14 replies to this topic

[Product9]

Hi guys,

It seems to me that every time I play conquest I get stuck on a team with zero lights, while the enemy team has 3-4 of them. On large maps like Alpine, this means they can just cap every point while we struggle to get to one with our assaults and heavies. And if we do cap a point, as soon as we leave it gets capped back up by faster mechs.

So, what's the deal with that?

[Hauser]

Matchmaker problem mostly. It tries to get you into a match quickly with people of comparable skill and tonnage. But it gets less picky as it takes longer to find a match. It might have been building for a 4man with 4light and unable to find four more in the 2 minutes. There aren't enough people dropping in those two minutes.

Not much you can do about. Try to crush the 4 slow guys on the other team and split up and sit on three points. At that point they'll have to come and fight you. Just on the kills and assists you'll make good amount of money so losing the match isn't a big loss.

The bigger maps could do with a larger resource goal though.

Edited by Hauser, 09 April 2013 - 05:20 PM.

[Product9]

Well, most problems can be circumvented with teamwork, but this is random people on the internet we are talking about here.

Prior to the implementation of Elo (which, for the record, I disdain) we used to get pretty evenly matched groups. Nowadays, most of the time either my team completely stomps them, or they completely stomp us.

In the case of these conquest matches, I am getting into them very quickly. Usually about 10 seconds of searching, if that.

[Hauser]

Product9, on 09 April 2013 - 05:26 PM, said:

Prior to the implementation of Elo (which, for the record, I disdain) we used to get pretty evenly matched groups. Nowadays, most of the time either my team completely stomps them, or they completely stomp us.

Weight wise they were fairly balanced but skill wise and mech quality it were a complete toss up. When I play in my 4P (243 battles, 1.55 w/l, 2.75 k/d, so I assume I'm high up in the elo bracket) people tend to stick together and focus fire fairly well. When I'm playing a Jenner (50 battles, so I assume still average elo) people tend to run all over the place doing single combat and such.

That a stomp happens doesn't mean the teams are imbalanced though. Once two or three mechs on either side are so damaged that they go down with little damage it's just a matter of luck which sides loses them first.

Once they're gone the fire power drops and it becomes easier to push on the remaining. This is especially pronounced because firepower is proportional to the number of units sqaured. So a 6 vs 8 situation the bigger team has (64/36=)170% the power of the smaller team.

Edited by Hauser, 09 April 2013 - 05:45 PM.

[LordBraxton]

I drop almost instantly when I hit launch and end up with terrible weight matching all the time.

IDK what this 2 minutes i keep hearing about is

[Diablobo]

There needs to be a proportional number of lights/scouts on each team. Alpine Conquest is the biggest problem. If one team has 2 or more light/fast mechs and the other team has one or none, the fastest team wins most of the time. After the typical fight at Epsilon, whoever has the most fast mechs and has the cap lead will win the overwhelming majority of the time, no matter how well the big main battle turns out. If you don't balance the cappers, you're gonna have a bad time.

[Product9]

Exactly. It's not a question of skill, it's just a question of mech preference. I also feel this way about ECM, since it's a toss up whether or not you'll end up on a team with ECM. Oftentimes, you end up having none while the enemy has multiple.

Personally, I hate any kind of matchmaking though. I prefer just having a list of servers to choose from.

[Vellinious]

It's been my experience, that regardless of the match style, the team with the better light pilots, is going to win 90% of those matches.

[Noobzorz]

Vellinious, on 09 April 2013 - 06:07 PM, said:

It's been my experience, that regardless of the match style, the team with the better light pilots, is going to win 90% of those matches.

Looking at my stats and observing the enormous gap in successes between my Commandos and my Dragons, I'd have to say that I agree.

[Texas Merc]

How about the team with the ONLY light pilots on a big map on conquest. OP wasn't talking about assault.

[aniviron]

I've been playing quite a lot of light lately, and I tend to find that having more lights is far from a guarantee of victory in conquest. When we're outcapping the big slow assaults, they say BUT ME SMASH FOUR GUY, HOW WE LOSE ANYWAY? This happens reasonably often; but just as often, the assaults go ME SHOOT BIG BULLET, LIGHT DIE AND ME FORGET BECAUSE ONLY TOOK TWO CLICKS. Even if you're playing light properly, if there are only one or two of you against assaults, you're not guaranteed a win if they play intelligently.

There also tend to be a lot of games where one side's lights go cap, while the others stick with their main force, leaving one side just feeling like they have no lights. I don't think it's very good play, but I have a hard time blaming the lights that don't cap- you either run a circle around the map, punctuated by the high excitement of standing still for 60 seconds watching a battle from a distance, or losing to a RVN-3L/COM-2D.

[Morang]

They should just screw that ELO. It's evil. Random pick of differently skilled players is good.

Maybe they should add PvP training mode where players can fight for no XP/CB reward (no repair rearm cost as well if they will reintroduce it) and stats are not being recorded, to help the noobs get accustomed. But additional complexity of matchmaker criteria means too long queue times and/or balancing faults.

[Vellinious]

aniviron, on 09 April 2013 - 08:40 PM, said:

I've been playing quite a lot of light lately, and I tend to find that having more lights is far from a guarantee of victory in conquest. When we're outcapping the big slow assaults, they say BUT ME SMASH FOUR GUY, HOW WE LOSE ANYWAY? This happens reasonably often; but just as often, the assaults go ME SHOOT BIG BULLET, LIGHT DIE AND ME FORGET BECAUSE ONLY TOOK TWO CLICKS. Even if you're playing light properly, if there are only one or two of you against assaults, you're not guaranteed a win if they play intelligently.

There also tend to be a lot of games where one side's lights go cap, while the others stick with their main force, leaving one side just feeling like they have no lights. I don't think it's very good play, but I have a hard time blaming the lights that don't cap- you either run a circle around the map, punctuated by the high excitement of standing still for 60 seconds watching a battle from a distance, or losing to a RVN-3L/COM-2D.

As a light pilot, I see it as my duty to go capture as many points as possible in the first minutes of the match...tis mah job. Scouting the enemy position while I do it. If the other teams lights are sticking with the main group of mechs, they're going to lose. Don't complain that the lights on your team are doing their job...

In the situation you mentioned, if the assaults stick together, I'll just out cap them. If they split up and head to different cap points, I'll choose the weakest point, and take the assault on. I have no fear of assaults in a light mech...NONE...and I'll win that matchup a heckuva lot more than I lose. And if there's two of us....one guy in particular that I group up with quite often, they really don't stand a chance

And no....I / we don't have lag issues. My ping rates are usually in the 40's or 50's, and his are even better than mine.

[Josef Nader]

aniviron, on 09 April 2013 - 08:40 PM, said:

I've been playing quite a lot of light lately, and I tend to find that having more lights is far from a guarantee of victory in conquest. When we're outcapping the big slow assaults, they say BUT ME SMASH FOUR GUY, HOW WE LOSE ANYWAY? This happens reasonably often; but just as often, the assaults go ME SHOOT BIG BULLET, LIGHT DIE AND ME FORGET BECAUSE ONLY TOOK TWO CLICKS. Even if you're playing light properly, if there are only one or two of you against assaults, you're not guaranteed a win if they play intelligently.

I have a near max engine in my assault, and I move a third of your speed (if you have a max engine). It has nothing to do with ASSAULT SMASH and everything to do with the fact that it takes me three times longer to get anywhere on the map. Conquest on large maps is won by whichever team had the most cap-happy lights, every single time. There is nothing I can do as an assault mech to defeat your team's onslaught AND try to capture and hold points, as it takes me a good 5 minutes to even -reach- the first capture point. Then I have to deal with your team trying to ram various devices of robot death up my exhaust, and by the time I'm done with that you've already captured 4/5 points and are laughing all the way to the bank.

It is an imbalance, and it needs to be looked at.

[Yokaiko]

Josef Nader, on 10 April 2013 - 05:28 AM, said:

and by the time I'm done with that you've already captured 4/5 points and are laughing all the way to the bank.

It is an imbalance, and it needs to be looked at.

Except you don't. I've had more than one game where even though I was the only light they had a split pair of mediums or something that kept me running.

I finish the game with 0 damage and maybe a spot or something, and the guy on the losing team that did 100 damage and died has a higher match score.

Its pretty frigging thankless.

I DO think that they should at least require one of each class, I had a game yesterday where the fastest mech on our team was a CATAPULT.

...of course the enemy had four fast movers, there was basically no way to win that.