21 replies to this topic

[Ice Bones]

This has to be by far the worst weight mismatch I have dropped in in a long time

875 vs 570 tons

6 assaults on one team and none on the other.

PGI needs to do something about this. We all know the weight balance is off, but this is insane.

Edited by Ice Bones, 27 January 2014 - 01:30 AM.

[Peenutts]

Stay away from Skirmish mode. That is where you find the most 4 man or more drops going in with all the meta mechs. These guys are bads and usually need to do these things to make cbills and XP.

Too bad you can't drop into a game with all the rest as solo players. You would see less of this.

[Hexenhammer]

Gonna have to try harder than that. DS5 was running a Steiner cap lance last night and we had a match were a Cataphract and thunderbolt were the only none assaults we had.

[wanderer]

I think I hit the all time championship last night.

We had three 'Mechs in our group under 85 tons. Six were 100 tons, three 85 tons, 1 80 tons, 1 65 tonner, 1 50 tonner.

The other side didn't have a single assault Mech. Whose idea was it to release a matchmaker that doesn't even try to weight balance?

Edited by wanderer, 27 January 2014 - 04:04 PM.

[Adiuvo]

Peenutts, on 27 January 2014 - 03:51 PM, said:

Stay away from Skirmish mode. That is where you find the most 4 man or more drops going in with all the meta mechs. These guys are bads and usually need to do these things to make cbills and XP.

Too bad you can't drop into a game with all the rest as solo players. You would see less of this.

There are 3 'meta' mechs on the red team assuming proper configuration. This doesn't look like a case of 1 4man dominating, it looks like a case of 1 4man light lance doing poorly.

Taking a 4man of lights is generally a poor idea unless all pilots are excellent. It can be fun, but you're not going to win much otherwise.

Edited by Adiuvo, 27 January 2014 - 04:22 PM.

[Roland]

Peenutts, on 27 January 2014 - 03:51 PM, said:

Stay away from Skirmish mode. That is where you find the most 4 man or more drops going in with all the meta mechs. These guys are bads and usually need to do these things to make cbills and XP.

Too bad you can't drop into a game with all the rest as solo players. You would see less of this.

[ReXspec]

Ice Bones, on 27 January 2014 - 12:40 AM, said:

This has to be by far the worst weight mismatch I have dropped in in a long time

875 vs 570 tons

6 assaults on one team and none on the other.

PGI needs to do something about this. We all know the weight balance is off, but this is insane.

Two words:

Battle Value

There is a lot of talk going around that states PGI may change the way matchmaking works...

Just be patient.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

ReXspec, on 27 January 2014 - 05:02 PM, said:

Two words:

Battle Value

There is a lot of talk going around that states PGI may change the way matchmaking works...

Just be patient.

I was patient in 2013. I'm done with patient in 2014.

[Hexenhammer]

I'd like to see BVs in the game. That way modules can be assigned a value and skills can have a value as well

[Sephlock]

Ice Bones, on 27 January 2014 - 12:40 AM, said:

This has to be by far the worst weight mismatch I have dropped in in a long time

875 vs 570 tons

6 assaults on one team and none on the other.

PGI needs to do something about this. We all know the weight balance is off, but this is insane.

If they're going to do that, they need to take into account which mechs are objectively terrible.

For example, an Awesome should only count as 35 ton mech. A Pretty baby should only count as much as a Locust.

A locust should count as... as... half a locust . Don't ask me how it'd work!

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Sephlock, on 27 January 2014 - 05:12 PM, said:

If they're going to do that, they need to take into account which mechs are objectively terrible.

For example, an Awesome should only count as 35 ton mech. A Pretty baby should only count as much as a Locust.

A locust should count as... as... half a locust . Don't ask me how it'd work!

Well, I don't know. I'd rather have a Raven, Spider or Jenner than an Awesome...so might be that all Awesome's are Locusts.

[Sephlock]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 27 January 2014 - 05:14 PM, said:

Well, I don't know. I'd rather have a Raven, Spider or Jenner than an Awesome...so might be that all Awesome's are Locusts.

Maybe when they roll out mech specific efficiencies, they should give the Awesome immunity to ghost heat issues or something .

[Sarsaparilla Kid]

Yes, immunity to ghost heat, because right now the Awesome suffers from Ghost Tonnage issues, which is apparent if they are only as good as a Locust from what y'all said above...

[Roadkill]

The Awesome suffers from Ghost Barn Doors. If you shoot anywhere in its general vicinity, you hit CT.

[Coralld]

Ice Bones, on 27 January 2014 - 12:40 AM, said:

This has to be by far the worst weight mismatch I have dropped in in a long time

875 vs 570 tons

6 assaults on one team and none on the other.

PGI needs to do something about this. We all know the weight balance is off, but this is insane.

You think that's bad? Yesterday I was dropping with 2 of my merc buddies and the MM put us against a team with 10 Assaults, 1 Victor and the rest were Atlases and Highlanders with a random Blackjack and Quickdraw to fill out their team of 12. We only had 3 Assaults on our team, a Victor, Stalker, and a Highlander, with the rest of our team made up of 2 Heavies, 3 Mediums and 2 Lights for a grand total of 10 sense we were down 2 players from the very start. They were not disco, we just flat out got dropped with only 10 people.

We figured that the MM was saying to us 'f*ck you guys' or that the MM really thought we were that amazing.

[Nippon]

I like competition, but that was a little bit much. Even battle value has its limit
910t vs 550t

[wwiiogre]

Like I have said many times, PGI does not use a matchmaker to make games that are balanced. They merely use the matchmaker to try to give everyone a 50/50 win/loss percentage. If you have a high elo, and you drop solo all you will see are games like the above almost 50% of the time. The other 50% will still be bad with about 20% you win. So since PGI does not factor in tonnage whatsoever, if you drop in a light or a medium or even a lighter Heavy you will still almost always face the above.

In my last 100 drops, I have had exactly two matches that ended with either 4v4, 3v3, 2v2 and only one match that ended 1v1. Which means 98 matches were won by a margin of greater than 6 mechs on oneside or a stomp. Most were won by a margin of 10 or more mechs. Meaning PGI is not trying to make even matches, merely trying to give everyone a participation ribbon or in other words keep most players in the middle of the bell curve for win/loss.

I had two matches yesterday that had a disparity of 400 tons. I had more than 50% of my drops where our side were all solos and the other side had, 1 or 2 4mans. I had 50% of our matches where we were either short one or two players at start. And a few more that people on our side just d/c'd in the first few minutes.

It really is by choice that we have the current elo matchmaker from PGI. Just look at Paul's posts in the command chair section of this forum. He says and I am gonna just paraphrase here, 'everything is working as intended' or 'nothing to see here, move along'.

Now we know that when UI 2.0 launches supposedly we get a new matchmaker. But with statements like that from Paul right before UI 2.0 launches it makes you cringe. Now he could be trolling us, as is his way. Or we are in for more of the same. Which would be a shame. Especially since the announcement that CW is most of a year away still.

Chris

Edited by wwiiogre, 29 January 2014 - 10:10 AM.

[Mawai]

In the matches posted, I think the issue is pre-made teams on both sides. There is likely a pre-made group of mostly assaults assigned to one team and a pre-made group of mostly lights assigned to the other. The matchmaker appears to ignore mech classes within groups ... perhaps only considering the group ELO when forming a match. Unfortunately, the pre and post game screens do not mark group members so it is impossible to be certain. However, in the poorly tonnage matched games I have played ... the biggest discrepancies were due to pre-made groups dropping mostly assault or mostly lights ... and the worst cases occurred when one or more of these groups are assigned to opposing teams.

[TygerLily]

Hexenhammer, on 27 January 2014 - 05:11 PM, said:

I'd like to see BVs in the game. That way modules can be assigned a value and skills can have a value as well

I would too...they could even transfer the heatscale (aka ghostheat) concept in. Mounting X amount of a weapon type scales your BV up...in fact, do this and you can drop the heatscale mechanic all together. AND they can just tweak it behind the scenes based on feedback without altering gameplay.

Bring your crazy meta build...you might be able to afford two and then round your team out with Awesomes, Hunchy 4J's and Locusts which underperform but, hey, they're cheap...Plop in some super ace pilots and you've got a good team. It'd almost emphasize piloting as the "competitive" factor and not build...

Filter that through weight limits and frame it in Community Warfare...Oh snap, the Kuritans took the major PPC producing planet on the map? Their PPC BV just went down 2%, everyone else is up 4%...

mmm, that sounds good. I'll have that...

Edited by TygerLily, 29 January 2014 - 10:33 AM.

[Mightyrant]

Ok, first of all, I pilot a CN9-AL most frequently.

Yesterday I played a game in the desert where my team didn't have a single mech over 65 tons and the opposing team had on my count 7 assaults. My team won the game overwhelmingly (12-3). Please tell me again how it's unfair? It's a challenge to be risen to. Sometimes people get screwed. It's not the mechs it's the players. Put me against an atlas head on any day and I'll come close if not win. Personally, weight has nothing to do with it. Strategy wins. Use your speed? Don't meta game? Everything is fair once you can use a mech the way it was designed to be used.