Jump to content

675 Tons: About Right For 12V12?


91 replies to this topic

#81 Zultor

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 171 posts
  • LocationMinneapolis, MN

Posted 09 August 2013 - 01:26 PM

No single number is going to be utilized they are going to have to use a range 600-700 or whatever. The real question is what should that range be?

#82 Trauglodyte

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,373 posts

Posted 09 August 2013 - 01:31 PM

View PostKuruptU4Fun, on 09 August 2013 - 12:39 PM, said:

As a point of contention, how long do you think would it take for the matchmaking system to assign pugs and premades with their selected mechs to create a game? I'd venture to say several minutes, and in truth that would be a good reason to stop playing this game.

Weight limits per match aren't going to solve the problem and personally I think an option that we are required to face should be added as well. As you know you have the choice to preselect 4 mechs in a que that are visible in the home screen.

My idea would be to have player have at least 2 mechs of different weight classes available and let the MM system choose which one you have to pilot, if you have 4 then things would obviously go faster. As a tradeoff to us players all XP becomes general XP that we can apply to the mech tree of 4 selected choices that were ready to drop.


Well, if I remember correctly, when UI 2.0 comes out, you can queue up multiple mechs of your choosing. So, if you had 2 or 20 mechs, you could queue them all up which means that the MM would have a plethora of mech weights and ELO scores from which to choose in order to put a game together. If it isn't part of UI 2.0, it damn well should.

#83 KuruptU4Fun

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,748 posts
  • LocationLewisville Tx.

Posted 09 August 2013 - 01:42 PM

View PostTrauglodyte, on 09 August 2013 - 01:31 PM, said:


Well, if I remember correctly, when UI 2.0 comes out, you can queue up multiple mechs of your choosing. So, if you had 2 or 20 mechs, you could queue them all up which means that the MM would have a plethora of mech weights and ELO scores from which to choose in order to put a game together. If it isn't part of UI 2.0, it damn well should.


I agree it should, it's not a reason to drop ELO and go with another single option like weight limits. But that idea does marry the two (IMO) to allow matches that are varied in mech classes and abilities of the pilots in them.

#84 VanillaG

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 1,115 posts
  • LocationIn my parent's basement

Posted 09 August 2013 - 02:59 PM

View PostKuruptU4Fun, on 09 August 2013 - 12:39 PM, said:

As a point of contention, how long do you think would it take for the matchmaking system to assign pugs and premades with their selected mechs to create a game? I'd venture to say several minutes, and in truth that would be a good reason to stop playing this game.


You really need to a weight limit per premade based on the number of players and then use PUGs for fillers for the rest of the team. That way the overall team tonnage will stay constant based on the tonnage values that they pick for both premades and total team tonnage.

#85 KuruptU4Fun

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,748 posts
  • LocationLewisville Tx.

Posted 09 August 2013 - 03:04 PM

View PostVanillaG, on 09 August 2013 - 02:59 PM, said:


You really need to a weight limit per premade based on the number of players and then use PUGs for fillers for the rest of the team. That way the overall team tonnage will stay constant based on the tonnage values that they pick for both premades and total team tonnage.


Which is EXACTLY why I made this same suggestion in that same post:

Weight limits per match aren't going to solve the problem and personally I think an option that we are required to face should be added as well. As you know you have the choice to preselect 4 mechs in a que that are visible in the home screen.

My idea would be to have player have at least 2 mechs of different weight classes available and let the MM system choose which one you have to pilot, if you have 4 then things would obviously go faster. As a tradeoff to us players all XP becomes general XP that we can apply to the mech tree of 4 selected choices that were ready to drop.

#86 Hellcat420

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 1,520 posts

Posted 09 August 2013 - 03:05 PM

like people are going to play this game when they are unable to use their $40-50 hero mech 75% of the time. all adding tonnage limits to pug games will do is kill this game. tonnage limits are no good outside of tournament play. weight matching is a better route for pug(casual) games.

#87 VanillaG

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 1,115 posts
  • LocationIn my parent's basement

Posted 09 August 2013 - 03:13 PM

View PostKuruptU4Fun, on 09 August 2013 - 03:04 PM, said:


Which is EXACTLY why I made this same suggestion in that same post:

Weight limits per match aren't going to solve the problem and personally I think an option that we are required to face should be added as well. As you know you have the choice to preselect 4 mechs in a que that are visible in the home screen.

My idea would be to have player have at least 2 mechs of different weight classes available and let the MM system choose which one you have to pilot, if you have 4 then things would obviously go faster. As a tradeoff to us players all XP becomes general XP that we can apply to the mech tree of 4 selected choices that were ready to drop.

Let me more clear. PGI says that total team tonnage is 690 tons. You and 2 friends create a group and your group is allocated 180 tons to divy up however you want. If you bring a third friend you would get 230 tons to split between the 4 of you. Depending on the number of premades, all the matchmaker needs to do is find enough PUGs fill in the rest of the team. This way one premade can't take a large portion of the available tonnage, they are only allocated a percentage based on number of players.

#88 Hellcat420

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 1,520 posts

Posted 09 August 2013 - 03:15 PM

View PostKuruptU4Fun, on 09 August 2013 - 03:04 PM, said:


Which is EXACTLY why I made this same suggestion in that same post:

Weight limits per match aren't going to solve the problem and personally I think an option that we are required to face should be added as well. As you know you have the choice to preselect 4 mechs in a que that are visible in the home screen.

My idea would be to have player have at least 2 mechs of different weight classes available and let the MM system choose which one you have to pilot, if you have 4 then things would obviously go faster. As a tradeoff to us players all XP becomes general XP that we can apply to the mech tree of 4 selected choices that were ready to drop.


i would rather just pilot the mech i want to pilot, not have the craptastic matchmaker choose for me.

#89 scJazz

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,668 posts
  • LocationNew London, CT

Posted 09 August 2013 - 03:24 PM

View PostKuruptU4Fun, on 09 August 2013 - 03:04 PM, said:


Which is EXACTLY why I made this same suggestion in that same post:

Weight limits per match aren't going to solve the problem and personally I think an option that we are required to face should be added as well. As you know you have the choice to preselect 4 mechs in a que that are visible in the home screen.

My idea would be to have player have at least 2 mechs of different weight classes available and let the MM system choose which one you have to pilot, if you have 4 then things would obviously go faster. As a tradeoff to us players all XP becomes general XP that we can apply to the mech tree of 4 selected choices that were ready to drop.

Not an entirely bad idea... but what about my Modules? I've been playing for 3 months. I have 3 modules that I must move around to each mech I pick. What happens with them? If you say whelp I need to buy a set for each mech I'm going to have to blast you in the face!

#90 KuruptU4Fun

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,748 posts
  • LocationLewisville Tx.

Posted 09 August 2013 - 03:28 PM

View PostscJazz, on 09 August 2013 - 03:24 PM, said:

Not an entirely bad idea... but what about my Modules? I've been playing for 3 months. I have 3 modules that I must move around to each mech I pick. What happens with them? If you say whelp I need to buy a set for each mech I'm going to have to blast you in the face!


I wouldn't suggest that at all. But each module is attached to the pilot once the match is set you have X amount of time to select the modules you've purchased.

#91 Khobai

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 23,969 posts

Posted 09 August 2013 - 03:58 PM

I dont agree with tonnage limits. Tonnage is meaningless because a 65 ton Jagermech can beat a 100 ton Atlas without breaking a sweat. Balancing based on tonnage will actually unbalance things more. Tonnage limits will also cause longer queue times because the queue will be bottlenecked waiting for specific tonnage combinations.

A better way to balance teams is tor simply require 2 of each weight class to be in a game (so teams would be 2/2/2/2 and 4 randoms which would be wildcards to keep the game interesting). Having the 4 wildcards would also help keep the queue times down.

#92 Malleus011

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 1,854 posts

Posted 09 August 2013 - 06:03 PM

Cw might make for some interesting tonnage limit modifiers. Maybe attacking Tharkad or Luthien hits 1000 tons, while a periphery world might be only 400.
Alternately, different houses/mercs might have weight modifiers, like Steiner ignoring the heaviest mech or Davion getting a bonus when attack or Marik getting a free Medium or something.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users