376 replies to this topic

[Macbrea]

Originally as of Dev 46 they were looking at the follow.

Group Size	Minimum Tonnage	Maximum Tonnage
2	40	125
3	160	180
4	210	245
5	265	305
6	315	365
7	370	425
8	420	485
9	475	545
10	525	605
11	580	665
12	630	730

This means in 12 man you would have to choose 12 mechs that weigh between 630 and 730 tons. That gives all 12 mechs 60 tons. If anyone takes less then 60 tons you can fit more assaults.

[ssm]

o0Marduk0o, on 27 November 2013 - 06:00 AM, said:

I hope the limit will be lower.

But I have no clue what you mean with the first sentence.

Ok, then let's clarify - I think that if you have free 120 ton 'slot', it's better idea to take Jagermech & Shadow Hawk than Atlas & Locust (or at the very least both pairs would be viable choices)

Edited by ssm, 27 November 2013 - 06:07 AM.

[o0Marduk0o]

ssm, on 27 November 2013 - 06:05 AM, said:

Ok, then let's clarify - I think that if you have free 120 ton 'slot', it's better idea to take Jagermech & Shadow Hawk than Atlas & Locust (or at the very least both pairs would be viable)

Yes, for sure.

[Joseph Mallan]

Modo44, on 27 November 2013 - 05:55 AM, said:

Go get funding for an SP campaign, then. This is a multiplayer game, and outside of private play, every single match is considered competitive.

And yet, people wanna see limits set. If you say you are competitive, you wouldn't want to limit your enemy from bringing their A game. I was dropping with a mix of Lawmen and Devil Dogs(Plug a fellow Lyran Group) last night. We ran into a few teams that had 4-6 Assaults More than we had(2 assault, 1 Heavy, 1 Light IIRC). Our matches ended well with our worst loss being 8-12. And the remaining 4... well a stiff breeze may have toppled them. We competed with the heavier teams and performed well even in loss.

[Tolkien]

o0Marduk0o, on 27 November 2013 - 05:51 AM, said:

You beat light mechs with mediums and light mechs are the only way to bring as much assaults as possible.

I actually think it will bifurcate into more lights+less assaults, and not move to the center.

There's a reason there's very little action in the middle of the weight range right now and lowering the sum will probably just end up in more good lights (jenners, spiders mostly), more good heavies, and less assaults.

TLDR I don't think lower weight limits will make the G in my hunchback 4G(f) stand for 'good choice'.

[Modo44]

People want limits to the differences between teams, because every match is competitive, so getting ****** randomly makes for an extremely bad experience. Nobody has issues with private matches having completely free team composition.

[Joseph Mallan]

Modo44, on 27 November 2013 - 06:15 AM, said:

People want limits to the differences between teams, because every match is competitive, so getting ****** randomly makes for an extremely bad experience. Nobody has issues with private matches having completely free team composition.

This is fine for tournament players, I am not here to play tournaments. I'm here to play a futuristic war game. War is the BIG competition and the rules there are "All's fair", so gimme that and give the Sportsmen Solaris 7.

[GRiPSViGiL]

This will let skill decide games for the most part instead of tonnage.

[Joseph Mallan]

Macbrea, on 27 November 2013 - 06:04 AM, said:

Originally as of Dev 46 they were looking at the follow.

Group Size	Minimum Tonnage	Maximum Tonnage
2	40	125
3	160	180
4	210	245
5	265	305
6	315	365
7	370	425
8	420	485
9	475	545
10	525	605
11	580	665
12	630	730

This means in 12 man you would have to choose 12 mechs that weigh between 630 and 730 tons. That gives all 12 mechs 60 tons. If anyone takes less then 60 tons you can fit more assaults.

So how are they going to accommodate Zeta Battalion of the Dragoons? The 10th Lyran Guards, Davion Assault Guards? These are Canon Units some of us players will eventually be a part of?

[ssm]

Joseph Mallan, on 27 November 2013 - 06:18 AM, said:

This is fine for tournament players, I am not here to play tournaments. I'm here to play a futuristic war game. War is the BIG competition and the rules there are "All's fair", so gimme that and give the Sportsmen Solaris 7.

Except one of the rules of this war is "Assaults are so rare and expensive that it's nearly impossiblile to fileld more than 2-3 per company deployment"

At least, PGI is trying to emulate that rule, albeit very softly.

Joseph Mallan, on 27 November 2013 - 06:22 AM, said:

So how are they going to accommodate Zeta Battalion of the Dragoons? The 10th Lyran Guards, Davion Assault Guards? These are Canon Units some of us players will eventually be a part of?

While iconic, we can manage without those units. This game had it's share of self-named "Assault Guards" and "Zeta Batallions", and well, balance is more important than Your "let's stomp pubbies in our Assault 8-man" Assault Guard-y immersion.

Edited by ssm, 27 November 2013 - 06:33 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

ssm, on 27 November 2013 - 06:24 AM, said:

Except one of the rules of this war is "Assaults are so rare and expensive that it's nearly impossiblile to fileld more than 2-3 per company deployment"

At least, PGI is trying to emulate that rule, albeit very softly.

Again what about the Canon Units that are pure to near pure Assaults? I can understand the limits for Us Mercs and Lone Wolfs. But the day will eventually come when I will be a 10th Lyran Guard, and the "Thundering Elephants" were called such cause they were heavy (and Unimaginative)

[ssm]

Joseph Mallan, on 27 November 2013 - 06:33 AM, said:

Again what about the Canon Units that are pure to near pure Assaults? I can understand the limits for Us Mercs and Lone Wolfs. But the day will eventually come when I will be a 10th Lyran Guard, and the "Thundering Elephants" were called such cause they were heavy (and Unimaginative)

While iconic, we can manage without those units. This game had it's share of self-named "Assault Guards" and "Zeta Batallions", and well, balance is more important than Your "let's stomp pubbies in our Assault 8-man" Assault Guard-y immersion.

[Rushin Roulette]

Im all for weight matching... make it so that the team sizes are not limited and that the Assault players with 100 Tons find out that they are matching their 100 Ton Atlas against five 20 Ton Locusts at 170 KPH .

As for dropweight limits as opposed to weight class limits... Im all for dropweight limits. At least you wont be fielding a balacned team against a bunch of trolls with 10 Assaults and 2 Lightmechs any more.

For class matching.. you will have games where your team of 1 Locust, 1 Cicada, 1 Dragon and 1 Awsome comes up against a team of 1 Jenner, 1 Shadowhawk, 1 Orion and 1 Atlas (Comes out at 200 Tons vs. 265 Tons... not too much difference, but if you multiply his by 3 for the 12 vs. 12 matching you have a weight difference of nearly 200 Tons)

[DEN_Ninja]

I wish that you could match tonnage and not be forced to have a 12 man team.

If we implemented the system from MechCommander of having a total weight limit and a 12-16 mech limit per team it would nice.
Because it is your idiotic choice to take 6 Atlas/Highlander on Alpine Conquest and not bring 12 L-M-H-A Team.

Your punishment for matching weight with high tonnage mechs to deploy less mechs. There's your role warfare. Mediums and heavies being more efficient for a team and the slot for the team rather than having to match 12 mechs with a tonnage restriction. Similarly, your choice for matching low tonnage is having the 12 mechs that are fast but you lack any real decent amount of firepower as opposed to a team stocked with nothing but dragons or jagers and shadowhawks.

[Modo44]

Joseph Mallan, on 27 November 2013 - 06:18 AM, said:

This is fine for tournament players, I am not here to play tournaments. I'm here to play a futuristic war game. War is the BIG competition and the rules there are "All's fair", so gimme that and give the Sportsmen Solaris 7.

So play solo, and enjoy the *** *******. What you ask for is currently in the game, thank the matchmaker.

[Karl Streiger]

Joseph Mallan, on 27 November 2013 - 06:33 AM, said:

Again what about the Canon Units that are pure to near pure Assaults? I can understand the limits for Us Mercs and Lone Wolfs. But the day will eventually come when I will be a 10th Lyran Guard, and the "Thundering Elephants" were called such cause they were heavy (and Unimaginative)

Well - if we have Interstellar Campagins - the units will be important.
If there is an Assault Drop to recapture Hesperus II or devastate a offense before it begann like on Dromini IV - than you need glorious heavy units.

Assault Mechs are the Heavy Tiger Tanks of BattleTech - use them in stationary defense or concentrate assaults and everything is fine. But the maintenance costs, slow action radius and a couple of other reasons made them impractical for "all day time operations"

However - I don't think that CW get near to IS-Wars or other fan made campaign settings.
So the overwhelming drop of 1200ton of might that attack an outpost defended by 4 UrbanMechs will never happen.
It won't happen that a Stock Panther or Vindicator would serve another task but to be a frag.

[stjobe]

ssm, on 27 November 2013 - 04:56 AM, said:

"Proper role warfare" probably wouldn't help a lot. What would be role for mediums in this magic "proper role warfare" that wouldn't involve destroying other mechs?

(in which they would still be sub-optimal compared to heavies/assaults and even lights)

The largest problem with mediums is that due to customization and pilot skills heavies do the medium's job better than they do.

Mediums are generally supposed to be jack-of-all-trades, mobile enough to react to changes in the engagement; enough firepower and armour to make a difference in shoring up a weakened position or add weight to a breach of the enemy line. Fast enough to chase off lights from their less mobile assaults and heavies, and durable enough to not implode when in the main battle-line.

In the current MWO, all that is better done with a heavy 'mech; a 'mech that really shouldn't be able to fill those roles, but due to our very unrestricted customization and our piloting skills it's easy to make a very mobile, heavily armed and armoured heavy - completely invalidating the mediums as a class.

Looking at the other end of the scale, one of the heavier lights like the Jenner can easily outperform the lighter mediums in the skirmisher role; again due to customization and pilot skills.

So let me rephrase and expand on what "proper role warfare" should be; it starts with the removal of the current piloting skills; no more Speed Tweak, no more Twist X - no more heavies with medium mobility.

It then continues with pilot skills along the lines of Dev Blog 4: Role Warfare, and finally it ends with role-specific XP/CB rewards, making doing a great job in your role just as rewarding as destroying the enemy is currently. A scout should be able to earn as much XP/CB as a brawler, if he does a good job of scouting and spotting. But that hinges on there existing tools to do the job and rewards to reward doing those jobs - and neither exists currently.

Having nothing of the above and just implementing tonnage limits is insanity. It doesn't make the game better, it just makes it more restrictive.

[Joseph Mallan]

Modo44, on 27 November 2013 - 06:39 AM, said:

So play solo, and enjoy the *** *******. What you ask for is currently in the game, thank the matchmaker.

And it needs a place in the coming game. I never wanna know that my enemy is going to be "sporting" unless it is a Jade Falcon or Clan Wolf Unit. They are supposed to tell me what they are bringing, and then match what I have to offer.

Murphy's Law is made up of more than just me. And i as a Command we choose to be "Assault Heavy" Why should we be limited due to Your wishes?

Karl Streiger, on 27 November 2013 - 06:43 AM, said:

Well - if we have Interstellar Campagins - the units will be important.
If there is an Assault Drop to recapture Hesperus II or devastate a offense before it begann like on Dromini IV - than you need glorious heavy units.

Assault Mechs are the Heavy Tiger Tanks of BattleTech - use them in stationary defense or concentrate assaults and everything is fine. But the maintenance costs, slow action radius and a couple of other reasons made them impractical for "all day time operations"

However - I don't think that CW get near to IS-Wars or other fan made campaign settings.
So the overwhelming drop of 1200ton of might that attack an outpost defended by 4 UrbanMechs will never happen.
It won't happen that a Stock Panther or Vindicator would serve another task but to be a frag.

CW should not take Fan made Campaigns into consideration, But for Canon The Dragoon Zeta Battalion was populated by the Heaviest Units

Quote

Historical Turning Points: Misery

• When rolling for units only use the Heavy or Assault columns; also, Zeta may use the Force the Initiative special ability, and receives double the modifiers when an opposing player attempts to Force the Initiative on them.

So IF Murphy's attacks these guys, Mediums and Lights should not be present! At All! I for one don't want to see any if i have the misfortune of riding against them.

[DEN_Ninja]

stjobe, on 27 November 2013 - 06:50 AM, said:

The largest problem with mediums is that due to customization and pilot skills heavies do the medium's job better than they do.

Mediums are generally supposed to be jack-of-all-trades, mobile enough to react to changes in the engagement; enough firepower and armour to make a difference in shoring up a weakened position or add weight to a breach of the enemy line. Fast enough to chase off lights from their less mobile assaults and heavies, and durable enough to not implode when in the main battle-line.

In the current MWO, all that is better done with a heavy 'mech; a 'mech that really shouldn't be able to fill those roles, but due to our very unrestricted customization and our piloting skills it's easy to make a very mobile, heavily armed and armoured heavy - completely invalidating the mediums as a class.

Looking at the other end of the scale, one of the heavier lights like the Jenner can easily outperform the lighter mediums in the skirmisher role; again due to customization and pilot skills.

So let me rephrase and expand on what "proper role warfare" should be; it starts with the removal of the current piloting skills; no more Speed Tweak, no more Twist X - no more heavies with medium mobility.

It then continues with pilot skills along the lines of Dev Blog 4: Role Warfare, and finally it ends with role-specific XP/CB rewards, making doing a great job in your role just as rewarding as destroying the enemy is currently. A scout should be able to earn as much XP/CB as a brawler, if he does a good job of scouting and spotting. But that hinges on there existing tools to do the job and rewards to reward doing those jobs - and neither exists currently.

Having nothing of the above and just implementing tonnage limits is insanity. It doesn't make the game better, it just makes it more restrictive.

Be glad that Bryan considers the Pilot Skills to still be a placeholder menu full of placeholder skills and is possibly subject to change in the future. How soon I don't know. It is up to them to develop it further because I find it kinda silly my jester reaches nearly 100 kph. I tend to use a STD with it anyways and operate it with 64 kph just fine if not better

[Ngamok]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 26 November 2013 - 02:49 PM, said:

you can still play what you want to play. but your team will need to be in the same tonnage range.

I love watching the QQ swing from 10 assaults per team to "if i cant do what i want, im not paying" whines like this.

hopefully some day PGI will be able to add 3 tonnage variances, 1 for a light/med/hvy ton drop, 1 for a full range drop, and 1 for the assault babies that cant handle anything unless their suckling from the teat of the 733C.

Also, to add to that, a Lobby system will also help some that way people can set up 3,3,3,3 matches or all mediums or something as well.