85 replies to this topic

[Kunae]

Always please remember that there is a difference between "newbie"/"newb" and "noob".

Newb/Newbie is someone new to the game. Then there are Noobs, who aren't new to the game but act like they are.

Newbies can be forgiven, we were all newbs at some point. Noobs should be derided and laughed at, and deserve nothing but scorn.

[Deathlike]

Yesterday, I saw a Founders C1 try to "dumbfire" LRMs into enemy mechs. I tried to explain to him that you need to hit 'R' to target, but that was either ignored or something along those lines. Needless to say, he was the last one on the team to die, despite doing him doing virtually nothing that match.

Sometimes it's like trying to fling poop into a void or black hole....

[DegeneratePervert]

Deathlike, on 19 August 2013 - 05:31 AM, said:

Yesterday, I saw a Founders C1 try to "dumbfire" LRMs into enemy mechs. I tried to explain to him that you need to hit 'R' to target, but that was either ignored or something along those lines. Needless to say, he was the last one on the team to die, despite doing him doing virtually nothing that match.

Sometimes it's like trying to fling poop into a void or black hole....

He was probably drunk. Nobody pilots the Founder's C1 unless they are drunk.

[Shae Starfyre]

My 7 and 4 year old often go into this 'He' did it argument over and over again, and a lot of excuses in this thread sound just like it.

The reason I am rude to new players is because it is PGI's fault, the UI sucks, or ELO is broken; this all makes perfect sense.

If we know these things exists, does the Noob? No. And if we know these things exists, who's fault is it to react to them in a childish manner?

Just wow, really?

[Fabe]

Kunae, on 19 August 2013 - 05:31 AM, said:

Always please remember that there is a difference between "newbie"/"newb" and "noob".

Newb/Newbie is someone new to the game. Then there are Noobs, who aren't new to the game but act like they are.

Newbies can be forgiven, we were all newbs at some point. Noobs should be derided and laughed at, and deserve nothing but scorn.

http://www.cad-comic.com/cad/20060823

[Kitane]

DegeneratePervert, on 19 August 2013 - 05:33 AM, said:

He was probably drunk. Nobody pilots the Founder's C1 unless they are drunk.

CATAPULT CPLT-C1 184 matches

I knew it! There must be something in the local tap water >_>

[Rippthrough]

Scryed, on 18 August 2013 - 06:18 PM, said:

I'm just tired of being put in a match where my team loses 12-0 and 4 guys do 0 damage

This, the matchmaker is worse than just a random number generator at the minute, I've had games this past week or so where 4/5/6 people managed to do a whole 2 damage between them, and no, I'm not joking, or missed a zero, that is two damage.
It's not the fault of the new people, it's the consequences of dire matchmaking, the terrible learning curve for a new player with the tiny amount of info available on the interface, and no intro training.

[seymourbalzac]

I always try my best to help a new person learn the game when I see one (usually involves LRM's don't do damage inside 180m and/or turn off arm lock) but it's when you try to help a person nicely and they push back or you get the noob in a trial mech calling you bad, that ****** me off and that's when I stop being nice.

Edited by seymourbalzac, 19 August 2013 - 05:48 AM.

[Deathlike]

Rippthrough, on 19 August 2013 - 05:44 AM, said:

This, the matchmaker is worse than just a random number generator at the minute, I've had games this past week or so where 4/5/6 people managed to do a whole 2 damage between them, and no, I'm not joking, or missed a zero, that is two damage.
It's not the fault of the new people, it's the consequences of dire matchmaking, the terrible learning curve for a new player with the tiny amount of info available on the interface, and no intro training.

Back to the overwhelming theme PGI has not yet picked up on...

WHAT TUTORIAL?

[A banana in the tailpipe]

Deathlike, on 19 August 2013 - 05:31 AM, said:

Yesterday, I saw a Founders C1 try to "dumbfire" LRMs into enemy mechs. I tried to explain to him that you need to hit 'R' to target, but that was either ignored or something along those lines. Needless to say, he was the last one on the team to die, despite doing him doing virtually nothing that match.

I was going to bring up this point too but my post was getting lengthy so let me just add that it doesn't matter how much skill is held or how hard you try. The first to the fight always end up being the first dead.

[MonkeyCheese]

MonkeyCheese, on 18 August 2013 - 06:03 PM, said:

But the system is broken, I dont care how good or bad a player is if they have done a large amount of games 1k-2k+ and have leveled up mechs they should not be placed in matches with day one noobs in trial mechs.

Ignoring pilot skill the fact that these "experienced" players are taking their Fully tricked out mastered death machines vs day one/ week one noobs in trial mechs is just wrong.

E.G. world or tanks tiers or a newer games like star conflict or warthunder, they dont have these problems, I cant take my day one noob bi-plane and fight a team full of jet powered planes with rockets and missiles that all fly 300kph faster than me and bombers covered in several turrets better than the ONE peashooter on my bi-plane.

No it donst work that way elsewhere, so why should noobs be put against this hell and in turn why should the experienced players put up with the noobs?

The point of my argument to carry on from my last post up there is that new people dropped with anyone who has played for months-years SHOULD NOT EXIST at all and that would solve the new player hate, but it does and it happens all the time. Dont give me that point "oh we should be better people and respect and help new players" No no we should not because this joke of a matchmaker shouldn't be happening.

I have been playing since closed beta and I have had it with new people and more so with pathetic trial mechs that it seems the main population gets stuck with, to me the trial mechs specifically light trials are more of a problem, seriously either put out better trial mechs like a raven 3L, jenner or spider or stick with the community built mechs.

New players put with experienced players is terrible yes, but putting a new player in a stock raven 2x/4x or a stock commando is just a bloody joke. Not only are they new and have no idea at all what to do, they are also stuck with a terribly cooled and extremely slow "light mech." My 9m aws can outrun the ravens and I have cents, blackjacks and trebs that can all reach well over 100kph as well as my 106kph dragon.

1. New players should never be grouped with experienced players, at least not without a really really indepth tutorial that gives them a decent mech at the end.

2. The poor heat efficient trial mechs should be sent into the deep periphery and replaced with better community/pgi builds. *shakes fists at slow trial ravens*

3. Proper 2 teamed "test matches" where kind people can show new people the ropes needs to be a thing. Or at least basic AI to shoot at. Going back to warthunder and star conflict for examples, both these games had offline tutorials also warthunder has single player vs AI historic and objective missions to learn the ropes and star conflict has a training map with real AI enemys that shoot at you and give chase while you learn and carry out training objectives.

If these are the things new players are experiencing when trying the game aka No tutorial, bad/slow trial mechs, constant experienced player roflstomps, pissed off experienced players on their teams simply WHY the hell would anyone trying out the game stick with it? Only reason I did in the beginning is because I had about 7-9 friends who got into the closed beta before me to show me the ropes and to convince me to keep pushing on until things got better, sure none of them are even playing anymore, but thats for discussion in other threads.

Edited by MonkeyCheese, 19 August 2013 - 06:20 AM.

[Erata]

Datenight, on 18 August 2013 - 05:00 PM, said:

Community -
Twice this weekend I introduced new players to MWO. Both of them spent a goodly portion of their matches noobtarding it up, in spite of my gentle instructions and suggestions. Both players were then subjected to berating, whining, and otherwise off-putting commentary from their teammates.

It's bad enough I have to apologize for a UI (come on UI 2.0!) that's full of quirks and personality that we veterans know how to navigate without knowing we know how to navigate, but now I have to apologize for those guys too.

Stop this now before we turn this into League of Legends. That guy you're about to call a noob might just be, in fact, a new player, struggling to learn the interface and digest what's going on. It might've been Sarah.

But how are newbies being grouped with so many experts if matchmaking is working? :V

I dunno. We could ask for chat options so we can mute people or even have a permanent ignore list. People are gonna be jerks, especially on the internet. Roll with the punches and have them try to assuage any complaints by...

1: Even in original DOTA, this went a long way to making people not rage out as hard
>TELL PEOPLE YOU ARE NEW AND STILL LEARNING.

[MrZakalwe]

lockwoodx, on 19 August 2013 - 05:53 AM, said:

I was going to bring up this point too but my post was getting lengthy so let me just add that it doesn't matter how much skill is held or how hard you try. The first to the fight always end up being the first dead.

Disagree strongly- the first person to get out of position and focused is the first to die most of the time.

[A banana in the tailpipe]

MrZakalwe, on 19 August 2013 - 06:21 AM, said:

Disagree strongly- the first person to get out of position and focused is the first to die most of the time.

The first person to the fight is the one out of position. Let the enemy make the first mistake.

[Kunae]

Erata, on 19 August 2013 - 06:17 AM, said:

But how are newbies being grouped with so many experts if matchmaking is working? :V

This.

Erata, on 19 August 2013 - 06:17 AM, said:

1: Even in original DOTA, this went a long way to making people not rage out as hard
>TELL PEOPLE YOU ARE NEW AND STILL LEARNING.

Seriously, most people are very helpful to new players. It's when advice is ignored, disregarded, or derided, that the helpful people tend to get a bit, shall we say, "grumpy".

[MrZakalwe]

lockwoodx, on 19 August 2013 - 06:21 AM, said:

The first person to the fight is the one out of position. Let the enemy make the first mistake.

unless I can start dropping ERPPC shots on people at long range to soften them up? Nobody is going to die from it but I probably wont take much return fire and the fight has started...

[Erata]

Kunae, on 19 August 2013 - 06:23 AM, said:

This.



Seriously, most people are very helpful to new players. It's when advice is ignored, disregarded, or derided, that the helpful people tend to get a bit, shall we say, "grumpy".

But it's all in how you use the LBX-10. You're just not using it right.

----

There is a lot of disinformation on the forums, or information being given out in the interest of fun, which is fine, except when it's framed as being good advice.
There are lots of machine gun centric builds that are fun in a team setting, but in no way effective in and of themselves.

All we can do is go out there and publicize effective builds, label them as such and why they're good at what they're designed to do, and try to accept criticism and start ranking builds.

I'm asking for people to assemble a list of mechs and then discuss how to tier them in terms of say.. general use flexibility, brawling power, sniper power, etc.

I guarantee you that a lot of PPC/Gauss builds are gonna emerge near the top. People get mega-mad about this because, well, it's unintuitive to believe that a long range robot is actually one of the best at every range outside of facehug-range.

[Kunae]

Most of this could be avoided by 3 things.

1. PGI desperately needs a real, and comprehensive, tutorial.
2. MM needs to be fixed so that new players are never put in a match with very experienced players.
3. The match UI needs a ton of canned commands and responses that are clear and concise.

[Sheraf]

Datenight, on 18 August 2013 - 05:00 PM, said:

Community -
Twice this weekend I introduced new players to MWO. Both of them spent a goodly portion of their matches noobtarding it up, in spite of my gentle instructions and suggestions. Both players were then subjected to berating, whining, and otherwise off-putting commentary from their teammates.

It's bad enough I have to apologize for a UI (come on UI 2.0!) that's full of quirks and personality that we veterans know how to navigate without knowing we know how to navigate, but now I have to apologize for those guys too.

Stop this now before we turn this into League of Legends. That guy you're about to call a noob might just be, in fact, a new player, struggling to learn the interface and digest what's going on. It might've been Sarah.

People who whinn about nerf this and that on this forum are noob. Newbie are people who new to the game

[Master Q]

Erata, on 19 August 2013 - 06:28 AM, said:

But it's all in how you use the LBX-10. You're just not using it right.

----

There is a lot of disinformation on the forums, or information being given out in the interest of fun, which is fine, except when it's framed as being good advice.
There are lots of machine gun centric builds that are fun in a team setting, but in no way effective in and of themselves.

All we can do is go out there and publicize effective builds, label them as such and why they're good at what they're designed to do, and try to accept criticism and start ranking builds.

I'm asking for people to assemble a list of mechs and then discuss how to tier them in terms of say.. general use flexibility, brawling power, sniper power, etc.

I guarantee you that a lot of PPC/Gauss builds are gonna emerge near the top. People get mega-mad about this because, well, it's unintuitive to believe that a long range robot is actually one of the best at every range outside of facehug-range.

Yes, that's basically the problem.

Certain weapons are downright useless - I would never slot LRMs if I was not building an LRM boat, because there are too many ways to simply make LRMs a waste of space. And that's a shame since the base builds for many 'Mechs include some level of LRM, because LRMs are supposed to be a relatively effective way to take potshots and soften your enemy at range.

Certain weapons - ERPPC, Gauss - are highly effective at both long and short ranges, sometimes ridiculously so. This is where the game's balance has become far off. Weapons that are limited to shorter ranges are being outshone, within their range zone, by the "sniper" weapons. Oftentimes it's not just a matter of the weapons themselves but the slots available for them. It's incredibly easy to fit two ERPPCs on almost any chassis with enough weight allowance, but fitting two AC/10s is a chore and they are far, far less effective by any reasonable metric. Heck, one AC/20 is less effective at almost any range compared to two ERPPCs.

Let's compare.

• AC/20: 14 tons, 10 slots, 7 ammo/ton. 6 heat per shot, cooldown 4.0s
  
• 2x ERPPC: 14 tons, 6 slots, 0 ammo. 24 heat per shot, cooldown still 4.0s BUT compared to 21 shots of AC/20 ammo, you can slot 7 DHS along with those ERPPCs and run cool. Heck, you can get 3 DHS in the same tonnage as the ammo, using mostly the same slots that AC/20+ammo would have eaten up.
  
• Pair of AC/10 (nobody in the game stupid enough to slot this, but for sake of argument and "equivalent" damage): 24 tons even before ammo, 14 slots, 15 ammo/ton (but needs tonnage for 2 guns so at least 4 tons if not 6 minimum), heat 6/shot, cooldown 2.5s. I think the tonnage just killed this one before we even talk distance effectiveness.

On to distance effectiveness!:

• AC/20: effective range 270, max range 810m (but slow projectile).
  
• ERPPC: effective range 810, max range 1620, fast projectile.

That is why it's become a no-brainer for so many mechs to slot them; why carry something effective at shorter range only when you can have something that is equally devastating anywhere from 50m out to beyond 1000m?

Edited by Master Q, 19 August 2013 - 07:03 AM.