145 replies to this topic

[Chavette]

FupDup, on 13 March 2013 - 02:37 PM, said:

Yeah, gotta love the 2 LL + 2 ML Raven. I just wish that I would have focused more on your CT earlier on Alpine instead of stupidly tearing your arm off.

We were both derping hardcore

[FupDup]

Chavette, on 13 March 2013 - 02:38 PM, said:

We were both derping hardcore

I derped so hard that I actually herped.

[Jonathan Paine]

OP: just wanted to thank you for starting a well reasoned thread.

Who am I kidding... here are my handful of pennies:
If coolant will make a difference in 8v8 games, what will artillery strikes times 8 do? With 8 air strikes thrown in?

As for the limitations on what kind of mechs you can pilot and still retain a high Elo rating, I decided I would rather play a diversity of mechs. Those first fifteen matches in an Awesome 9M after running the tournament alternating between a tricked out Stalker with an Atlas DDC as a backup.... ouch... ouch...ouch!

I would like to see some bracketing based on general levels of Elo: something like Cadet<Green<Veteran<Elite. Perhaps the matchmaker could be tuned to make sure that Cadets and Elites wont drop into the same round as a small start?

[WolvesX]

http://mwomercs.com/...s-op-yesterday/

This thread is the best example for LRM OP, different view because of different skill level.

Reminds me of the good old "Nerf hills" joke.

Edited by WolvesX, 13 March 2013 - 03:09 PM.

[Arete]

Thing is, once the matchmaker gets tweaked you really don't need brackets since it'll sort itself out by itself. You can already notice brackets a bit, you often get to play with/against names that you begin to recognize.

One thing that would be nice, but would be based on public stats, would be an option from the matchmaker in Heroes of Newerth. When you enter the queue, you can choose the option "fairer matches" where you accept longer queue times for a more even matchup. Public rating is needed because when entering as a group you can't have a wide spread of ratings.

edit: and btw, nice thread :-) Been a long time since I've seen a thread that's been on track with good posts for so many pages.

Edited by Arete, 13 March 2013 - 03:07 PM.

[Megurine Luka]

xDeityx, on 13 March 2013 - 01:32 PM, said:

It's been years since I've been there, but Elitist Jerks got around this problem by having a subset of forums that required a certain Elo rating in WoW arenas to be able to post on those forums. For example if you weren't a 2100+ rated Mage, you couldn't post on certain Mage forums. If you were a 2100+ rated Mage you could post on those certain Mage forums but not on certain Paladin forums. I believe the reasoning was that too much low-level discussion was dominating the forums and was drowning out the people who could actual backup their arguments in game. It seemed to work really well at fostering intelligent discussions and advancing "theorycraft."

I wouldn't mind the same thing happening here. Not on the general forum, but have a "Pros Only" forum that anyone could read but required a certain level of in-game accomplishment to be able to post in.

This has some merit, but I think we might need 1-2 more balance passes on ELO before we go there. The developers themselves have said that they are still gathering data for this first implementation of MM3 (well second if you count the buggy start with the rollback and repatching later).

I am not sure if the game can differentiate a person who mostly runs 4 mans from a person who just pugs or a person who plays with a friend or two once in a blue moon. I do think it should because the 4 man person will have a vastly different gaming experience from a pure pugger.

I do not think that this would be high priority on PGI's list though considering all the other things they have to do. They will probably find it faster to just cross-reference statistical data from their database with what the players are saying in general and see if it matches. If a person appears to have a valid point, they can always check if that account is mostly a pugger, 4 man, or 8 man kind of guy and they can obviously see his ELO and other statistics. Adding a 'rating requirement' forum here will get the lower end more riled up and they will start shouting that PGI doesn't care about their opinions because they cannot access this so-called special forums.

[Arete]

For game balance, I really don't think an "elite section" based on elo rating is the answer. Much better for PGI to just invite ppl from the best teams out there to make a super testers group that can mess around with stuff pre-patch and see what works and what needs tuning. I'm sure PGI has their internal testing, but the best way is for some of the players that really know how to "abuse" the game mechanics get to test things out for balance.

[EvangelionUnit]

WolvesX, on 13 March 2013 - 04:40 AM, said:

These things are all true when high Elo players fight other high Elo players. In low Elo, not so much.

I think a game should be balanced around HIGH Elo, around compedative environments and

not around PUG games.

What do you think?

so everyone should shuffer for so just a few can have a good game ? well, good luck paying for the servers alone

[Mahws]

Elite section is a silly idea.

For starters ELO is separated by weight class. My Heavies are high ELO where everyone runs ECM, Ravens and A1's, my lights are in ELO hell where everyone runs unpainted LRM20 only builds. Am I high or low? Seeing as I don't run Catapults or Assaults do I have more grounds to talk about their balance than a lower ranked player that actually uses them?

I'm low ELO in lights because I haven't run anything but Spiders since stat recording started. If I'd run nothing but the 3L I'd be high ELO. A good player can be mediocre in a underpowered mech and a mediocre player can be good in a overpowered one, neither says anything about their understanding of the game or its mechanics.

[Adrian Steel]

This is the best thread I've seen in quite some time. Thank you WolvesX.

[Critical Fumble]

EvangelionUnit, on 13 March 2013 - 03:33 PM, said:

so everyone should shuffer for so just a few can have a good game ? well, good luck paying for the servers alone

He's suggesting that the high end of the spectrum should be where they make everything "even"; rather than in environments with players using sub-optimal techniques. Which should make the game balanced for everyone, barring certain things.

Although one thing is a bit off, just judging by the top doesn't necessarily make the game "fun" throughout. The steepness of the learning curve, for instance, is not depicted there.

[Cpt Beefheart]

xDeityx, on 13 March 2013 - 12:46 PM, said:

I have a differing opinion mainly due to the hotlink you quoted. Unskilled people think that they are vastly more skilled than they actually are, and are therefore the biggest contributors of garbage to the forums.

"wtf??? My Atlas keeps getting beaten by Trenchbuckets!!! They're hacking!!! I don't understand why they're suddenly winning!"

Yep, noticed posts like these a lot, and I don't think n00bs understand what happens when your Elo rating improves and your Alpha strike mashing strategy is now powerless against players that have a similar rating because they know how to play with skill.

People win for different reasons, and as your rating starts improving you begin noticing a broader range of tactics in games... and begin losing until you figure out ways around alien strategies you didn't see in previous games.... but I have noticed after long winning streaks I'll be playing against less LRM boats and more brawlers, which says something about how effective boating is vs skill/strategy, and also that people are learning ways around this pain-in-the-a$$ tactic.

TLDR;

- Upper echelon games will have the biggest variety of tactics, making them seem unbalanced.

Edited by Cpt Beefheart, 13 March 2013 - 09:34 PM.

[Abivard]

Sometimes what you see in cutting edge competition is simply new ideas that people have not developed a counter for yet.

You develop new methods first, then you develop counters, It is simply that basic.

For those who might have missed it by not actually playing, centurions are the new favorite fast mover at this time.

[WolvesX]

Thank you people for all your great posts and input!

"Elite" Section on a forums can only work, if we got ranked and unranked queues. Its not about fairness, its about personal goals.

You can't view these things seperate. If you are a casual player, that plays the game just for fun and doesn't care to much about balance and game mechanics, its imo not the personal goal of that player to have a posting right in the "Elite" section.

Elo should be present in ranked and unranked games, for the sake of better matchmaking, but when you play ranked games, you know that you have to play as good as you can if the most viable build out there.

It adds another feature to the game: "semi competitive play and something to work on"

Rookie system:

If we got leagues in the ranked games, like Rookie > Mechwarrior > Veteran > Elite > ("Legendary"), this will result in more balanced matches, Elite players should not matched with Rookies.

Arete, on 13 March 2013 - 03:05 PM, said:

Thing is, once the matchmaker gets tweaked you really don't need brackets since it'll sort itself out by itself. You can already notice brackets a bit, you often get to play with/against names that you begin to recognize.

One thing that would be nice, but would be based on public stats, would be an option from the matchmaker in Heroes of Newerth. When you enter the queue, you can choose the option "fairer matches" where you accept longer queue times for a more even matchup. Public rating is needed because when entering as a group you can't have a wide spread of ratings.

edit: and btw, nice thread :-) Been a long time since I've seen a thread that's been on track with good posts for so many pages.

A fair match option is a wonderfull idea.

If the players got shields on there name "rookie system" and I support the view that a "elite" secion is not totaly needed, but I can't see the harm in it, though its on a low pro.

Edited by WolvesX, 14 March 2013 - 07:41 AM.

[WolvesX]

Fun fact:Rants against game mechanics get the most like, together with "i-love-you-devs" threads.

[Deathlike]

WolvesX, on 14 March 2013 - 08:00 AM, said:

Fun fact:Rants against game mechanics get the most like, together with "i-love-you-devs" threads.

Ask you asking a buff to teh Wang?

[Zerberus]

WolvesX, on 13 March 2013 - 04:40 AM, said:

These things are all true when high Elo players fight other high Elo players. In low Elo, not so much.

I think a game should be balanced around HIGH Elo, around competitive environments and

not around PUG games.

What do you think?

Wolves

Generally, I agree.

However, PGI is not doing this for charity, therefore it`s only logical (and sane) to balance the game around the section of hte comunity that brings them the most revenue. I can only ASSUME that this is primarily the semi-casual that plays on weekends and a few matches during the week, likely doesn`t visit the forum much if at all, and isn`t necessarily bothered by stats. He just wants to walk around and kill other mechs and will spend maybe 10-20$ /month to do so.

I assume this based on my long term experiences with other MMO games that got balanced more and more toward casual players as the years progressed.

One thiong however I don`t fully support is not matching elites with rookies. That is THE best way for rookies to learn, to have a chance to see what other people are doing first hand, be it as a target, a lancemate, or a spectator.

Think of it this way: did those people in your life that taught you the most know MORE than you or the same amount? Were your Idols the people who were better at something at you, or those that were at your level? Did you improve your skills by practicing what others taught, or do you constantly force yourself to reinvent the wheel, first?

What I'm trying to say is you can`t ever get better if you have no idea what better looks like and there`s nobody there to show you.

Edited by Zerberus, 14 March 2013 - 08:41 AM.

[Tekyio Wolf]

Deathlike, on 14 March 2013 - 08:14 AM, said:

Ask you asking a buff to teh Wang?

Wang buff?

[scruffy416]

OK, so I've read the OP a couple of times. I don't see any real suggestions in there.

All I see is a veiled rewording of the idea "We should ignore the ideas/suggestions of those players with a low Elo"

Have I missed something?

[WolvesX]

scruffy416, on 14 March 2013 - 09:22 AM, said:

OK, so I've read the OP a couple of times. I don't see any real suggestions in there.

All I see is a veiled rewording of the idea "We should ignore the ideas/suggestions of those players with a low Elo"

Have I missed something?

Updated it for more info.