Jump to content

Balance, Pics Attached.


23 replies to this topic

#1 Zephyre

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 28 posts

Posted 18 June 2013 - 03:22 PM

Balance this is not. Tonnage variance anyone?
Posted Image

Now I understand trying to keep a certain caliber of player playing similar skill levels, but do the math, there is a serious problem with this tonnage difference. I'm not looking for a tonne per tonne matching, but can we keep it in the same weight class?

#2 White Bear 84

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 3,857 posts

Posted 18 June 2013 - 06:58 PM

LOL you think that is bad weight matching? You ever had a drop against 6 assaults and two heavies where your team is all in mediums and lights!

But yes - im of the firm belief that matchmaking is a big lie. Imbalanced drops, poor implementation of elo. 90% of matches are either imbalanced in terms of weight and/or result in the usual 8/2, 8/1, 8/0 stompings.

#3 Tennex

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 6,619 posts

Posted 18 June 2013 - 07:21 PM

cuz they're too ****** big

#4 Asmosis

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 2,118 posts

Posted 18 June 2013 - 08:06 PM

should look at match making the same way you'd look at a boxing match. a difference in weight is far more important than skill level, provided they are in the same ballpark (i.e. not picking random guy off the street).

#5 Ari Dian

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 251 posts

Posted 18 June 2013 - 10:51 PM

85t difference is not this bad. I have seen way worse. And this is not the reason your team lost. You lost because their team did 3x as much damage as yours. Because, most likely, they were playing better together. LOL, your team did an average of 89 damage each. And you wonder why you lost?

I have to shiver when i see a Quickdraw with only 20 damage and hear on the same time the weight balance is bad......

If you would have said the Elo selection was not good, i would have understand it. If they were 8 man premade against PUG, i would have understand it. But saying the weight matchmaking is bad because of this? FAIL!

#6 GazT4R

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 59 posts
  • LocationBristol, UK

Posted 18 June 2013 - 11:36 PM

ELO selection is a pile of toss tbh. The current matchmaker couldn't match a pair of cards.
It is failing on every level, skill set and weight.
After 10+ losses in a row you start to wonder why you bother to play, even if your doing 400+ damage every match if the rest of the player selected can't hit the broad side of a barn accurately then you might as well play a single player game.

Off to play Metro I think or anything but this poorly implemented pile of ****.

#7 King Arthur IV

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Moderate Giver
  • 2,549 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 12:07 AM

match making by class was done before, im not sure why they didnt give match making by total weight ago? not to mention current match making is borked (op photos proves that)
i have a feeling match making will be borked no matter what because of all the four man teams out there.

#8 Zephyre

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 28 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 06:25 AM

View PostAri Dian, on 18 June 2013 - 10:51 PM, said:

85t difference is not this bad. I have seen way worse. And this is not the reason your team lost. You lost because their team did 3x as much damage as yours. Because, most likely, they were playing better together. LOL, your team did an average of 89 damage each. And you wonder why you lost?

I have to shiver when i see a Quickdraw with only 20 damage and hear on the same time the weight balance is bad......

If you would have said the Elo selection was not good, i would have understand it. If they were 8 man premade against PUG, i would have understand it. But saying the weight matchmaking is bad because of this? FAIL!


And this is where you show your complete ignorance. Its not just about tonnage, its the class of weapons combined with the armor that is the problem. I'm no dummy, and I've been around since early beta. So were the other 3 in my lance. I don't solo drop because yeah, its a huge disadvantage being alone and off comms.

That game was brutal and lasted all of 4 minutes. That's a loss of two mechs every minute. That translates to overwhelming firepower, and I can promise you we didn't just walk up and get destroyed one at a time. My mech lasted all of 10 seconds. Yep I was first over the ridge, I expected to take a beating, I didn't expect to lose half a mech in one salvo to 5 assaults.

With that said, Don't be a d-bag and claim I and my lance don't know what we're doing.

Frankly if we go back to TT (cringes at bringing TT rules into a real time game) Matches were based on BV (Battle Value) of mechs and components. So if either side had 5000 BV to work with you ended up with roughly the same tonnage and firepower. The game came down to skill of the operators, and yes, some times dumb luck of the dice rolls.

The current "match making" system is borked even worse than the old 8 randoms tossed together. I've seen way too many matchs where you have a lance of lights and mediums going up against heavies and assaults. Its garbage and it needs to be looked at.

#9 Syllogy

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,698 posts
  • LocationStrana Mechty

Posted 19 June 2013 - 07:26 AM

So a difference of 75 tons was what decided the match? ...

That's odd, because I could almost guarantee that it was the 88 points of damage averaged by your team vs. the 228 points of damage averaged by the other team.

I'd also like to point out that a stock QKD-4H has a 37 point Alpha... how did you manage to only do 62 points of damage?

#10 Syllogy

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,698 posts
  • LocationStrana Mechty

Posted 19 June 2013 - 07:30 AM

Also, this might be weird but here is a perfect example of how Tonnage does not decide the match (380 tons vs. 550 tons):

Posted Image



#11 Zephyre

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 28 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 08:26 AM

View PostSyllogy, on 19 June 2013 - 07:26 AM, said:

... how did you manage to only do 62 points of damage?


As I said before:

Step 1: Look around corner.

Step 2: Take about 6 PPCs and 3 Gauss rounds.

Step 3: Quick Draw goes BOOM.

Yeah they had better position, but the same thing happened to almost every other mech on my team. Not everyone that raises a concern is a blithering *****. Yes the match went poorly. I'm merely trying to illuminate a trend I've seen from both sides and improve game play for everyone. If you're wanting every match you play to be a ROFLSTOMP, then please, take it elsewhere.

#12 Parnage Winters

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Nimble
  • The Nimble
  • 414 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 08:32 AM

Charge other team.
Die.
Blame matchmaking on tonnage balance.
This isnt' feedback, this is comedy.

#13 Zphyr

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • 703 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 11:18 AM

1st game since patching: my team was lightless, assaultless and mainly heavies. The other team had 1 cicada, one DDC, one jager and all lights. Their lights were not those amazing death-defying pilots to justify the ELO vs Weight. What kind of balance is this? This is getting worse every patch!

#14 Ace Selin

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,534 posts
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 19 June 2013 - 04:46 PM

Honestly OP i actually think thats a pretty good much up tbh. Was expecting to see Assualts/Heavies versus Lights/Mediums.

#15 Ari Dian

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 251 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 11:41 PM

View PostZephyre, on 19 June 2013 - 06:25 AM, said:


And this is where you show your complete ignorance. Its not just about tonnage, its the class of weapons combined with the armor that is the problem. I'm no dummy, and I've been around since early beta. So were the other 3 in my lance. I don't solo drop because yeah, its a huge disadvantage being alone and off comms.

That game was brutal and lasted all of 4 minutes. That's a loss of two mechs every minute. That translates to overwhelming firepower, and I can promise you we didn't just walk up and get destroyed one at a time. My mech lasted all of 10 seconds. Yep I was first over the ridge, I expected to take a beating, I didn't expect to lose half a mech in one salvo to 5 assaults.

With that said, Don't be a d-bag and claim I and my lance don't know what we're doing.

Frankly if we go back to TT (cringes at bringing TT rules into a real time game) Matches were based on BV (Battle Value) of mechs and components. So if either side had 5000 BV to work with you ended up with roughly the same tonnage and firepower. The game came down to skill of the operators, and yes, some times dumb luck of the dice rolls.

The current "match making" system is borked even worse than the old 8 randoms tossed together. I've seen way too many matchs where you have a lance of lights and mediums going up against heavies and assaults. Its garbage and it needs to be looked at.


Where i show my ignorance? Do not start to insult me! At least i know why i lost, when i lost.


- YOUR team got stumped down by a better team.
- They were focusing fire where you were just showing up one by one (it seems). So you didnt even let them a choice but to single slaughter your team.
- They did 3 times as much damage as your team (this is 200% more damage compared to the 17% weight difference)
- I assume the 4 Liao Player in Lance Alpha were premade as well. So they dropped in 4 mechs with PPC and Gauss and were playing together as team with focusing fire and staying together. You were not.
- They used the Spider for scouting (i guess, when i see the damage). Your Spider pilot use it for damage.

So you didnt had: Awareness, teamplay and weight on your side. This is like a Goliath with 3 missing legs. And you wonder why you fell down?



Even if they would have the better and more weapons, you did 1/3 of their damage!!!! Your average damage is at lousy 88. Even if they would focus one of your mechs, and need around 10 sec to take him down, the rest of your team did NOTHING this time it seems. You got slaughtered because you were playing to bad, not because the weight of the mechs was bad. I would even admit you lost because the matchmaking placed you against a better, more experienced team. But NOT because of the weight of the mechs.
To be honest, the result would have been the same if they had 3 Cataphracts instead of the 2 Highlander and 1 Stalker.



And i would love to see a BV match over weight balanced match as well! Because this way the trial mechs are handled like they should. A Stock Atlas is less worth as a full tweaked Jenner with XL, ES, FF, DHS, Master XP with modules. And this should be reflected in the "worth" of the mech in kind of BV or something. But we are not talking about trials against custom Mechs on your match.

#16 Timto

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 144 posts

Posted 20 June 2013 - 12:15 PM

I really tried to swallow all the disbalance last month.
It is really depressing and if it doesn't get better (a lot) I will take a long brake.
The boating sucks. The development is too slow and I don't think it will be a great game in some month. All the ppcs, all the lrms, the balancing, and so on...
Just wanted to say that. But I still hope....

you can argue about me, but there will come a time, maybe, if all the "good" players will play alone.

#17 Timto

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 144 posts

Posted 20 June 2013 - 12:18 PM

the "good" players may play alone in the future

#18 Kharim

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 39 posts

Posted 20 June 2013 - 02:24 PM

May I just ask You, how many of You that complain about tonnage/class balance play alone? A well organised team of fairly low tonnage can effectively combat much heavier opponents. Get on voice or keep complaining forever.

#19 PropagandaWar

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 2,495 posts
  • LocationCalifornia

Posted 20 June 2013 - 02:28 PM

View PostWhite Bear 84, on 18 June 2013 - 06:58 PM, said:

LOL you think that is bad weight matching? You ever had a drop against 6 assaults and two heavies where your team is all in mediums and lights!

But yes - im of the firm belief that matchmaking is a big lie. Imbalanced drops, poor implementation of elo. 90% of matches are either imbalanced in terms of weight and/or result in the usual 8/2, 8/1, 8/0 stompings.

I have to go to my screen caps I have quite a few showing that.

#20 TheFlyingScotsman

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 639 posts
  • LocationCA

Posted 20 June 2013 - 09:38 PM

View PostSyllogy, on 19 June 2013 - 07:30 AM, said:

Also, this might be weird but here is a perfect example of how Tonnage does not decide the match (380 tons vs. 550 tons):

Posted Image





This post isnt proof that matchmaking is off. It's proof that streaks are off and that ravens dont take damage correctly. :D With that much SSRM in the field, CTS are all anyone would be hitting.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users