48 replies to this topic

[Hobo Dan]

I’m always hearing the argument that we cannot use BV because MWO is more about pilot skill. I agree. What if we used both?

Each weapon has a BV but the finial BV of the mech is determined by those BV’s + a players skill with said weapons. They are tracking tons stats for all the weapons we use (Accuracy, Damage) why not use those to measure player skill? So in theory, two players using the same mech with the same load out would not have the same BV because of the individual pilot’s stats.

They could even track other things like XL engines and how often do you get popped by a side torso vs CT?

[3rdworld]

BV or Cost, doesn't really work well in a FPS.

Players don't exactly find comfort in knowing the other guy was running a much higher level mech when [DEAD] starts showing up next to your name. And that the # of players on each side is static, doesn't allow the for numeric superiority that the team running cheaper mechs needs.

It could be tweaked to balance a match vs match, but no one likes losing because the other guy was just more powerful, see P2W vs P2NotGrind.

[Lupin]

Well would be better to keep team balance simple ELO really does not seem to work.
Weight I think most players agree should be a factor but maybe Alpha damage or DPS should be used? Numbers which are available to match maker right away.

[xDeityx]

Khobai, on 20 July 2013 - 01:06 PM, said:

Absolutely horrible idea. Do you really want noobs with LB10Xs and XL engines on their Atlases to drag down the whole team? Just because a component is expensive doesn't mean its good.

It's only a bad idea because balance is horrible. If PGI weren't so incompetent it'd be a great idea.

[IceSerpent]

3rdworld, on 22 July 2013 - 05:23 AM, said:

BV or Cost, doesn't really work well in a FPS.

Players don't exactly find comfort in knowing the other guy was running a much higher level mech when [DEAD] starts showing up next to your name.

The whole point of having BV (or whatever you want to call it) is precisely to avoid the situation you've described. What makes you think that balancing equipment betwen opposing teams doesn't work well in FPS, or any other game for that matter? Practically all games I know of at least try to provide for a level playing field.

Quote

And that the # of players on each side is static, doesn't allow the for numeric superiority that the team running cheaper mechs needs.

Who says that number of players has to be static? It's only static in MWO because PGI decided to make it so.

Quote

It could be tweaked to balance a match vs match, but no one likes losing because the other guy was just more powerful, see P2W vs P2NotGrind.

Again, the whole purpose of the exercise is to avoid this.

[3rdworld]

IceSerpent, on 22 July 2013 - 07:33 AM, said:

The whole point of having BV (or whatever you want to call it) is precisely to avoid the situation you've described. What makes you think that balancing equipment betwen opposing teams doesn't work well in FPS, or any other game for that matter? Practically all games I know of at least try to provide for a level playing field..

You would need to be incredibly naive to believe I am suddenly going to stop putting DHS and ES on 90% of my mechs because I will have to fight someone with the same tech on the other side. I already do. And I already win. So what exactly are you going to use as a carrot? Now instead of needing to carry the scrub in a good mech on my team, I know there will be a scrub in a bad mech on their team.

Ask yourself: Does class based match making work? No, everyone just runs assaults. So why on earth would you believe that a "tech" based matchmaking be anything other than all players in the best mechs?

IceSerpent, on 22 July 2013 - 07:33 AM, said:

Again, the whole purpose of the exercise is to avoid this.

Hey look, again you did nothing.

IceSerpent, on 22 July 2013 - 07:33 AM, said:

Who says that number of players has to be static? It's only static in MWO because PGI decided to make it so.

so that makes it static no?

Am I being trolled? Or are you being serious?

Edited by 3rdworld, 22 July 2013 - 09:40 AM.

[IceSerpent]

3rdworld, on 22 July 2013 - 09:38 AM, said:

You would need to be incredibly naive to believe I am suddenly going to stop putting DHS and ES on 90% of my mechs because I will have to fight someone with the same tech on the other side. I already do. And I already win. So what exactly are you going to use as a carrot? Now instead of needing to carry the scrub in a good mech on my team, I know there will be a scrub in a bad mech on their team.

What makes you think that anybody needs you to suddenly stop doing whatever it is you are doing? You play whatever build you want to play (for whatever reason), matchmaking by BV would simply attempt to pick mechs for the opposing team so that their combined BV would be roughly equal to that of your team. No carrots are required.

Quote

Ask yourself: Does class based match making work? No, everyone just runs assaults. So why on earth would you believe that a "tech" based matchmaking be anything other than all players in the best mechs?

It used to work when it actually was in effect (didn't prevent newbies in stock Raven 4X from being steamrolled by fully pimped 3Ls though, which is why it's worse than BV). No, not everybody ran assaults back then. "Tech" based matchmaking is not necessary when all players pilot the same mech/loadout, but it is necessary when some of those players want to pilot something different.

Quote

so that makes it static no?

No, any rule of the game can be changed by devs at any moment. Given that PGI is extremely fond of "it was our position at the time" stunts, I wouldn't call anything in MWO "static".

Quote

Am I being trolled? Or are you being serious?

Being serious.

Edited by IceSerpent, 22 July 2013 - 10:07 AM.

[Jman5]

It's an interesting thought, but as others mentioned there are problems that would have to be addressed.

First off, you would have to either change or weigh the weapon costs to reflect their balance better. Next you would have to weigh XL engines differently. I would recommend making them 1:1 with their standard variant. Finally, you would have to look at mech upgrades and see if it makes sense. I really have no idea how badly something like FF would impact something like this.

So again, this could work, but you would have to make careful adjustments that reflect the reality of this game.

Edited by Jman5, 22 July 2013 - 11:34 AM.

[Homeless Bill]

My Pretty Baby costs twice as much as a PPC Stalker. I think they'd be better off calculating a BV than trying to shoehorn cost to fit what would work with this model. It simply has too many strange problems for me to support matchmaking based off of cost.