67 replies to this topic

[paxmortis]

Of course the tournamnet is still running. At the moment we are in the K.O. phase of the 3025 Stockmech Tournament - Season 2

During the Tourney, i not modifed the MBV because it would be used by the teams. Till now it looks quite fine for the 3025 techlevel.

After the tourney is finished, i will make a couple of modification in the MBV. The next testing event will be then the Solaris 7 Open tournament.

This tournament contain more classes like the 3025 Open class and the 3050 Open class. This will show how the MBV works with self made mechs of any techlevel and equipment.

Edited by paxmortis, 28 November 2013 - 09:56 AM.

[Kvidar]

I know this topic is a little old, but I just wanted to weigh in and go on record saying that I think that a battlevalue based matchmaker would be a very good idea for MWO. The most recent iteration of the 3 assault 3 heavy 3 medium 3 light battlefield will be prone to min-maxing in regards to having 100 ton/75 ton/55 ton/35 ton mechs. In the 3/3/3/3 idea what reason would there ever be to bring a locust over a jenner? None.

In a battlevalue system, (particularly this one) the difference between a locust and a jenner is roughly 100 points. In certain situations/builds, that's enough to bring an ATLAS instead of a Cataphract. No matter how you cut it there will always be people like me who enjoy analyzing and breaking down a system to min-max it, I just feel like a battlevalue system would make it both harder to minmax (which is a good thing, minmaxxers should have to choose whether it's potentially worth it to bring a locust instead of a jenner for that extra 100BV) and it would promote people playing a wider variety of mechs, because if they use the 3/3/3/3 I guarantee that at least 20% of the playerbase will refuse to use non 100/75/55/35 ton mechs (I know I would only use those...)

The biggest flaw with the 3/3/3/3 system is that I literally gain nothing by gimping myself by using a catapult instead of a cataphract besides -MAYBE- making the enemy team bring a catapult instead of a cataphract as well, but even then if it takes too long then my team would have a catapult, and the enemy will get a cataphract because MM couldn't find another 65 ton mech to match me against. In a BV system depending on how I build my catapult it could potentially be worth more than a cataphract, making it so that the potential of my mech is more important than the tons on it.

Edited by Kvidar, 11 March 2014 - 02:23 AM.

[Moromillas]

Kvidar, on 11 March 2014 - 02:23 AM, said:

I know this topic is a little old, but I just wanted to weigh in and go on record saying that I think that a battlevalue based matchmaker would be a very good idea for MWO. The most recent iteration of the 3 assault 3 heavy 3 medium 3 light battlefield will be prone to min-maxing in regards to having 100 ton/75 ton/55 ton/35 ton mechs. In the 3/3/3/3 idea what reason would there ever be to bring a locust over a jenner? None.

In a battlevalue system, (particularly this one) the difference between a locust and a jenner is roughly 100 points. In certain situations/builds, that's enough to bring an ATLAS instead of a Cataphract. No matter how you cut it there will always be people like me who enjoy analyzing and breaking down a system to min-max it, I just feel like a battlevalue system would make it both harder to minmax (which is a good thing, minmaxxers should have to choose whether it's potentially worth it to bring a locust instead of a jenner for that extra 100BV) and it would promote people playing a wider variety of mechs, because if they use the 3/3/3/3 I guarantee that at least 20% of the playerbase will refuse to use non 100/75/55/35 ton mechs (I know I would only use those...)

The biggest flaw with the 3/3/3/3 system is that I literally gain nothing by gimping myself by using a catapult instead of a cataphract besides -MAYBE- making the enemy team bring a catapult instead of a cataphract as well, but even then if it takes too long then my team would have a catapult, and the enemy will get a cataphract because MM couldn't find another 65 ton mech to match me against. In a BV system depending on how I build my catapult it could potentially be worth more than a cataphract, making it so that the potential of my mech is more important than the tons on it.

Let me offer a counter to that, by saying that all plans look good on paper, just like all vaporware looks good before it's an actual game.

How the ELO match maker works exactly, is largely unknown. You could make up any kind of new system, yet you don't have anything solid to compare it to. And so, saying one is better than the other can only be an assertion.

To say that using a Catapult instead of a Cataphract is gimping yourself is wanting. Where on earth are you getting this from? If anything, I'm marginally better on my Catapults.

[General Taskeen]

Paxmortis also posted this for anyone's use. German players are heavily into stock matches, and that's what the MBV is that they made for leagues. I think its pretty good for that purpose, and as shown on Paxmortis links they have a list of relative MBV applied to custom Mechs as well taking in account all the equipment on it.

[paxmortis]

The MBV is for anyone and this include PGI Feel free to use it for leagues or tourney or what else.

The database is still up to date because we use it in ther germany community for the 3025 stockmech tourney.

This is now the second season we are using it. I ask every season for feedback, problems etc. till now no complain. Of course this is not a big playerbase with around 150+ players.

Edited by paxmortis, 11 March 2014 - 08:41 AM.

[Ladehemmung]

Has someone any plans to update it for Clan-Tech?

[TLBFestus]

Syllogy, on 28 August 2013 - 08:20 AM, said:

How do you balance a moron against a sharpshooter in the same mech?

No system is perfect, but I have no doubt that this system or something similar would be better than what is currently used would work better.

As far as the skill of the pilot, isn't that what we WANT to be the determine factor in the match? Going into the match knowing that you aren't horribly outgunned and that the outcome us more than likely going to be a result of your skill, some smart/lucky decisions and teamwork rather than sheer mass of weaponry and endosteel?

A system that takes into account the factors listed by the OP would bring different load outs and variety to the game.

[Cimarb]

Pax, I made mention of your system here, so wanted to let you know.