM, said:

How is making teams more balanced diminishing the team aspect of MWO? Eventually it all turns out what builds people have and if they can handle them well. This plan of theirs made me upgrade my clan package to Adder and will probably see further upgrading at late april when this gets implemented.

You take away the ability to be an Assault Company or a Striker Company. You Just made the company composition, Generic.

[Ryoken]

Morang, on 04 March 2014 - 04:52 AM, said:

Still it looks that 1-1-1-1 for premades is the only sane way to achieve more or less equal quantity of each weight class (though it's the admission that PGI failed at mech balance and must now force artificial diversity).

So two friends that bought fang and flame can not play together in a premade lance? Great idea... NOT!
Complete disagree, this is ridiculus!

[cat97628]

I still do not understand PGI instance on weight as a method of balance. I do not get why they are not using the battle value points systems that the table top rules utilize. They are to the point where PGI avoids them all together. I understand BV has had issues but come on create a new system. Tonnage is just one variable to utilize when try to balance a company. It is not the only one.

[Fuggles]

Ryoken, on 04 March 2014 - 06:38 AM, said:

So two friends that bought fang and flame can not play together in a premade lance? Great idea... NOT!
Complete disagree, this is ridiculus!

Yes it is rediculous but it's not accurate either. Lances aren't going to be locked to one of everything, they even specifically said that if three people want to drop in atlas they can.

[PropagandaWar]

Ryoken, on 04 March 2014 - 12:10 AM, said:

I do understand that a lance of:
1 assault mech
1 heavy mech
1 medium mech
1 light mech

would fit best into your company class limit system of:
3 assault mechs
3 heavy mechs
3 medium mechs
3 light mechs

But by pure logic because of the different movement speeds of those classes it is a highly unlikely composition of mechs. Either the assault gets left behind or the light mech of the team can not live up to its speed.

Imagening
faster teams of lights/medium mechs (1-3lights and 1-3mediums maybe 1-2 fast heavy)
medium pace teams of medium/heavy mechs (1-3 mediums and 1-3 heavy maybe 1-2 light/assault)
and slow teams of heavy/assault mechs (1-3heavy and 1-3 assault maybe 1medium/light)
is what you have to consider.

Yet there are mentionalbe exceptions! So a team of a light spotting mech together with a heavy/assault mech LRM faction together in one lance does work ingame and by lore.

So please do not think about forcing 1-1-1-1 on us as it would further diminish the team game aspect of mwo that you allready kicked in the guts for a year.

Not this team. We've been gearing up against the Meta'ites for some time now.

[ShadowbaneX]

Ryoken, on 04 March 2014 - 12:23 AM, said:

Because a company is:
1x light/medium lance
1x medium/heavy lance
1x heavy/assault lance

You know you're completely right.
A light lance like a Commando, a Spider, a Jenner & a Cicada;
Medium Lance;
a Hunchback, a Shadow Hawk, a Dragon and a Jagermech
Heavy Lance:
Cataphract, Victor, Battlemaster and Highlander.

Oh, wait. That's 3 lights, 3 mediums, 3 heavies and 3 assaults. Well, go figure.

[Fuggles]

cat97628, on 04 March 2014 - 06:45 AM, said:

I still do not understand PGI instance on weight as a method of balance. I do not get why they are not using the battle value points systems that the table top rules utilize. They are to the point where PGI avoids them all together. I understand BV has had issues but come on create a new system. Tonnage is just one variable to utilize when try to balance a company. It is not the only one.

Ok let's put it this way, an awesome has a sigificantly higher battlevalue than a victor. This is MWO, not TT online.

If you aknowlege that TT values aren't accurate for Mwo and propose they assign new battlevalues, I instead propose they BALANCE the mechs themselves.

[Kaeb Odellas]

Lances will probably look more like this:

Alpha Assault - 3 Assault, 1 Heavy
Bravo Flanker- 2 Heavy, 2 Medium
Charlie Scout - 3 Light, 1 Medium (probably Cicada or fast Streak boat)

[Sahoj]

I agree that it is optimal to have your 3 Assault mech pilots on coms and pre-grouped players will recognize this.

However - 3-4 mans do not treat standard drops as competitive. They often do not even build lances that have synergy. 4-mans are goof-off/practice/cbill farming time.

Many Clan/Merc/IS Unit players do not like playing Assaults (We've had problems getting guys in the D-DC's for 12-man competitive matches)

Cheers,
Sahoj

[Malcolm Vordermark]

I'm not entirely sure of your complaint. Are you saying that have 3-3-3-3 would mess up our current scouts + death ball configurations? Or are you under the impression that groups must drop 1-1-1-1?

[Voivode]

Here's a mix for you.

3 lights (pick whatever)

2 fast mediums (Cicada, BJ 1X, Cent 9D, fast Kintaro, etc)

1 slower support medium (load up some guns)

3 Heavies (pick whatever)

3 Assaults (pick whatever)

Bam! You have a fast group of 5 that can go in and use speed and a slower group with lots of firepower.

I know I know I know. It isn't five Highlanders and three Cataphracts with a lance of Jenners. Whatever shall you do?

[Malcolm Vordermark]

Ryoken, on 04 March 2014 - 06:38 AM, said:

So two friends that bought fang and flame can not play together in a premade lance? Great idea... NOT!
Complete disagree, this is ridiculus!

I think this is the problem. Lances can have any composition so long as it does not bring more than 3 of a class.

So a lance of 3 assaults and 1 heavy is possible. As is 3 lights and 1 medium. All combinations in between too.

The two friends in your example can both bring their dragons.