376 replies to this topic

[LawDawg]

Trauglodyte, on 26 November 2013 - 03:01 PM, said:

One thing to note, and I've been championing this for a while, if PGI would allow players to queue up multiple mechs at a time, some of this may not even be that much of an issue. If I can queue up all 15 of my mechs, which range from 20 tons to 100 tons, it would inject 15 different weights and 4 different ELO ratings into the system. If we assume that there are, and I'll be optimistic, 1000 people on during prime time and that each player has 5 mechs, that is 5000 different mechs from which to choose along with maybe 4000 different ELOs (at max) with which to create a 24 man match.

As to the weight matching, I welcome it because I want to see more mechs out there. Bring on the horror of Trebuchet packs

For pug matches, THAT would be awesome! Q up 4 and let the MM drop you in whatever weight class was available. Would cut down on wait times for sure.

[Alex Warden]

Hellcat420, on 26 November 2013 - 03:02 PM, said:

the reason to bring a few locusts is to load the rest of the team up with heavy and assault mechs.

not a huge problem either... the locusts die quickly, and 2 fast lighthunters can desintegrate an assault very well... if i have 4 of those and 2 or 3 tanks and a few heavies, well you can bring a few more assaults if you want... but that´s all theoretical assumptions, no need to argue about the loadouts now

stjobe, on 26 November 2013 - 03:05 PM, said:

And is that really the direction we want the game to take? More reasons not to drive a light?

No, we need more reasons to take our sub-60 ton 'mechs on the field; more reasons to do so and be a productive and contributing team member. And the only way to do so is to have some sort of role warfare in place before tonnage limits - to do it the other way may well spell doom for MWO.

i´m only talking about locusts which would be taken to lower the overall tonnage to make space for heavier mechs...

i´d never run a 12 man without ravens or the like

[LawDawg]

Hellcat420, on 26 November 2013 - 03:02 PM, said:

the reason to bring a few locusts is to load the rest of the team up with heavy and assault mechs.

Alex Warden, on 26 November 2013 - 03:09 PM, said:

not a huge problem either... the locusts die quickly, and 2 fast lighthunters can desintegrate an assault very well... if i have 4 of those and 2 or 3 tanks and a few heavies, well you can bring a few more assaults if you want... but that´s all theoretical assumptions, no need to argue about the loadouts now



i´m only talking about locusts which would be taken to lower the overall tonnage to make space for heavier mechs...

i´d never run a 12 man without ravens or the like

Considering the Locust and its output, along with how easy it is to kill. I would much rather drop weight somewhere else to get up to the spider/raven or jenner. Locust just isnt worth. Spider with ECM, could make the diff. and hold off lights at your back door. Locust cant do that. A Jenner would do to. Just say no to a Locust............

Edited by LawDog, 26 November 2013 - 03:18 PM.

[Alex Warden]

LawDog, on 26 November 2013 - 03:15 PM, said:

Considering the Locust and its output, along with how easy it is to kill. I would much rather drop weight somewhere else to get up to the spider or jenner. Locust just isnt worth. Spider with ECM, could make the diff. and hold of lights at your back door. Locust cant do that. A Jenner would be would do to. Just say no to a Locust............

yep, that´s what i am talkin about there you start considering "what if i take this instead of that, where do i take the tonnage from" etc.

makes things more interesting imho...at least in 12vs12 matches... as for the pug matches, i´d go with the "multiple mech que" suggested above

Edited by Alex Warden, 26 November 2013 - 03:18 PM.

[LawDawg]

Makes the game a {Scrap} more interesting doesn't it!? And I for one love it!

I really like the "Multipul mech Que suggestion."

Edited by LawDog, 26 November 2013 - 03:21 PM.

[Zyllos]

Werewolf486, on 26 November 2013 - 02:43 PM, said:

...First they need a randomizer for the weight, otherwise we will have the same boring weight limit and in a month it'll be really boring....

This is extremely true.

Having weight limits be modified based on mission and map really effects the entire gameplay. This can lead to interesting changes in gameplay later for CW.

[Screech]

Folks are looking at tonnage limits in a vacuum. I think tonnage limits on groups will go into play at the same time as the removal of group size limits. Not sure if it will include the 12 man as well, but it should if they are serious about CW being meaningful.

[LawDawg]

IMHO, as was stated earlier. Say you Que 4 mechs from 4 different weight classes. MM drops you into a match to balance the "Weight" of mechs dropped into match on each teams.

Can that over time get boring? Yes. Doesn't any game? How many times you play single play BF4? or any other? (There are a few ive ran through 10+ times).

But they are steadily improving, and this is one stepping stone. Now Im no fan boy. You can check my post to Garth and Bryan.

I want data, but I honestly think this is a step in the right direction. I just hope it is correctly implemented and without to many issues or blow back..

[LawDawg]

Screech, on 26 November 2013 - 04:01 PM, said:

Folks are looking at tonnage limits in a vacuum. I think tonnage limits on groups will go into play at the same time as the removal of group size limits. Not sure if it will include the 12 man as well, but it should if they are serious about CW being meaningful.

So your saying, 1v1, 2v2, 4v4....ect? Well that would be excellent! But wasnt that suppose to happen with CW which is 3-9 months away? (3 being SHORT STICK). Solaris (for 1v1 and such)

Edited by LawDog, 26 November 2013 - 04:15 PM.

[Roadbeer]

LawDog, on 26 November 2013 - 04:13 PM, said:

So your saying, 1v1, 2v2, 4v4....ect? Well that would be excellent! But wasnt that suppose to happen with CW which is 3-9 months away? (3 being SHORT STICK). Solaris

No so much that, as with the addition of weight restrictions is supposed to be the removal of the group size cap. So weight would be balanced by the size of the group (Say the Weight cap on a 5 player group would be 325 tons, that would average 65 tons per player)

[LawDawg]

So max limit is 400 tonnes.

Team A> 4 Atlai = capped at tonnage

Team B> Can bring however many mechs they want (12 Spiders to make up 360 tonnes of 400)?

Would that ever happen, no. just try to understand what your saying.

<EXAMPLE>

Edited by LawDog, 26 November 2013 - 04:25 PM.

[Jman5]

Hellcat420, on 26 November 2013 - 02:42 PM, said:

so with tonnage limits what is there to stop a team from throwing a few locusts on the team then loading the rest up with heavy and assault mechs? tonage limits are not the way to go to have more balanced matches.

With 4-man premades you can't just decide that one lance is going to be the fail-locust lance while the 2 other lances will be full of assaults. Weight limits will have upper and lower bounds for premade teams as well as the team overall. So if there are 4 of you in a premade, you'll have say a 210 minimum and 240 max tonnage to work with. The end result will be a 12 man team between 630-730 tons. Now if you want to bring 2 locusts for every 2 highlanders, that's fine. But your team isn't exactly going be stellar with half your mechs relegated to Locusts.

Right now I'm seeing 2/3 - 3/4 of my team exclusively in assaults and heavies. After this we're going to see much more equal representation which is what we should all want.

Edited by Jman5, 26 November 2013 - 04:28 PM.

[Roadbeer]

LawDog, on 26 November 2013 - 04:19 PM, said:

So max limit is 400 tonnes.

Team A> 4 Atlai = capped at tonnage

Team B> Can bring however many mechs they want to make up 400 tonnes?

<EXAMPLE>

No, there will be min/max numbers based off the size of the group. Ok, using my theoretical max of 325 tons for a 5 player group, there would also be a minimum of, oh lets say 280 tons. The Group window wouldn't allow them to launch with 5 atlases because it would be over the max 325, nor would it let them launch with 5 Jenners because it would be below the 280 minimum. Thus a mixed group is required to fall within the range of 280 - 325.

Having said that, a whole team will have a max of. 780 Tons for all 12 members. and a minimum of 700 Tons. The 5 player group who caps out with their allotted 325 tons, leaves 455 tons for the other 7 members of the team (other premades and pugs) to fill in.

These numbers are just examples, but I hope I explained it correctly.

[LawDawg]

Jman5, on 26 November 2013 - 04:24 PM, said:

With 4-man premades you can't just decide that one lance is going to be the fail-locust lance while the 2 other lances will be full of assaults. Weight limits will have upper and lower bounds for premade teams as well as the team overall. So if there are 4 of you in a premade, you'll have say a 210 minimum and 240 max tonnage to work with. The end result will be a 12 man team between 630-730 tons. Now if you want to bring 2 locusts and 2 highlanders, that's fine. But your team isn't exactly going be stellar with half your mechs relegated to Locusts.

Right now I'm seeing 2/3 - 3/4 of my team exclusively in assaults and heavies. After this we're going to see much more equal representation which is what we should all want.

Preach it!

[Prezimonto]

stjobe, on 26 November 2013 - 02:49 PM, said:

Everyone that sees tonnage limits as some kind of salvation for MWO seem to think it's not them who will be forced to drop in the Locust so that their team mates can have fun in their heavies and assaults.

I'm with Fup on this one; role warfare is way more important to the future of MWO than tonnage limits.

Role warfare, done properly, could be amazing. I fear it will never be implemented as it requires too many moving pieces to change, game modes, in game rewards, better team organization tools. They've added many of these things, in a very half-arsed fashion, and I suspect they think it's good enough, when it's clearly not.

[Mycrus]

Victor Morson, on 26 November 2013 - 02:18 PM, said:

Playing pug 12 mans is a tedious and frustrating experience since you never know what weight you are going up against, and have to ton up insanely to do well in.

Neg.

A group of seven thwee thwee charlees get rushed by fast brawlers and supported by lurms and lights is kibble.

They don't have the speed to fight a brawling match.

The problem with 12-man is that players have all stagnated into the long range "meta" and have actually forgotten how to brawl.

What is funny is the squadron panic you notice when the l33t 12-man playurz succumb to a good 'ole pug zerg rush!

So in a very intended pun - L2P 12s

You need video evidence?

[Vercinaigh]

This gon be gud. The outrage this is going to have will be amazing. I am all about removing assault warrior online, but facignt he fact of 90%+ of this population knowing less than 30% of this game and it's mechanics will lead to a huge outcry. Plus what if a 4 man lance needs to practice a 4 atlas drop for their upcoming match? WELL *** U. This is very half arsed and i think proper weight matching is the ultimately better and most flexibile idea if they can do it proper.

No matter how good this looks on paper, this is going to produce the largest backlash this community has seen yet. That silent majoirty you hear so much about, that put a lot of money into the game etc? Be ready to hear from them, en mass.

[Roadbeer]

Vercinaigh, on 26 November 2013 - 04:42 PM, said:

This gon be gud. The outrage this is going to have will be amazing. I am all about removing assault warrior online, but facignt he fact of 90%+ of this population knowing less than 30% of this game and it's mechanics will lead to a huge outcry. Plus what if a 4 man lance needs to practice a 4 atlas drop for their upcoming match? WELL *** U. This is very half arsed and i think proper weight matching is the ultimately better and most flexibile idea if they can do it proper.

No matter how good this looks on paper, this is going to produce the largest backlash this community has seen yet. That silent majoirty you hear so much about, that put a lot of money into the game etc? Be ready to hear from them, en mass.

[Deathlike]

Vercinaigh, on 26 November 2013 - 04:42 PM, said:

No matter how good this looks on paper, this is going to produce the largest backlash this community has seen yet. That silent majoirty you hear so much about, that put a lot of money into the game etc? Be ready to hear from them, en mass.

Well, I'd rather have "some fairness" in terms of tonnage, but after last night's play where I was the "lightest mech" on my team (the Shadowhawk) and everyone else was bigger than me... that is a serious problem (and btw, that was a sad win).

Edited by Deathlike, 26 November 2013 - 04:50 PM.

[Rattlehead NZ]

If you solo drop then you can take whatever you want with no restrictions. Being in a group of 2 or more already is an advantage over pugs so having a weight min/max limit stops the 4 man groups from using nothing but assaults or lights.

OMG mediums and heavies becoming the backbone of a lance, what ever shall we do