165 replies to this topic

[Pando]

Saxie, on 25 June 2013 - 06:11 PM, said:

I'm betting you've never played against p00k.....

EDIT: I'm talking 8 man, not this 4 man premade, or pug....

That could probably be said about the majority of the population. When we play 8's, the que dries up within a few games.

[AimRobot]

CHWarpath, on 26 June 2013 - 11:36 AM, said:

Another baddie making posts based on this own terrible gaming perspective. Atlas's routinely do less than 200 damage on most matches because of bad builds and bad players. So lets not get carried away.

Thats cause the atlas had bad weapon placement, but atlas i still the key opener if you have a team without long range weapon.

[Lugh]

CHWarpath, on 26 June 2013 - 11:36 AM, said:

Another baddie making posts based on this own terrible gaming perspective. Atlas's routinely do less than 200 damage on most matches because of bad builds and bad players. So lets not get carried away.

I see plenty of mechs in all types doing sub 100 damage a game. Even when I was brand new to the game that was an extremely rare occurrence for me. Somehow John Q Rambo, didn't get the memo that teamwork wins here.

[Felicitatem Parco]

1st, I'm going to move this thread to Gameplay Balance because it's about balancing the roles of Weight Classes. The "Metagame" forums subsection is intended for using the term Metagame to describe the "secondary game objectives" aside from the actual main combat, such as the in-game Economy, the Territory Capture conquest-mode, etc.

2nd, I have a feeling that many people are defining what is "competitive" or not are doing-so in the absence of weight limitations. I wonder how your persona list of "Effective Mechs" might change if your 8-man premade team was limited to so-many tons... I suggest we all mind the future, and not just the current Matchmaking limits (or lack thereof).

[AimRobot]

Ther has been homemade ton rules for half a year and ther is a reason for it.
Ton limitation is just not the solution cause you force people to play mechs they might not enjoy or even have.

Edited by AimRobot, 26 June 2013 - 12:23 PM.

[Rohjaz]

Straylight, on 25 June 2013 - 02:28 PM, said:

I think part of OP's point is that competent Light and Medium pilots are rare, because taking that same competency level into a Heavy or Assault yields proportionately better performance. That is to say, bigger 'mechs perform better, regardless of how skilled the pilot is. There's also a tipping point (right around 70 tons) where tonnage not only augments skill, but compensates for it. If I make a mistake in my Spider, I'm toast. I can post 300 damage, 3 kill matches, but I have to play nearly flawlessly in order to do so. In a good Heavy or Assault, I can be sloppy, slow to react, oblivious to my surroundings and generally act like a sleep-deprived lunatic and still pull four or five kills out of a match. This isn't really due to inherent imbalances between mech types, either. The imbalance lies in the game's reward structure: the roles that Lights and fast Mediums excel at--spotting, reconnaissance, harassment, base capping, and so on--yield FAR fewer rewards than simply slugging it out with the other team. Bigger mechs are better at that, as they should be, but the game's overemphasis on this makes them proportionately more valuable than they should be. Lights performing their intended role absolutely wins games. What it doesn't do, though, is pay well. What's worse, is almost all of the rewards that Lights are good at earning aren't individual rewards, but team rewards. A Raven that spends the entire game tagging targets, providing ECM coverage and sensor data, capturing resource nodes, and generally doing what a Raven is supposed to do makes 60-80K CB and a few hundred XP. The Cataphract that just rushes straight into the brawl makes everything the Raven does (because those rewards are all shared by the team) AND an additional 100K CB and 1000 XP for damage, components, kills and assists. We'll see if CW and better gametypes changes this. As it stands, though, it IS a problem that needs to be addressed.

Straylight, on 25 June 2013 - 02:28 PM, said:

I think part of OP's point is that competent Light and Medium pilots are rare, because taking that same competency level into a Heavy or Assault yields proportionately better performance. That is to say, bigger 'mechs perform better, regardless of how skilled the pilot is. There's also a tipping point (right around 70 tons) where tonnage not only augments skill, but compensates for it. If I make a mistake in my Spider, I'm toast. I can post 300 damage, 3 kill matches, but I have to play nearly flawlessly in order to do so. In a good Heavy or Assault, I can be sloppy, slow to react, oblivious to my surroundings and generally act like a sleep-deprived lunatic and still pull four or five kills out of a match. This isn't really due to inherent imbalances between mech types, either. The imbalance lies in the game's reward structure: the roles that Lights and fast Mediums excel at--spotting, reconnaissance, harassment, base capping, and so on--yield FAR fewer rewards than simply slugging it out with the other team. Bigger mechs are better at that, as they should be, but the game's overemphasis on this makes them proportionately more valuable than they should be. Lights performing their intended role absolutely wins games. What it doesn't do, though, is pay well. What's worse, is almost all of the rewards that Lights are good at earning aren't individual rewards, but team rewards. A Raven that spends the entire game tagging targets, providing ECM coverage and sensor data, capturing resource nodes, and generally doing what a Raven is supposed to do makes 60-80K CB and a few hundred XP. The Cataphract that just rushes straight into the brawl makes everything the Raven does (because those rewards are all shared by the team) AND an additional 100K CB and 1000 XP for damage, components, kills and assists. We'll see if CW and better gametypes changes this. As it stands, though, it IS a problem that needs to be addressed.

Very good post. Thank you for your eloquence and clear manner in stating my EXACT sentiments.

[FupDup]

Actually, role warfare is alive and well. You can chose to be either a killer or a capper.

Edited by FupDup, 26 June 2013 - 12:41 PM.

[Rebas Kradd]

So, what, just give light/medium pilots bigger C-bill hauls?

[jakucha]

Heavies and assaults are generally easier to use/get kills with. That doesn't mean lights and mediums are useless though.

[Rohjaz]

Prosperity Park, on 26 June 2013 - 11:57 AM, said:

1st, I'm going to move this thread to Gameplay Balance because it's about balancing the roles of Weight Classes. The "Metagame" forums subsection is intended for using the term Metagame to describe the "secondary game objectives" aside from the actual main combat, such as the in-game Economy, the Territory Capture conquest-mode, etc. 2nd, I have a feeling that many people are defining what is "competitive" or not are doing-so in the absence of weight limitations. I wonder how your persona list of "Effective Mechs" might change if your 8-man premade team was limited to so-many tons... I suggest we all mind the future, and not just the current Matchmaking limits (or lack thereof).

I understand your sentiments, but if there are no developer comments stating otherwise, I'm afraid players will continue to raise their concerns about the current matchmaking situation.

As an optimist, I hope that the 12v12 (and larger) team makeups will allow the lighter mechs to have more critical importance in battles.

We will only know when all of these are implemented.

Until then, the problems are being stated here, and it's up to the devs to listen to the players and decide what to do next.

Edited by Rohjaz, 26 June 2013 - 12:49 PM.

[Screech]

My founders mech is the Jenner, back when you could pick. The OP is very much correct that PGI's decision to remove choice and go lightest to heaviest does speak volumes on where the game has gone since then.

[hammerreborn]

Screech, on 26 June 2013 - 01:09 PM, said:

My founders mech is the Jenner, back when you could pick. The OP is very much correct that PGI's decision to remove choice and go lightest to heaviest does speak volumes on where the game has gone since then.

No it doesn't...it's just the damn order they've been relatively sticking to the last I don't know...year?! The sole exception as far as I'm aware is the Flea, which was delayed due to MASC and probably the Orion, unless PGI starts doubling up as it's slated to come out after the Flea it looks like, but was also delayed.

We just released the heavy for this current iteration, the victor comes next, followed by the light that was supposed to be this generation, which gets us into August. September I assume is the Orion, which was also delayed, then October starts the sequence over again with light -> medium -> heavy -> assault. Which corresponds to locust, shadow hawk, thunderbolt, and battlemaster. Unless they decide to start doing two mechs a month.

There is no damn conspiracy around every corner people. You're paying more money because you get to play an assault mech 3 months before it's official release, just like you could buy the highlander hero before it's release.

Now if all 4 mechs were released at the same time you'd have a point, but you don't. There are facts, and then there are wild accusations, hyperbole, and conspiracy theories.

Edited by hammerreborn, 26 June 2013 - 01:26 PM.

[Red squirrel]

I see a much bigger problem inside each weight class.
For example: There still is some thing like a scout role. But only if you use an ECM Raven or Cicada.
I played a bit with my Commandos today and man they are underwhelming.
Also there are too many, too fast heavy mechs out there. A Quickdraw can outrun my Commando - CRAZY!

[Screech]

hammerreborn, on 26 June 2013 - 01:22 PM, said:

Now if all 4 mechs were released at the same time you'd have a point, but you don't. There are facts, and then there are wild accusations, hyperbole, and conspiracy theories.

Don't see how release dates makes a difference. Speaking of facts, founders let you choose phoenix doesn't, that is a fact. Spin it how you want.

[3rdworld]

Funny thing.

I thought about buying the smallest and choosing the Battlemaster, as it is the only one there that matters.

Then I learned I would need to buy the 80$ pack for it.

nope.

[A banana in the tailpipe]

FupDup, on 26 June 2013 - 12:41 PM, said:

Actually, role warfare is alive and well. You can chose to be either a killer or a capper.

Well said.

[Mercules]

Red squirrel, on 26 June 2013 - 01:51 PM, said:

I see a much bigger problem inside each weight class.
For example: There still is some thing like a scout role. But only if you use an ECM Raven or Cicada.
I played a bit with my Commandos today and man they are underwhelming.
Also there are too many, too fast heavy mechs out there. A Quickdraw can outrun my Commando - CRAZY!

If a Quickdraw can -outrun- your Commando then you are doing it wrong. You shouldn't have to go 120+ to not get shot in the Battletech universe, but in MWO you do. I scout in a Commando. I don't get many kills, but I do distract and harass the enemy team as well as get my team target locks and information.

[3rdworld]

Is this relevant?

It is a Victor BtW.

Edited by 3rdworld, 26 June 2013 - 03:02 PM.

[Lootee]

I concur with the OP.

Know why they made the Battlemaster cost $80 ?

Because it can carry SEVEN PPCs.

The BLR-1G has 1 energy hard point in the right arm, 3 in the left torso, 3 in the right torso.

[Victor Morson]

We need weight restrictions. Always have, always will. Class balance - within the confines of BattleTech - is impossible.

Also I have no problem with PP's pricing because it's exceptionally good - esp by PGI sale standards - value for the money. The Battlemaster is one of the most popular 'mechs in the franchise. Please try to remember that had to figure into this, too.

Edited by Victor Morson, 26 June 2013 - 03:07 PM.