Cathy, on 27 September 2013 - 02:39 PM, said:
Kind of surprised your lights didn't cap win the game, which is where, in this case, there is a weight imbalance, its not so much that there are 6v1 CTF, but your team had 3 lights while they had none, so your team was more nimble, but not able to take punishment, also the atlas was either a disco, or afk, so you lost another 100 tonnes.
Well you know you won't see what mechs the other side has, until it is over. So to speak, there is no strategie you can reply to if you don't know who you are up against.
Cathy, on 27 September 2013 - 02:39 PM, said:
This isn't the worse imbalance by far, I've been in games where the weight difference was over 250, as much as I do think the MM still needs work, and it isn't fun if the mis match is to far apart, you'll also find complants about teams being OP because it was full of lights, that the assaults couldn't hit and made that match unfair, if you care to look far enough in these forums, so being light of tonnage isn't allways a disadvantage
And again, i didn't complain about tonnage discrepancy in the manner that a bulk of lights swarming assault mechs and crush them or other maybee unfair setups.
I complain about the Matchmaker and it's obvious disability in matchmaking to set same chassis even out in one team to the opposing so that chassis/variant stacking is avoided and or balanced by the same amount in the opposite team. Because we all know what happens when a stacked up group of chassis clustering together. For example a cluster Ilyas and or JMs are awaiting with massiv AC power in Forest Colony the 1st one who steps out and or into the cave. Or a cluster of catapults (or other LRM boat able Chassis) hit a brawler setup in Alpine Peaks. These are matchups what couldn't happen, because the same Type (i.e. the possibility of Fotm stacking) is balanced at start in the most part.
And no it wouldn't be to predictable, because it also could be a random mode integretated for the last 1/3 of the setup e.g. the last eight players who get droped in the 12 vs. 12. And if there arn't enough players who queue up, i made a proposal that it would be ok to match up same weight classes. The matchmaker can easy be tuned to make randomness happen. But randomness like a 12 man team is matched up with the enemy team which have half of the setup "the same Battlemech" sux. Because clustering is a normal prozess and desired in pug's, with the standard chat phrase: "Stay together bla bla".
If the setups are balanced, then it comes down to tactic and skill - and this is what we want, or maybee only me. To measuring our skills against each other and not been ****** up by a disadvantage due to the setup. Like a cluster of overheating laser users (caused by chassis/variants like an awsome, hbk 4p) get ruled over by AC/Gauss users in heat heavy maps like Terra Therma and the opposit at frozen maps. As long as we can't chose the map we drope and fix the loadout for this situation, than it needs a equality in the system of drops to eaven out disadvantages at both teams. Otherwise the matchmaker have to check the loadouts for special maps to fit evenly players in battlemechs, what ends up that some maps won't be played that much, because the current meta doesn't support Energy and Missiles or Ballistics weapons and produces FOTMs.
Edited by Kuritaclan, 28 September 2013 - 12:36 AM.
1
