43 replies to this topic

[Rebas Kradd]

and zero, on 05 February 2014 - 07:35 PM, said:

12 man games are vastly more likely to end in a complete stomp than 8 mans due to the significantly great snowball effect.

And yet, they're not.

[dario03]

I would love matches with different team sizes. But does that affect server load? I thought I remember people saying that moving to 12v12 let the game handle more players with less server requirements.

[seymourbalzac]

8v8 was way better then 12v12 IMO and I was sad the day they made the change.

[and zero]

Goose, on 06 February 2014 - 12:47 PM, said:

Yeah-yeah: The Cruiser Model.

Sooo how big must a match get in order for a team to "absorb losses?"

Well, I was actually saying that I wish the matches were 8vs8 again. Or that we at least had the option to choose.

I would think the matches would have to get significantly larger before the concept of absorbing losses could even begin to apply. This games distribution of damage model combined with mechs generally taking a moderate amount of fire to bring down (as compared to any other shooter) really lends itself to the whole snowball effect.

I myself thoroughly dislike 12vs12: almost everyone has quite, so I can never get 12 guys together to play with. So my 2-4 man gets stuck with a handfull of generally worthless pugs and we got stomped continually. Our lance doing about 400-600 damage each with 3-4 kills total. The rest doing less than 150 damage with no kills. In 8 mans we could still win those games. Hell, we usually did. Now, there is no way we can take on the remaining 6 of the enemy team when we are already damaged after half our ******* team suicides.

With the matchmaker as shit broken as it is, I miss my 8 mans