Jump to content

Every Game Is A 8-0 Stomp


30 replies to this topic

#1 Daemian

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • 242 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • LocationLouisville, KY

Posted 21 November 2012 - 12:26 AM

Well not every game but pretty damn close.

I either win or lose 8-0. Best case games the winning team lost 2 guys.

I think it's because the teams are so small. Whoever gets the first kill has a huge advantage. And if you start the game with a disco or farmer then your even more likely to give up that first kill and then subsequently lose.

Playing in a group I am more likely to win than when I pug but the scores are still the same. 8-0.

What can be done to make the battles more likely to go down to the wire?

I really think 12 v 12 would help but I don't think the game can handle 24 mechs in one battle right now.

So what else?

Maps with multiple objectives so teams have to split up maybe?

#2 One Medic Army

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 5222 posts
  • LocationBay Area, California

Posted 21 November 2012 - 12:40 AM

Yep, even when running 4man teams it's usually 8-0 or 8-1, even when we loose.

#3 Youngbull1980

    Member

  • Elite Founder
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 248 posts
  • LocationPortsmouth, UK

Posted 21 November 2012 - 12:43 AM

I'd love to see company size matches (12v12) along with battalion size games (36v36).
I find it goes one of 4 ways in a game
8-0 win (or 8-1/2)
0-8 lose
8-7 win
4-4 and someone caps

#4 STRONG LIKE BEAR

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 88 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 12:44 AM

LOL

With the performance issues this game has, this guy thinks 12v12 and 36v36 are even REMOTELY possible?

Ahahahahah

Edited by STRONG LIKE BEAR, 21 November 2012 - 12:45 AM.


#5 ian davion

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 133 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 12:48 AM

Things seemed better before the patch in my opinion. It wasn't really fun tonight. It was brutal stomps with a handful of close matches. The close ones were really good but, the rest were terrible. The worst were when one or two people did way more damage then anyone else and got all of the kills. Some of the builds are mopping the floor with people.

I have had an experience close to One Medic Army's. I was running with a four man tonight and it was mostly 8-1 or 8-0 even when we lost. it was mostly 8-3 or 8-2 even when we lost. (tired and today's gaming has just been painful in hindsight). Anything else was close or cap. Most of the deaths on the winning side were someone being stupid or focused fire on one or two mechs. There has been some fun matches, but there have been more painful ones. I don't think it was groups that have been doing the stomps. I feel that it was something that was imbalanced in the new patch.

Edited by ian davion, 21 November 2012 - 01:09 AM.


#6 Jared Synge

    Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 14 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 12:51 AM

One other fellow and I were in Caustic Valley six times in a row. Everytime we were on the lakeside w/o the factory. On EVERY match the opposing team came from line 3 and our team set up on the base of the hill on our side. Of those six matches we lost one. Of those six matches our side lost 1-3 people in total. The team size isn't the issue, map size is. Each map has one of two ways that EVERYONE follows. It's simply a choice of which is going to be more common. I've stated this in another post earlier. If everyone in Caustic Valley, using it as an example again, is going to burn down line 3 to get to the other base, then people are gonna start figuring out that it's the typical attack path. Hence you have one team steamrolling another because they already know which way the other team is coming from.

When I first started playing this game a couple of weeks ago, scouts would go track enemy units, target lock them, and then the team would have a general idea of where they were. Now its like "Oh okay, we are in the outer city of the frozen map. Set up near the downed plane and a few watch the tunnel for them to come through there." It's all become routine, in just a few weeks I'm looking at each map that way because I know that thats how everyone is gonna play it. If you have a good team that will listen to or watch team chat, its almost always gonna be that kind of result. With those on TS they have a quicker response time, but I have been in all pugs and the last couple of days I have doubled my wins over loses, where before I was high on the loss side of my stats.

Edited by Jared Synge, 21 November 2012 - 12:53 AM.


#7 MoonUnitBeta

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 2015 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 12:56 AM

I can only report the opposite. I've played 11 games tonight. I haven't been in a 8-0/0-8 game yet. They've all been (those that I can remember)
8-3
8-5
2-8
6-8
8-7

capped ones were
6-5
7-3
3-4

those are what i can remember in terms of scores. but I know that there was never a 8-0 or even a 8-1 match.
Guess I've just been lucky.... :S
They have all been good matches, and it's nice seeing/having a 4 man group on your side, and a 4 man group on their side. you can tell the coordinated ones from the non. Even without a mic, if you watch the minimap you can kinda get the jist of their strategy, so I stick with them and it turns out for the better. It's all about team work, even if you are pugged. No point running into the trees alone, get swamped, and get angry because no one was there. You're just wasting your time and compromising your teams success.

#8 Johnny Reb

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 3270 posts
  • LocationColumbus, Ohio. However, I hate the Suckeyes!

Posted 21 November 2012 - 01:11 AM

Well the pugs cried enough to have it 4 man teams! If that's not enough only 2 man teams?

#9 Daemian

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • 242 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • LocationLouisville, KY

Posted 21 November 2012 - 01:12 AM

Right after I posted this I got in a really good match. Came down to one guy left on each team.

I agree with Jared Synge, it's the map size. We need bigger maps.

With multiple objectives.

#10 Daemian

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • 242 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • LocationLouisville, KY

Posted 21 November 2012 - 01:17 AM

View PostJohnny Reb, on 21 November 2012 - 01:11 AM, said:

Well the pugs cried enough to have it 4 man teams! If that's not enough only 2 man teams?


Get over your 8 man circle jerk already.

Even when I win it's a 8-0 or 8-1 stomp. That's not fun. And it's even less fun when I lose that way.

This has nothing to do with premades or pugs, its the nature of the game. Small team sizes on small maps. The team that gets the first kill can often snowball their way to victory.

Edited by Daemian, 21 November 2012 - 01:17 AM.


#11 ian davion

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 133 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 01:29 AM

Johnny Reb, I don't feel that the main problem was teams against non teams tonight, you seem to be just jumping at that to ridicule. I agree that the maps are part of the problem. In my opinion, there are only one or two sensible routes. The maps only have, at most, three routes. Frozen is tunnel, dropship, long route. Forest (both) is tunnel, center, water. River is H line, river, bridge. Caustic is left side, right side, (silly people take the center).

#12 Daimonos

    Member

  • Elite Founder
  • 117 posts
  • LocationHampshire, UK

Posted 21 November 2012 - 01:42 AM

I had a OneMedicArmy experience in Forest Colony this morning, but not in a good way. PUGing, my team had three Atlas-Ks in, and at least one trial Dragon. Not a good start. My team rapidly melted to a 0-8 loss against OMA's, which featured Atlas-Ds and well built Cataphracts. The winning team had no trial mechs, and one non-founder. My team had at least four beginners in trial mechs; maybe five.

It's not just small maps: there's no matchmaking for skill, experience, or custom-built mechs. All these things combine so that yes, games are often lopsided. There are still close games to be had; they're just not yet as frequent as we'd like.

Edited by daimonos, 21 November 2012 - 01:43 AM.


#13 ElCadaver

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 131 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 01:52 AM

I said it before, as quickly as you can PGI, open up the game to community made maps! I'm sure heaps of talented people could follow a simple toolset guide and make nice stuff. On top of that you will have out of work (or obsessed employed people), submitting their maps to show their mad skillz and boost their online profile. I'm speaking from experience in building community based online worlds.... then at least each release will have something for people to get generally excited about, while yr in yr netcode, fixin yr bugs

In summary
Community made maps - big ones
48v48 minimum
random artillery to make it interesting

#14 One Medic Army

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 5222 posts
  • LocationBay Area, California

Posted 21 November 2012 - 01:55 AM

Sorry about that, I pulled my Atlas-D out of storage since I was tired of being steamrolled.

The biggest issue I have with matchmaking right now is you don't know before the match how much of a challenge it'll be.
I don't know if bringing a new design I'm trying out will cause my team to loose, or if we'll win regardless and I shouldn't be bringing a proven 100ton god of death to the field.
Not to mention the times it turns out we're alongside another pre-made team and it's fairly hideous.

Edited by One Medic Army, 21 November 2012 - 01:56 AM.


#15 Axen Marik

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 59 posts
  • LocationFlagship Outbound Light III, coordinates classified

Posted 21 November 2012 - 02:03 AM

All this will be changing as matchmaking evolves and gets better.

I personally would rather wait a few minutes for a better match up than instant drop into cluster%^&*noobville. It looks like that's what is being worked on to achieve, so for now I'll take it and build up my mech bay and pilot tree for that day.

Now if only they could do that for forum accounts so we could filter out the whine... :D

#16 Daimonos

    Member

  • Elite Founder
  • 117 posts
  • LocationHampshire, UK

Posted 21 November 2012 - 02:26 AM

Sorry about that, I pulled my Atlas-D out of storage since I was tired of being steamrolled.


Heh, no worries. The next game was a roflstomp in my favour. PUGing is always a mixed bag.

#17 Jared Synge

    Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 14 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 07:57 AM

View PostElCadaver, on 21 November 2012 - 01:52 AM, said:

I said it before, as quickly as you can PGI, open up the game to community made maps! I'm sure heaps of talented people could follow a simple toolset guide and make nice stuff. On top of that you will have out of work (or obsessed employed people), submitting their maps to show their mad skillz and boost their online profile. I'm speaking from experience in building community based online worlds.... then at least each release will have something for people to get generally excited about, while yr in yr netcode, fixin yr bugs

In summary
Community made maps - big ones
48v48 minimum
random artillery to make it interesting


This would be a good idea, but a simple orange box map (remember those i CS:S and DoD) would really suck. The maps would have to be of a certain standard, optimized properly, and challenge worthy. A 48 vs 48 map may be a bit extreme though. I'd say at most a 24 vs 24 map, equivelent to two companys on each side would, would probably be the limit. Those maps would be as large as 4096m x 4096m. A single map with an urban center, river, and coastal forest would be something to really push player teams and make it a challenge to win in Assualt. Caps being located in the city center and a beach head on in the coastal forest. Thats just an example of something that would be a lot more challenging than rushing a tunnel and taking a cap.

#18 Mu

    Member

  • Elite Founder
  • 475 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 09:39 AM

it's a lottery system, every time you hit 'launch' you're pulling the arm on a slot machine.

sometimes you get the equivalent of that thing that happens in Sonic the Hedgehog 2's casino level when you roll 3 robotnik faces and Sonic gets doinged by 3252352234523 spiky balls and you lose all your rings. This is what it feels like when your team has 4 trial Atlases and one of your friends crashes to desktop, while the other team is some super-organized bunch of Germans doing 8 man sync drops.

I don't mind losing because the other team was better than the guys I brought to the table. I sure as hell DO mind losing because half of my team doesn't actually play because there's no consequences for griefing your allies by suicide grinding, and I'm stuck with them because I can at best only bring 3 other people. Or even worse, when the game is so unstable that I can't even rely on those 3 to make it in without a disconnect or memory leak issue.

#19 Hood

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 239 posts
  • LocationDFW

Posted 21 November 2012 - 09:47 AM

View PostDaemian, on 21 November 2012 - 12:26 AM, said:

Well not every game but pretty damn close.

I either win or lose 8-0. Best case games the winning team lost 2 guys.

I think it's because the teams are so small. Whoever gets the first kill has a huge advantage. And if you start the game with a disco or farmer then your even more likely to give up that first kill and then subsequently lose.

Playing in a group I am more likely to win than when I pug but the scores are still the same. 8-0.

What can be done to make the battles more likely to go down to the wire?

I really think 12 v 12 would help but I don't think the game can handle 24 mechs in one battle right now.

So what else?

Maps with multiple objectives so teams have to split up maybe?

OMG 12 man groups? Can u imagine.. 8 man teams and 4 puggers...(yes they would still *****). So the 8 man would have to turn on the puggers.. Once the puggers are gone, whats left of the 2 8 man teams fight it out.

#20 General Kaos

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 40 posts
  • LocationMinnesota

Posted 21 November 2012 - 09:52 AM

View PostDaemian, on 21 November 2012 - 12:26 AM, said:

Well not every game but pretty damn close.

I either win or lose 8-0. Best case games the winning team lost 2 guys.

I think it's because the teams are so small. Whoever gets the first kill has a huge advantage. And if you start the game with a disco or farmer then your even more likely to give up that first kill and then subsequently lose.

Playing in a group I am more likely to win than when I pug but the scores are still the same. 8-0.

What can be done to make the battles more likely to go down to the wire?

I really think 12 v 12 would help but I don't think the game can handle 24 mechs in one battle right now.

So what else?

Maps with multiple objectives so teams have to split up maybe?



I am not sure what game you are playing, because most of my games are nailbiters right to the end 7-8. Out of the last 20 games only 1 was a roll 2-8.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users