40 replies to this topic

[Voivode]

Rouken, on 04 March 2014 - 09:35 AM, said:

I think this is the problem. Lances can have any composition so long as it does not bring more than 3 of a class.

So a lance of 3 assaults and 1 heavy is possible. As is 3 lights and 1 medium. All combinations in between too.

The two friends in your example can both bring their dragons.

This is what happens when people don't actually read something, they just skim and then log in to QQ.

[Malcolm Vordermark]

Voivode, on 04 March 2014 - 09:42 AM, said:

This is what happens when people don't actually read something, they just skim and then log in to QQ.

Well it is sort of buried in a wall of text and comes right after them talking about how lances will be 1-1-1-1. Anyways, I've copied a section from the command chair post and have underlined the relevant information:

"Instead of restricting team builds by tonnage and causing these weird edge cases, we decided to implement a team building limitation based on Weight Class. This means for each ‘Mech of a certain Weight Class, there is one on the opposing team. On top of that, we will enforce a 3/3/3/3 team build based on Weight Class as well. That is, a team is to consist of 3 Lights, 3 Mediums, 3 Heavies and 3 Assaults. No more, no less in each class.

This helps keep our vision point of a lance being created using a 1/1/1/1 lance build. 3 Lances, each at 1/1/1/1 giving a team build of 3/3/3/3. This 3/3/3/3 build is also a lot easier for new players to understand and it is also a good way of preventing a single weight class dominating a team’s build.

With this solution, players are able to launch in any ‘Mech they own without having to worry about a tonnage limit restricting their ability to do so. Those two players who wanted to play in a group of 2 Atlases are now able to do so. The Match Maker at this point would simply queue them as a group of 2 Assault Mechs.

Also within this solution is a restriction to the amount at which a team of players can min/max the team builds in terms of tonnage preference of one ‘Mech over another."

Edited by Rouken, 04 March 2014 - 09:48 AM.

[DEMAX51]

So... they have no plans to lock 4-man lances to one of each type of class, so this is a total non-issue.

[Ryoken]

Rouken, on 04 March 2014 - 09:35 AM, said:

I think this is the problem. Lances can have any composition so long as it does not bring more than 3 of a class.
So a lance of 3 assaults and 1 heavy is possible. As is 3 lights and 1 medium. All combinations in between too.
The two friends in your example can both bring their dragons.

Voivode, on 04 March 2014 - 09:42 AM, said:

This is what happens when people don't actually read something, they just skim and then log in to QQ.

This is no QQ. I did get that premade lances are only bound to 3-3-3-3 rules and not the 1-1-1-1 rule.

I wanted to point out that Bryans/PGIs vision point of a 1-1-1-1 lance is absolutely wrong and that they have to reconsider.

[Malcolm Vordermark]

Ryoken, on 04 March 2014 - 11:00 AM, said:

This is no QQ. I did get that premade lances are only bound to 3-3-3-3 rules and not the 1-1-1-1 rule.

I wanted to point out that Bryans/PGIs vision point of a 1-1-1-1 lance is absolutely wrong and that they have to reconsider.

Why? 3 of each weight class seems like a perfectly reasonable starting point for imposing order on the chaos that is the pug.

[Ryoken]

Rouken, this is about letting Bryan/PGI know that their envisioned 1-1-1-1 lance is wrong. The vision is wrong. A lance incorporating all four weight classes is wrong. It does not work for different mech speeds in most cases alone. (If you do not take a Panther for light and an Zeus/Battlemaster for assault)

I'm absolutely fine with a premade lance in the 3-3-3-3 rule as you can put 3lights with a medium or 2 medium with 2 heavys etc.

[Ryoken]

DEMAX51, on 04 March 2014 - 09:48 AM, said:

So... they have no plans to lock 4-man lances to one of each type of class, so this is a total non-issue.

No, thankfully no. As stated above I just want to prevent Bryan/PGI following a wrong vision so it does not come this way should they keep that course.

[Malcolm Vordermark]

Ryoken, on 04 March 2014 - 11:37 AM, said:

Rouken, this is about letting Bryan/PGI know that their envisioned 1-1-1-1 lance is wrong. The vision is wrong. A lance incorporating all four weight classes is wrong. It does not work for different mech speeds in most cases alone. (If you do not take a Panther for light and an Zeus/Battlemaster for assault)

I'm absolutely fine with a premade lance in the 3-3-3-3 rule as you can put 3lights with a medium or 2 medium with 2 heavys etc.

1-1-1-1 is the "ideal" lance from a balance perspective. Its not going to split a group with 3 assaults up among the lances and even if it did try to populate the rest of the lances with that in mind would it really make a difference?

People don't stick with their lances now. Faster mechs run off and leave assaults behind now. Furthermore, the commander function should still be intact.

I'm still not seeing the issue.

[Sug]

Who cares what PGI's "ideal lance" is? Their lack of understanding of the IP they've acquired or the game they've made is nothing new. You don't have to drop in 1-1-1-1 lances.

Considering 84% of players don't even group, and 12% play in groups of 2-3 this change is barely going to affect how anyone plays. All it does is try to even up the tonnage on both teams. Worst case with a 3-3-3-3 is a 195 ton advantage to one team, which is still about 100 less than the worst discrepancy I've experienced.

Edited by Sug, 04 March 2014 - 12:09 PM.

[Voivode]

Ryoken, on 04 March 2014 - 11:37 AM, said:

Rouken, this is about letting Bryan/PGI know that their envisioned 1-1-1-1 lance is wrong. The vision is wrong. A lance incorporating all four weight classes is wrong. It does not work for different mech speeds in most cases alone. (If you do not take a Panther for light and an Zeus/Battlemaster for assault)

I'm absolutely fine with a premade lance in the 3-3-3-3 rule as you can put 3lights with a medium or 2 medium with 2 heavys etc.

So what you're talking about is not the 3-3-3-3 company composition in and of itself but enforcing that composition by forming lances composed of one of each weight class?

That would be pretty annoying, I agree. I'm not sure that's how they intend to do things. At worst it's annoying, though, since you'll still have three lights even if they are in different lances.

[Gyrok]

The issue this creates is that mechs that are naturally better for General Purpose, or even specialized roles will now become even more inherently valuable in drops.

This does nothing to change the competitive meta either, consider:

Current Meta:

4x JR7/RVN 3-L/FS9
3-4x JAG/CTF
4-5x HGN/VTR

3/3/3/3 Meta;

3xRVN 3-L 1x CDA-3M (ALL with 2xERLL as before)
2xSHD-2H w/ 2xAC5 + ERPPC
3x CTF-3D w/ 2xAC10 + PPC
3x HGN or VTR w/2xUAC5 + 2x ERLL/PPC

What does this change in the meta? The mild annoyance of using 2 meta mediums...

*THIS DOES NOT CHANGE ANYTHING THEY WANTED TO CHANGE!*

Therefore, my issue with this implementation is it annoys the user base and brings no positive changes to the current issues we experience in MWO.

[Malcolm Vordermark]

Gyrok, on 04 March 2014 - 12:55 PM, said:

The issue this creates is that mechs that are naturally better for General Purpose, or even specialized roles will now become even more inherently valuable in drops.

This does nothing to change the competitive meta either, consider:

Current Meta:

4x JR7/RVN 3-L/FS9
3-4x JAG/CTF
4-5x HGN/VTR

3/3/3/3 Meta;

3xRVN 3-L 1x CDA-3M (ALL with 2xERLL as before)
2xSHD-2H w/ 2xAC5 + ERPPC
3x CTF-3D w/ 2xAC10 + PPC
3x HGN or VTR w/2xUAC5 + 2x ERLL/PPC

What does this change in the meta? The mild annoyance of using 2 meta mediums...

*THIS DOES NOT CHANGE ANYTHING THEY WANTED TO CHANGE!*

Therefore, my issue with this implementation is it annoys the user base and brings no positive changes to the current issues we experience in MWO.

The goal wasn't to change the meta it was make teams more evenly matched.

[Foxfire]

I personally still think that the game was best when it matched weight class to weight class on the drops and would only modify it by allowing matches of your class +/- one class to eliminate the match making wait. That way you limit the amount of armor disparity.

[Bagheera]

Joseph Mallan, on 04 March 2014 - 05:00 AM, said:

You take away the ability to be an Assault Company or a Striker Company. You Just made the company composition, Generic.

They fear the return of the Hunchback lance, clearly the most OP thing ever.

[Jin Ma]

nah its more of just an excuse.

[Sephlock]

Just to play devil's advocate, I thought canonically lances were generally mixed (although not necessarily so rigidly) so that they'd have a spotter/scout, a heavy hitter, etc.

A Standard Lance consists of one light, one medium, and two heavy BattleMechs.^[1]

[Ryoken]

Sephlock, on 05 March 2014 - 12:05 AM, said:

Just to play devil's advocate, I thought canonically lances were generally mixed (although not necessarily so rigidly) so that they'd have a spotter/scout, a heavy hitter, etc.

A Standard Lance consists of one light, one medium, and two heavy BattleMechs.^[1]

No problem with that and exactly what I said.

Ryoken, on 04 March 2014 - 12:10 AM, said:

Imagening
faster teams of lights/medium mechs (1-3lights and 1-3mediums maybe 1-2 fast heavy)
medium pace teams of medium/heavy mechs (1-3 mediums and 1-3 heavy maybe 1-2 light/assault)
and slow teams of heavy/assault mechs (1-3heavy and 1-3 assault maybe 1medium/light)
is what you have to consider.

A medium lance composition logically fields medium/heavy mechs mostly but may have the occasional light or even sometimes an assault in it. The Problem starts if you start envisioning about forcing a light AND an assault into each and every lance.

[Bagheera]

Sephlock, on 05 March 2014 - 12:05 AM, said:

Just to play devil's advocate, I thought canonically lances were generally mixed (although not necessarily so rigidly) so that they'd have a spotter/scout, a heavy hitter, etc.

A Standard Lance consists of one light, one medium, and two heavy BattleMechs.^[1]

Which is all well and good, but not a viable lance composition in the 3/3/3/3 format. Well maybe one lance could look like that, but 1 out of 3 is hardly standard.

[Kataiser]

I've said it before; I'll say it again.

Battle. Value.

[Lyoto Machida]

Rouken, on 04 March 2014 - 11:32 AM, said:

Why? 3 of each weight class seems like a perfectly reasonable starting point for imposing order on the chaos that is the pug.

Ryoken, on 04 March 2014 - 11:37 AM, said:

Rouken, this is about letting Bryan/PGI know that their envisioned 1-1-1-1 lance is wrong. The vision is wrong. A lance incorporating all four weight classes is wrong. It does not work for different mech speeds in most cases alone. (If you do not take a Panther for light and an Zeus/Battlemaster for assault)

I'm absolutely fine with a premade lance in the 3-3-3-3 rule as you can put 3lights with a medium or 2 medium with 2 heavys etc.

Lol...almost sounds like you're talking to yourself, Ryoken.