

835T Vs 470T- Drop Balance Is Working Great!
Started by DaddyP1G, Jan 13 2014 07:37 AM
166 replies to this topic
#1
Posted 13 January 2014 - 07:37 AM
You don't need to have a perfectly balanced drop all the time, but try to get close. I was just in a game that was 835 Tons vs. 470 Tons. 12-0
6 lights, 5 mediums (2 were cicadas so in theory 8 lights), 1 heavy
VS.
1 light, 4 mediums, 2 heavies and 5 assaults (2 HGH, 3 Atlas)
6 lights, 5 mediums (2 were cicadas so in theory 8 lights), 1 heavy
VS.
1 light, 4 mediums, 2 heavies and 5 assaults (2 HGH, 3 Atlas)
#2
Posted 13 January 2014 - 07:42 AM
Let me guess..the atlas were a premade?
#3
Posted 13 January 2014 - 07:44 AM
Hard mode engaged !
But honestly, too many people in assaults in the queue and the MM has to find a spot for them.
But honestly, too many people in assaults in the queue and the MM has to find a spot for them.
#4
Posted 13 January 2014 - 07:47 AM
I'm glad someone finally got the nerve to post on this

#5
Posted 13 January 2014 - 08:03 AM
I was in a drop against 8 AS7-D-DCs, that seems to be the premade stomp bot of choice, and my side having no counter to the ecm let alone the the outright disregard for weight balance. The four other bots on their side were a AC40 Jager, 2 ecm spiders, and a DeathKnell. My side was mostly a mixture of mediums and lights, with a couple catapults, and our one assualt was an Awesome. Not one mech on my side with ecm, or tag. I myself was in a Locust, was alpha'd on first contact, without even seeing the enemy, thanks to all thier ecm coverage.
The current match maker stinks, it really needs to stop putting multiple pre-mades on one side, needs more weight balance, and needs to take into account ecm.
The current match maker stinks, it really needs to stop putting multiple pre-mades on one side, needs more weight balance, and needs to take into account ecm.
#6
Posted 13 January 2014 - 08:05 AM
Sandpit, on 13 January 2014 - 07:47 AM, said:
I'm glad someone finally got the nerve to post on this 

I'm glad someone finally got around to fixing this problem...oh wait...maybe it's the glacial pace at which things are fixed that causes repeat posts.
Even Russ is admitting that the patches are small and not doing much in anticipation of the BIG FEBRUARY 4 PATCH WOO.
#8
Posted 13 January 2014 - 08:30 AM
Pics or it didn't happen.

#9
Posted 13 January 2014 - 08:30 AM
Pic's or didin't happen bro!
Nah, just kidding.
Something seems off about all the drops I seen my brother in. And when I pilot his mech's for him. But their usually not that glaring of an issue.
Guess PGI put the MM on hard-mode for everybody. Like Ngamok said.
Edit: Damnit Noesis! You too fast man!
Nah, just kidding.
Something seems off about all the drops I seen my brother in. And when I pilot his mech's for him. But their usually not that glaring of an issue.
Guess PGI put the MM on hard-mode for everybody. Like Ngamok said.

Edit: Damnit Noesis! You too fast man!
Edited by AaronWolf, 13 January 2014 - 08:31 AM.
#13
Posted 13 January 2014 - 08:41 AM
You could fix it using a Fußleistenmontagegerüst...

#15
Posted 13 January 2014 - 08:50 AM
Kaden Kildares, on 13 January 2014 - 07:37 AM, said:
You don't need to have a perfectly balanced drop all the time, but try to get close. I was just in a game that was 835 Tons vs. 470 Tons. 12-0
6 lights, 5 mediums (2 were cicadas so in theory 8 lights), 1 heavy
VS.
1 light, 4 mediums, 2 heavies and 5 assaults (2 HGH, 3 Atlas)
6 lights, 5 mediums (2 were cicadas so in theory 8 lights), 1 heavy
VS.
1 light, 4 mediums, 2 heavies and 5 assaults (2 HGH, 3 Atlas)
Why?
Seriously, Why does it have to be balances every time? I truly don't understand the logic of a random number generator making everything balanced. I mean frankly Every time a Jenner or a Raven beats me I should be raising Holy Hel! Cause I out weight it by 2.86 times instead of the 1.77 times the winning team in your scenario had! I should never lose... Like Ever!
#20
Posted 13 January 2014 - 09:21 AM
Pics or I can't believe you!



1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users