24 replies to this topic

[SweetJackal]

I might be looking through rose tinted glasses since I stopped playing the closed Beta back when Repair and Rearm was being tuned to allow for negative C-bill gain after matches but as slow paced that an 8v8 match could be back then it was better than the overcrowded mess we have with 12v12.

In 12v12 the game just feels lopsided. The moment that one side gets the smallest advantage the weakened team just crumples. It's reaching through the screen and just snapping the neck of their opponents. The amount of concentrated firepower on the field feels like it lessens the effect of armor and makes death all that much faster.

Maybe I've just been out of the game too long and it hasn't clicked for me, hasn't suddenly started making sense once more. So how has 12v12 been for you compared to the other formats?

Would you rather see 8v8/10v10 or 14v14/16v16?

And no, this isn't a poll so you'll have to explain your reasoning

[Bhael Fire]

12 v 12 takes time to get used to. Now when I see old screens of 8 v 8, it seems too sparse.

Worth mentioning, they are eventually going to include private matches where you can launch with how ever many people you want (up to 12 on each side). You just won't get XP/C-Bills/Stats from those matches though.

[Edustaja]

You certainly need to be more careful in 12 v 12. Assaults can easily end up being deathtraps for the new or inattentive player.

[Iskareot]

I do miss the 8 mans, - the Cbills from it and how it felt. After playing the 12 v 12, I know for sure I lost a lot on the friends list that's for sure. I admit -- it is not as fun based on the Cbill intake alone. I feel like it takes too much to earn so little now. ALSO the ELO system can go ...... get...... yeah. Pitting pug teams that have no clue up against more then 2 premade 4 man teams is pretty much ********. No way will this work or does it. It is not remotely fair or balanced. -

[XX Sulla XX]

I do not miss 8vs8. 12vs12 makes for a much more interesting game.

[FupDup]

I'd probably like 12v12 better if it wasn't accompanied by the C-Bill depression.

[Deathlike]

I'd like 12v12 better if the queues weren't getting shorter/smaller... seeing the many of the same faces match to match...

It almost feels like I'm playing in a tourney, except we're not in any sort of tourney.

Edited by Deathlike, 09 September 2013 - 07:03 PM.

[Airu]

Miss 8x8, now its just 2 blobs of mechs sitting behind cover taking shots, untill someone decides to push and depending on how successful it is, one of the teams gets quickly reduced to 1-4 mechs (usually lights).

Much less tactic involved because 1 good player cannot make a considerable difference anymore. As soon as enemy has 2 mech advantage in brawl its usually over for the other team.

Making kills also does not bring a big feeling of accomplishment anymore...
12v12 are nice for one type of play, but I want 8x8 back for a different gameplay feeling.

Edited by Airu, 09 September 2013 - 07:39 PM.

[rollermint]

I like it, as a casual player. Its more fun, it feels more "real".

8vs8 feels too sparse, too "arena'ish" if you will, thus I don't actually feel immersed. Well I've always been one for bigger battles. Heck I can only dream of the day where you can have multiple companies of mechs in a huge mechs with varying objectives and combat areas.

But they should allow cuztomizable lobbies, custom choices is always good for the more serious minded players.
The public PUGs should remain 12 vs 12, though.

[Tenam]

I personally prefered 8v8 ... although a little tougher sometimes on the larger maps. The reason I prefer it is most of the time I play paired with one buddy, and in 8v8 two guys can make a difference. We had a measurable impact on the outcome of the match. In 12v12 ... niether of us feel like we have the ability to significantly impact the outcome of the match. When we took out 3 or 4 mechs in 8v8 that was significant, and generally meant a win. When we accomplish the same thing in 12v12 it doesn't mean as much when you then suffer a crushing defeat.

[Dago Red]

I played only a few matches during 8vs8 and gave the game a break for quite a few months but I will say it does seem to lower how much your individual contribution is valued by more than the 50% it should statistically.

I've had a few matches lately where I've got my two kills 500 damage and a slew of ruined arms and side torsos under my belt and when I look around for the biggest blob of teammates to link up with I realize it's me and two lights spread out to the far ends of the map and the 3 guys I was with at the start of that brawl were the biggest batch of our team left. Cue being mopped up by the 6 survivors on the enemy side. Admittedly staying organized would help with that buy ya know pugs it's like herding cats.

I mean I'm liking 12v12 but it's often a real cluster ****. Sometimes a glorious or hilarious one but a cluster nonetheless.

I really wish there was an array of choosable match sizes that you could que up for even without the private match with no pay thing. Keep it to lances so say 4v4 or 8v8 or 12v12. Hell go crazy give us 16v16 as an option.

[Joseph Mallan]

12 Mechs= 1 Company
15 Mechs= 1 Trinary

Most unit formations are based on this. 8 was never the magic number.

[Theodor Kling]

I find 12vs12 much more fun then 8vs8. Sure you might die faster if you stumble in most of the enemy team..but if you bring your team ...

And it is not that loopsided in my experience. I see plenty of games that look like a steamroll but at 6:0 suddenly get turned around, ending in 7:12 or 12:10 or ..anything.
12vs12 is certainly less predictable then 8vs 8.

[Lostdragon]

I would like the option to do either one. They are both fun in different ways.

[A banana in the tailpipe]

12v12 was the best thing to happen to this game since changing the starting locations on the bigger maps.

[Mehlan]

lockwoodx, on 10 September 2013 - 06:48 AM, said:

12v12 was the best thing to happen to this game since changing the starting locations on the bigger maps.

I like 12v12, but think it works better with the larger than smaller maps.... by the same token, I think we need some other..engagement types.. 4 spawn pts, 2 per side... or 3v3/4v4 types engagements, though I'd guess or hope(?) that might tie to the mythical CW stuff.

[Joey Tankblaster]

I think 8v8 was better. One bad move and you die within seconds. It feels just wrong. Typically the game decides within the first 2 minutes of the clash. You end spectating a cap race.

[whiskey tango foxtrot]

Lostdragon, on 10 September 2013 - 06:21 AM, said:

I would like the option to do either one. They are both fun in different ways.

I'll take this a bit further....being able to put any number of people in your group (up to 12) and drop with them on the map of your choice should be an option. (imhp)

[Mehlan]

Joey Tankblaster, on 10 September 2013 - 07:04 AM, said:

I think 8v8 was better. One bad move and you die within seconds. It feels just wrong. Typically the game decides within the first 2 minutes of the clash. You end spectating a cap race.

Don't think that's 100% accurate....seen a few, suprising comebacks, or where the last mech was able to distract the other side to pull the match to a draw(?) Ex: mech and light, assault cap... light on the other team, was able to trick/pull both off the cap and run the clock out... or assault, 3 v 1... but all the were fairly damaged, 2 on cap, 1 was 2/3 across map, the last mech was able to trash the solo, took one of the capping mechs with a lucky shot and then take out the third.

[Kunae]

The reasons it feels this way?

1. The maps are too small.
2. There are no objectives other than blowing up the enemy.

This encourages blob tactics, and blobbing with 12 is much more deadly than blobbing with 8, thus you are seeing the problem more now.