9 replies to this topic

[Darkblood]

With the game as it is now, many Mechs have no point, with very few exceptions. The proof is what you see in 8 mans (at least at the higher competitive levels): 6 or 7 assaults + 1 or 2 very specific scouts. The only reason people still use heavies is because we don´t have a 2xAC20 assault.

That´s because PGI is still keeping to the bad idea of "let´s start from TT" but at the same time "let´s forget TT". The fact is the numbers are mostly still TT, and in TT you don´t match a 35 tonner Mech for a 20 tonner, much less the current approach (which is matching 8 random Mechs vs 8 random Mechs - there´s no matching besides elo in 8-man games). No wonder people are forcing this 8 "random" Mechs to be assaults (with lights in basically for information purposes.).

In TT we would be matching either BV (in tourneys or single games) or c-bills (in campaigns), and then:

LCT-1V: 1,512,400 c-bills, BV=432
SDR-5V: 2,984,540 c-bills, BV=622

You see? Even between a 20-tonner and a 30-tonner the difference is huge. On a c-bill restricted campaign you could buy almost two locusts for a single spider. Even BV wise, on low BV games you would have to sacrifice points elsewhere to field that spider.

I still think PGI should implement BV in some way here (forget tonnage). They could easily add BV with ELO (with proper weights to tune the relative importance of the two) and match that one number. BV takes into account weight and all equipment on the Mech, and you could tune it from the TT values to reflect actual usefulness in this game (PPCs for instance, would have a much higher BV than in TT). Then ELO takes into account the pilot. So, you want to bring that 3XERPPC, 1xGauss, XL 732 Highlander of yours? Be prepared to be matched against the same monster or a less cheesy/heavy mech piloted by a pilot way better than you. That would make it feasible to field any Mech, if it´s a crappy one, it would be matched against the same or similar on the other side (with the occasional Assault that can´t even maneuver around buildings)

On top of that, a single number matching is way faster and less prone to problems.

So?

Disclaimer: probably suggested before, but this forum is a hassle to search

[Syllogy]

A jacktard in an Atlas is still just a jacktard.

Edited by Syllogy, 26 June 2013 - 01:59 PM.

[Darkblood]

Syllogy, on 26 June 2013 - 01:58 PM, said:

A jacktard in an Atlas is still just a jacktard.

My point exactly. People who cannot even fight and go to MechSpecs or Forums to look for the "Kings of Cheese" (low ELO, high BV combination) would find themselves playing some very hard games against good pilots piloting non-ECM Spiders (high ELO, low BV). They would get their butts kicked and I guarantee you that the cheese builds would be far less frequent after a while.

[Timuroslav]

I've made this argument before and I agree with the original poster. Here's why I think the Original Poster is right. *copy and Pasting because I don't feel like Ranting on the same idea again* lol


Weight classes look like they work for a while, until you have a Clan Cougar http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Cougar Fighting a Commando http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Commando. Both are light mechs, but the Commando is going to lose because it doesn't have the same amount of armor, doesn't have ECM and a doesn't have the Hardpoints and Weapons.


The End Result will be, Everyone Picking Ravens, Everyone picking Hunchbacks over Blackjacks, Everyone picking Atlas/Stalkers over Awesomes.

Tonnage balance Appears to do the same thing, Until you're 12v12 Inner Sphere Versus Clan Mechs

if It's 1v1 the Clan Mechs will win even though they're equal weight classes or Weight.
This Is Also true for Newer Mechs.
You Cannot Compare an Old Cicada Here:http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Cicada
To a Newer Hellspawn with Guardian ECM and Jumpjets here:http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Hellspawn

The Hellspawn, Unless Absolutely horrible, will Always win against lighter mechs of its weight class.

There Needs to be a Balance System Outside Weight classes. Otherwise We will won't see Locusts when they come out because Everyone will be playing ECM Raven 3Ls

Tonnage Balance Systems will Work until Clan Tech comes out.

The best hope for Balance in the Future, will be a Weapon Rating+Battle Rating(a Heavily Modified Battle Value) System.
Because Newer Mechs Will always have better hardpoints. (Newer as in later in the Timeline)

the Problem with Battle Value and Battle Rating is that they're Kind of Arbitrary with a lack of Rational at the moment.

TL;DR:
Heavier Mech means more Armor & Weapons.
People Will Maximize their options in order to be competitive.
Pretend you have 2 Mini Coopers that cost nearly the same
1 of them is 10 years older.
They Weigh about the same and have the same amount of Space
You Will buy the Newer one if they cost nearly the same here's why.
More options Better Gass Mileage, Better Engine. Better Interior.

Edited by Timuroslav, 29 June 2013 - 11:49 AM.

[Augustus Martelus II]

The weapon hardpoint of MWO also do something to see the predominance of cheesy built

[DeadlyNerd]

BV was supposed to be a primary criteria in the first place...

It's just 1 column with integer values in the relational tables. It could'v been and probably is far more effective than Elo could ever be cause currently it's not the player who wins the fight, but the mech.

[Major Derps]

Darkblood, love the idea, it's exactly what we need. The current matchmaker is woeful, ELO just doesn't work well for this game.

DeadlyNerd, on 29 June 2013 - 12:47 PM, said:

BV was supposed to be a primary criteria in the first place...

It's just 1 column with integer values in the relational tables. It could'v been and probably is far more effective than Elo could ever be cause currently it's not the player who wins the fight, but the mech.

Not entirely true; more that the pilot with the fewer noobs behind him wins.

[Child3k]

Mokey Mot, on 30 June 2013 - 03:01 AM, said:

Not entirely true; more that the pilot with the fewer noobs behind him wins.

Which is true for every game I know ...

Apart from that: The current matchmaker in games for grps up to 4 factors in weight classes. So while the playerbase currently leanes more to the heavy side, driving a medium is not a disadvantage in general because in most matches for every medium on your team, there's one on the other.

[Darkblood]

Child3k, on 30 June 2013 - 03:10 AM, said:

Which is true for every game I know ...

Apart from that: The current matchmaker in games for grps up to 4 factors in weight classes. So while the playerbase currently leanes more to the heavy side, driving a medium is not a disadvantage in general because in most matches for every medium on your team, there's one on the other.

Not exactly true (been in many a match were my Hunchback was the only thing below 60 tons in both teams), and also not the point.

The current system matches Weight CLASS, not weight, so you match an Awesome with an Atlas or a Highlander. A locust to a raven 3L. And even between two Mechs of the same weight there are huge differences in terms of hard points and the actual equipment installed. BV goes beyond that, each and every equipment has a BV value, weapons, ECM, AMS, etc... Even the chassis itself and the engine. You add all that and get the BV. Not very complicated and VERY effective. You add ELO to that to take the pilot into consideration and done, one number to rule them all.

[Rotaugen]

Syllogy, on 26 June 2013 - 01:58 PM, said:

A jacktard in an Atlas is still just a jacktard.

You're talking about me, aren't you?