97 replies to this topic

[Gyrok]

https://www.reddit.c...e_pts_feedback/

Quote

While I have not played the PTS, I can guess what this feels like in terms of game balance.
While I realize that this may be unpopular...I would like to open a discussion.

Why not do 10 vs 12?

I mean...sure, the ultra comp scene would have some breakdowns. However, that would only be if they were hell bent on trying to keep IS and Clan tech in the same drop viable. Why not do comp in IS vs IS and Clan vs Clan? You get 10 vs 10 or 12 vs 12 that way.

The cons:

• 
  
  This would require lots of effort to rewrite the entire MM to accommodate this across all modes.
  
• 
  
  It would take time to fine tune after the change to get balance to a pretty good place.
  
• 
  
  It would require rolling back all nerfs to clan mechs and all nerfs to IS mechs.
  
• 
  
  Comp leagues would have to play IS vs IS or Clan vs Clan
  
• 
  
  This would likely somewhat increase the frequency of stomps in group/solo queue to an undetermined degree

The Pros

• 
  
  Clan and IS mechs in all their glory
  
• 
  
  Capability to balance factions asymmetrically, meaning that IS can be balanced against IS across the range, and so could Clans. This would also allow adjustments for weapons/chassis to be set against some sort of BV-esque metric (which they have seemingly claimed to accomplish already...)
  
• 
  
  Would allow a potentially new and evolving meta game with the aspect of not just IS vs Clan, but also IS vs IS and Clan vs Clan.
  
• 
  
  Would not dramatically impact CW aside from queue groupings (and MM re-write)
  
• 
  
  Would allow abstract balancing methods to carry more weight

The known questions:

• 
  
  Q: Who would still play IS?
  
• 
  
  A: There are plenty of people who would still play IS, they did it in TT, they would do it here. Additionally, IS mechs would still be balanced out against clan mechs, just with better numbers. Once this plays out, I believe you would see good populations on both sides, just as now. Considering that "Clan mechs OP" is now a common belief (not necessarily undeserving in some senses) there are many who still play IS now...so why would it be different?
  
• 
  
  Q: How would you balance the mechs?
  
• 
  
  A: With a system derived from TT called BV. Not necessarily a carbon copy per se...however...a system could be derived that would allow more weight to FPS elements to accomplish the goal and provide solid game play
  
• 
  
  Q: How will this effect the regular queues with people wanting to play mixed factions?
  
• 
  
  A: You and your friends would have to play for the same faction to drop together. This is not untrue in any other game with factions, and hard lines must be drawn for factions to actually carry any weight in this game any way. As it stands, PGI would be much better off with hard drawn lines allowing people the opportunity to play for both sides, perhaps even have a tab for IS and a tab for Clan in the UI so you can easily filter both out and play accordingly. There are already many people who do not have mechs from one faction or the other, so this would only impact a relatively small number of the player base who own mechs from both sides, and would be a slight inconvenience compared to something like SWTOR or WOW or any other MMO where faction dictates everything.

Please discuss, as I would like to hear the opinions, and would welcome questions or points to debate the merits/flaws of such a proposal. If we discuss this thoroughly, we may be able to present something to PGI if the idea has enough merit. I have no illusions that such a proposal presented properly would even necessarily gain traction; however, the idea merits discussion considering what we are currently seeing, does it not?

Discuss.

Edited by Gyrok, 13 September 2015 - 04:44 PM.

[Vlad Ward]

Gyrok, on 13 September 2015 - 04:43 PM, said:

Discuss.

Why? It's only been beaten to death a million and one times already.

[Mycrus]

Gyrok, on 13 September 2015 - 04:43 PM, said:

https://www.reddit.c...e_pts_feedback/

[/size][/font][/size][/font]


Discuss.

Feed clan pug 10 man to IS comp 12 man... this will better simulate zelbrigen...

Discuss.

[Naduk]

10v12 does nothing to solve the problem of clans being straight up OP

it does not matter that you have two less players when you still have 3 timberwolfs on your side

if you bring a timberwolf and i bring an orion your going to take me apart before i have even opened up 1 section of your armor
leaving you with more than enough health to repeat this action a few times

in its current state it would need to be more like 6 vs 12
but thats just stupid

even if you gave all the clan weapons the same stats as the IS weapons but left their tonnage as clan(to not break everything)
it would be a clear advantage add that to omni mechs where you can choose your hardpoints and things are still looking down for the IS, then you still have all their lower space tech and no death XL's
thus even if clan weapons used the same damage stats as IS they would still be more powerful

not quite as scary but it would still be noticeable

so no, 10v12 is a stupid idea that will only enforce what everybody already believes that clans are the only way to win
so much so that they get taxed 2 players

in a world with no Zellbrigen the clans have no right being op

[XX Sulla XX]

Terrible idea. It will not take that much to balance things.

[Weaselball]

I'm only assuming you are suggesting 10 v 12 simply for the lore reason of it being two clan stars VS 3 IS lances. That being the case, the clans also fought on the concept of the batchall wherein the lowest bid among the clan forces attacking a planet got the honor of attacking. Since there is 0 possibility of players ever doing this in the pub queue, or even in CW (no matter how lore-hungry a CW group is), then should PGI force a weight penalty even further on the clan 10 man to take this into account? If so, what sounds fair? 600 tons for the clan group as a whole? 500 tons? Or did you not think that far ahead, because I can promise you if there is no weight limit then the clan 10 man will be nothing but direwolves and timberwolves in which case, gg is group.

[Davers]

1. You admit that mixed "competitive play" is impossible with this. How can it be balanced for everyone else, but good organized players break it? Right here it says this idea isn't really good.

2. So more stomps are inevitable. How exactly does this make the game more balanced or fun?

3. IS Glory- meaning inferior mechs.

4. BV ONLY works because you can mathematically predict outcomes- the hit rolls, the locations of damage, etc. BT assumes every pilot is equally skilled in ALL weapons. It is just as easy to hit with a PPC as a Gauss, AC10, or Laser if they all fall into the same range category. BV doesn't work.

5. 10v12... Does that mean the IS gets 2 additional Locusts or 2 additional King Crabs?

6. It will not create a new meta between same tech fights. 10v10 Clan and 12v12 IS are not big changes, and in fact do not make any weapons inherently better or worse. So, no new meta.

7."Would not not dramatically impact CW" What does this even mean, and how do you know this?

8. "Allowing abstract balancing methods to carry more weight" What does this mean?

9. People played IS vs the Clan in CW because each player controlled a whole team of mechs. And based on TT BV it could be a lot more than 2 extra mechs. I could take 5 Locusts for each of your Timberwolves and have them all shooting them in your back, for example. Not to mention BV has gone through several versions because it was considered broken. For example, people felt that certain aspects (such as mobility) were rated too highly. So don't compare TT to MWO.

10. How the hell do you know only a small minority of players have mechs from both factions? I would actually think that single faction players would be the minority.

Getting rid of quirks and going 10v12 does not make rainbows to shoot out and fix everything. We still have a TON of balance issues between mechs of the same faction, forget about balancing them for an asymmetric battle.


Seriously Gyrok, I can't believe you forwarded this trash for a discussion.

[Jaeger Gonzo]

Better number balance is 10v16.

[SaltBeef]

While do not think they will do it.........
They could easily fix matchmaker by having 2 inanimate objects take up drop slots. A Large cargo container or Passive sensor suite for drop site. These objects drop from the dropship and just stay inanimate. MM problem solved. Currently both in Europe and the US there are more IS mechs owned by players than Clan mechs owned , in the US there are more Clan mechs played per percentage than in Europe but still more IS mechs owned. If people Gravitate to Clan it is win win because they sell more mechs.

[darkkterror]

Vlad Ward, on 13 September 2015 - 04:53 PM, said:

Why? It's only been beaten to death a million and one times already.

Because it can always be beaten to death a million and two times?

[MischiefSC]

Already debunked this.

Do a regular weekly event with IS in stock builds 10 v 12 on Clans to simulate the difference. See if you actually have 12 is to each 10 Clan players. See if all the comp/vet populations are split evenly or skewed Clan. Get them to drop in those sort of matches regularly, as in the only way to play the game.

The bad balance is why people left BT or only played 3025, it's why they changed to is and clans balanced in Dark Ages. Not to mention each player running a Lance or company of throw away mechs in a tabletop strategy is an utterly, completely different experience from a fps.

Fortunately PGI has already nixed this idea as terrible and rightly so.

[Kiiyor]

Vlad Ward, on 13 September 2015 - 04:53 PM, said:

Why? It's only been beaten to death a million and one times already.

+1

Not only that, PGI have officially addressed it, saying that it would require a huge amount of work to implement, and that they are not going to do it.

There's nothing to discuss - it isn't going to happen. There's no point - unless you just want to frustrate yourself and argue, in which case, knock yourselves out guys! I love a good flame war.

[Wintersdark]

Davers, on 13 September 2015 - 05:15 PM, said:

1. You admit that mixed

Spoiler

"competitive play" is impossible with this. How can it be balanced for everyone else, but good organized players break it? Right here it says this idea isn't really good.

2. So more stomps are inevitable. How exactly does this make the game more balanced or fun?

3. IS Glory- meaning inferior mechs.

4. BV ONLY works because you can mathematically predict outcomes- the hit rolls, the locations of damage, etc. BT assumes every pilot is equally skilled in ALL weapons. It is just as easy to hit with a PPC as a Gauss, AC10, or Laser if they all fall into the same range category. BV doesn't work.

5. 10v12... Does that mean the IS gets 2 additional Locusts or 2 additional King Crabs?

6. It will not create a new meta between same tech fights. 10v10 Clan and 12v12 IS are not big changes, and in fact do not make any weapons inherently better or worse. So, no new meta.

7."Would not not dramatically impact CW" What does this even mean, and how do you know this?

8. "Allowing abstract balancing methods to carry more weight" What does this mean?

9. People played IS vs the Clan in CW because each player controlled a whole team of mechs. And based on TT BV it could be a lot more than 2 extra mechs. I could take 5 Locusts for each of your Timberwolves and have them all shooting them in your back, for example. Not to mention BV has gone through several versions because it was considered broken. For example, people felt that certain aspects (such as mobility) were rated too highly. So don't compare TT to MWO.

10. How the hell do you know only a small minority of players have mechs from both factions? I would actually think that single faction players would be the minority.

Getting rid of quirks and going 10v12 does not make rainbows to shoot out and fix everything. We still have a TON of balance issues between mechs of the same faction, forget about balancing them for an asymmetric battle.


Seriously Gyrok, I can't believe you forwarded this trash for a discussion.

All of this.

[SaltBeef]

If Clan mechs became dominate they could just switch to refusal war. Clan on Clan.like MW2.

[MechaBattler]

When it's a few pieces on the table top. No big deal. When it's an individual's only mech that s/he's trying to grind c-bills and experience for. You can bet they don't want to play on such an uneven playing field that you need to give one side 2 more mechs to make up the difference.

Let's not discount the idea of balancing mechs so that Clanners and meta gamers can get their rocks off power gaming.

[Wintersdark]

MischiefSC, on 13 September 2015 - 05:30 PM, said:

Already debunked this.

Do a regular weekly event with IS in stock builds 10 v 12 on Clans to simulate the difference. See if you actually have 12 is to each 10 Clan players. See if all the comp/vet populations are split evenly or skewed Clan. Get them to drop in those sort of matches regularly, as in the only way to play the game.

The bad balance is why people left BT or only played 3025, it's why they changed to is and clans balanced in Dark Ages. Not to mention each player running a Lance or company of throw away mechs in a tabletop strategy is an utterly, completely different experience from a fps.

Fortunately PGI has already nixed this idea as terrible and rightly so.

Indeed. It's just terrible.

It's a stupid suggestion that has been debated to death and doesn't warrant further discussion. Thankfully, its 100% done, and simply won't happen, so there's no reason to bother arguing.

[Jaeger Gonzo]

MischiefSC, on 13 September 2015 - 05:30 PM, said:

Already debunked this.

Do a regular weekly event with IS in stock builds 10 v 12 on Clans to simulate the difference. See if you actually have 12 is to each 10 Clan players. See if all the comp/vet populations are split evenly or skewed Clan. Get them to drop in those sort of matches regularly, as in the only way to play the game.

The bad balance is why people left BT or only played 3025, it's why they changed to is and clans balanced in Dark Ages. Not to mention each player running a Lance or company of throw away mechs in a tabletop strategy is an utterly, completely different experience from a fps.

Fortunately PGI has already nixed this idea as terrible and rightly so.

I already answered you to this somewhere else.

Yes we had regular stock event balanced around 5v8. In Stock 12v10 is not enough. In custom without quirks is also not enough.
And yeah thing worked and was fun as hell.

If you come now with your Jedi argue.
Yes, that was answered as well.
There is super fun game asymmetrical balanced Jedi v Droids live for more then 10 years.

Edited by Jaeger Gonzo, 13 September 2015 - 05:43 PM.

[Wintersdark]

SaltBeef, on 13 September 2015 - 05:35 PM, said:

If Clan mechs became dominate they could just switch to refusal war. Clan on Clan.like MW2.

So just totally discard IS mechs except for the rare die hard fan/chronic underdog? Not a good idea.

[Xetelian]

I'd play it but I don't particularly want it.

[Davers]

SaltBeef, on 13 September 2015 - 05:35 PM, said:

If Clan mechs became dominate they could just switch to refusal war. Clan on Clan.like MW2.

It is currently Day 136 of the Clan Truce in CW. Despite ALREADY WINNING, the Clans still refuse to fight each other and only attack the IS exclusively.