69 replies to this topic

[pwnface]

I just finished this drop with 195ton weight difference. Yes we did win on cap because this was a conquest match but if this were on assault it would have been extremely difficult to win. Anyone who thinks weight doesn't matter is an *****. An equally talented 733c pilot should never lose to a light pilot no matter what. In general, heavier mechs are able to do more damage quickly and have much more survivability. I've killed plenty of isolated atlai in 1v1 situations in my jenner, however it takes at least a full minute of kiting and pinpoint damage to do so. An assault mech can kill a light in a few seconds with decent aim. Regardless of skill, weight DOES matter.

[Sagamore]

Krigg, on 30 October 2013 - 10:03 PM, said:

Please back to mathmaking priority: tonnage >> class >> elo (i just hate when no chans to vin)

The only game-breaking thing I see here is Red Team's beta lance (4-man premade) launching with 4 assaults, not to mention some of the best assault choices in the current state of the game. If that 4-man was on your team instead, the weight balance would swing the other way.

What needs to be fixed here is limiting what premades can take. Allowing a 4-man to take 4 assaults is ridiculous. This was suggested in an AtD or Command Chair a while ago as an upcoming feature where 4 players would have a tonnage cap, forcing more varied mech choices.

[pwnface]

I disagree with limiting what a 4-man premade can queue with. It isn't that difficult to just give the other team a similar composition. I'd be totally fine with a very low chance of a 12 assault vs 12 assault match or 12 light vs 12 light match.

Edited by pwnface, 01 November 2013 - 03:20 PM.

[OneEyed Jack]

Khobai, on 31 October 2013 - 07:23 AM, said:

Yep I remember. Which is why it should just be a strictly enforced 2 of each weight class. Because you cant abuse that.

Really? You can't just take the "best" or heaviest in each weight class? If both sides have the exact same restrictions, it would be no different than now with both sides having the exact same freedoms, except being harder to find matches.

SuomiWarder, on 31 October 2013 - 12:08 PM, said:

Heck, by tonnage you cold even have 9 v 12 if the nine side was all assaults.

What game are you playing? In the game I'm playing S. Hawks and Jagers can put out enough damage at extremely long ranges to chew through the side of an Assault in seconds with minimal exposure to return fire. In the game I'm playing ECM, is moderately important and is mostly on Lights. In the game I'm playing, faster mech can run right around an Assault force and cap for victory**. In the game I'm playing, many Heavies are significantly more dangerous than most Assaults, and many Lighter mechs can easily dismantle larger mechs if they have a numbers advantage, by the simple expedient of encircling.

(** Yes, I'm aware they can camp, but camping cannot possibly win unless the enemy chooses to come to you. Or they can split up and suffer defeat in detail by being outnumbered even worse. Or they can advance. There really are no other options.)

[Sagamore]

pwnface, on 01 November 2013 - 03:15 PM, said:

I disagree with limiting what a 4-man premade can queue with. It isn't that difficult to just give the other team a similar composition. I'd be totally fine with a very low chance of a 12 assault vs 12 assault match or 12 light vs 12 light match.

I understand the criticism but I'm going to wait and see. I think it will make for more interesting games since teams will have to pick more varied mechs. Seeing 3 HGN-733Cs and a Misery in a lance is ridiculous. That is min-maxing to the extreme. If anything, we'll see more medium mechs (or maybe not).

[Lt David Barns]

pwnface, on 01 November 2013 - 02:34 PM, said:

I just finished this drop with 195ton weight difference. Yes we did win on cap because this was a conquest match but if this were on assault it would have been extremely difficult to win. Anyone who thinks weight doesn't matter is an *****.

I just had one such assault match (175ton difference), and on River City no less, which is not exactly the best place for base capping if the enemy force isn't a full out heavy and slow company. (Also ignoring the fact that I absolutely despise base capping without having at least tried to fight the enemy first...)

Anyway, here's the predictable result with some added numbers and an overview of mech classes:



Edit: Sorry for not quite having figured out how to insert a picture without getting an external link, btw.

Edited by Lt David Barns, 02 November 2013 - 12:05 PM.

[Magna Canus]

Joseph Mallan, on 01 November 2013 - 09:18 AM, said:

A really good point, but may I suggest that Skill (and Luck, to a much lesser degree) are actually "the mans" factors along with skill? And as such if everything else is equal, the Assault pilot will win as often as the Light pilot on a fair playing field.

I agree to a point, but all things are not equal. Pit a locust with 4xMG and 1xML vs. an Atlas with "typical" weaponry and the skill gap gets very large. With that kind of equipment the light piolot needs to be significantly more skilled than the assault piolot.

[Magna Canus]

wintersborn, on 01 November 2013 - 11:58 AM, said:

People did this because of what pre mades did to public PUG's, PUG stomping is a game killer. It has chased off more customers than anything else PGI has done. Pre mades ganking noobs just ****** off the noobs and they take their money with them leaving no one to fund the game and no one for teams to gank.

There should be no Pre mades in a PUG period. Teams/Clans etc. need their own games via a lobby etc.

I can't speak for any of the other 4 man groups, but the Foxes, C4 and HHoD do not "gank" PUGs, and as far as I have seen the Law does not either. More often we are trying to coordinate people (that allow it) and enhance the team play.

The bottom line though is that teams and solo's are all just 1 thing, people. I have seen Richard Craniums on both ends of the spectrum and I seriously doubt separating everyone is going to fix that. Instead of griping about bad groups things will just switch over to griping about bad individuals.

The real issue behind the stomps are player base, the MM and ELO. If your ELO does not reflect you "true skill level", if the MM does not take the right factors into account, and if your player base does not allow the MM enough choices, then you get stomps.

[Joseph Mallan]

Magnakanus, on 04 November 2013 - 01:18 AM, said:

I agree to a point, but all things are not equal. Pit a locust with 4xMG and 1xML vs. an Atlas with "typical" weaponry and the skill gap gets very large. With that kind of equipment the light piolot needs to be significantly more skilled than the assault piolot.

I disagree. An equally skilled Locust pilot, will know how to use terrain and speed to stay out of the Atlas's guns while chipping away at the rear armor. It is partly why Assaults have rear firing weapons on TT. Now on an open field... Yeah the Atlas has the edge.

[Magna Canus]

Joseph Mallan, on 04 November 2013 - 04:46 AM, said:

I disagree. An equally skilled Locust pilot, will know how to use terrain and speed to stay out of the Atlas's guns while chipping away at the rear armor. It is partly why Assaults have rear firing weapons on TT. Now on an open field... Yeah the Atlas has the edge.

I think we can agree to disagree on this point which is ok. I tend to count a bit more personal skill towards those that can pull off the "death from one thousand paper cuts" as opposed to the "one shot one kill" version.