263 replies to this topic

[Truesight]

Joseph Mallan, on 18 March 2014 - 07:06 AM, said:

Fox Teeth
4L
5M
3H
Sorensen's Sabers
4L
4M
1H
3A

I would be hearing much pouting on the boards for the mismatch this is.

The Black Widow Company Wolf's Dragoons
4L
2M
6H

Nope no 3/3/3/3 balance here.

Now you have to notice, that 3-3-3-3 only works for PUG matches. If you want to play 12 man games (you describe units), there are other rules in place. 12 mans will not be restricted to 3-3-3-3 + you can choose your enemy!

[Voivode]

Joseph Mallan, on 18 March 2014 - 07:25 AM, said:

Cause we had Class matching back in Beta... the crying was just the same as it is now.

Someone is going to bring
3x 35
3x 55
3x 75
3x 100

Or 695 Tons
2x Highlanders+ 1 Victor
3x Cataphracts
3x ECMCicada
3x ECMSpiders

And let the fair and balanced begin. No matter how balanced YOU want the ame someone WILL find a way to bring more bang than you want them to have.

I'll take both those scenarios over the usual 6-8 assault mechs per team per match. The 3-3-3-3 is most likely aimed at PUG/public matches anyways. When you talk about competitive matches that's a whole different animal and people will do what they do there to gain whatever advantage they can. That's not going to change no matter what PGI does.

[Joseph Mallan]

Truesight, on 18 March 2014 - 07:32 AM, said:

Now you have to notice, that 3-3-3-3 only works for PUG matches. If you want to play 12 man games (you describe units), there are other rules in place. 12 mans will not be restricted to 3-3-3-3 + you can choose your enemy!

LOL You do know the game is Inner Sphere vs Clan forces... Depending on if you are a House Unit or a Merc Our opponents are already selected If they will keep to this original truth. If not, if this is going t be a Solaris style game with trophies and leader boards... So long, and thanks for all the fish.

[Mystere]

Joseph Mallan, on 18 March 2014 - 03:23 AM, said:

Tonnage limits are great and all. But why can't my friends and I be an Assault Company or a Skirmisher Company? This universe IS very diverse. But what many people here want is not diverse at all. You can take anything you want... So long as you only take it this way! You have to bring what I want to fight. I don't like those weapons so leave them out... THIS is you idea of diversity? Its a fighting game but all I keep reading is, "Oh I don't like fighting that, its to powerful... This is a game of giant robot warfare. And fighting isn't about fair and Player vs Player games should be, you bring your best I bring mine. Caustic Valley, Noon (-5 GMT).

Instead all I keep reading is,
"Oh that's to hard to beat!"(Nerf this)

"Billy's not playing fair!"(Nerf Pop Tarts)

"Johnny brought an Atlas again!"(Weight limits)

You are grown Men & Women. Start acting like it.

This game lets us all use the same equipment. All of it. We can use. If we choose to limit ourselves and our opponent doesn't, So long as it is allowed by PGI it is fair and it is legal. Quit whining, accept you lost because you didn't plan properly. Evaluate the situation, and adapt.

AMEN TO THAT!

Edited by Mystere, 18 March 2014 - 07:37 AM.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Joseph Mallan, on 18 March 2014 - 07:25 AM, said:

Cause we had Class matching back in Beta... the crying was just the same as it is now.

Someone is going to bring
3x 35
3x 55
3x 75
3x 100

Or 695 Tons
2x Highlanders+ 1 Victor
3x Cataphracts
3x ECMCicada
3x ECMSpiders

And let the fair and balanced begin. No matter how balanced YOU want the ame someone WILL find a way to bring more bang than you want them to have.

It's more like 3xVictor, 3xPhract, 2xSHawk/1xECMCicada, 2xJenner/1xECM

Or some variation on that, depending on how much they like ECM.

[Wrayeth]

I'm very unhappy with the proposed 3/3/3/3 setup. As someone who owns a bunch of assaults and a smattering of heavies, I expect the new weight class limitations will make my queue times ridiculously long.

For the record, I prefer assaults not because of meta, but because of playstyle. I enjoy using mechs that, while slow, have heavy armor to shrug off hits, and have the firepower to bring the pain. I do not enjoy running around in a fast, fragile mech that can die to one or two volleys. (Yes, I know the idea is to avoid getting hit in the first place; it's still not my playstyle preference.)

This has been a trend for me not just in MWO, but also in other games. In tabletop Battletech, my favorite mechs are in the heavy and assault classes, and I've generally flown battleships and battlecruisers in EVE.

tl;dr:

3/3/3/3 is a bad idea and punishes players who use certain classes of mech because it's their preferred playstyle, not because of meta.

[Shermburger]

Joseph Mallan, on 18 March 2014 - 03:23 AM, said:

Tonnage limits are great and all. But why can't my friends and I be an Assault Company or a Skirmisher Company? This universe IS very diverse. But what many people here want is not diverse at all. You can take anything you want... So long as you only take it this way! You have to bring what I want to fight. I don't like those weapons so leave them out... THIS is you idea of diversity? Its a fighting game but all I keep reading is, "Oh I don't like fighting that, its to powerful... This is a game of giant robot warfare. And fighting isn't about fair and Player vs Player games should be, you bring your best I bring mine. Caustic Valley, Noon (-5 GMT).

Instead all I keep reading is,
"Oh that's to hard to beat!"(Nerf this)

"Billy's not playing fair!"(Nerf Pop Tarts)

"Johnny brought an Atlas again!"(Weight limits)

You are grown Men & Women. Start acting like it.

This game lets us all use the same equipment. All of it. We can use. If we choose to limit ourselves and our opponent doesn't, So long as it is allowed by PGI it is fair and it is legal. Quit whining, accept you lost because you didn't plan properly. Evaluate the situation, and adapt.

So what I'm getting here is that you don't like tonnage limits because it makes the game not diverse enough, and yet you want anyone who doesn't play cookie cutter to be punished?

[Mystere]

wanderer, on 18 March 2014 - 03:23 AM, said:

Truth is, we'd have more group-droppers if PGI actually had a decent grouping system in place- and simply separated PUGs from it unless said PUG player toggled a "I don't mind being filler" button.

I am not a filler. Your superiors hired me specifically to show you greenhorns how things are really done.

[Joseph Mallan]

Shermburger, on 18 March 2014 - 07:41 AM, said:

So what I'm getting here is that you don't like tonnage limits because it makes the game not diverse enough, and yet you want anyone who doesn't play cookie cutter to be punished?

It makes it to restrictive. Tonnage limits forces us to play in a way we may not wish to play. We are all grown ups. I myself am 48 I know what I want to play, I would assume so does every other adult playing the game. So if you want to bring a Light cause you are best in it... Cool, That Centurion and you just click... Bring it boss. When I get killed cause I don't have the reflexs or powerful PC processing ability I don't ask for you to bring something I can kill and to run background programs to slow your system down for me. I take my beating, evaluate my options, and adapt.

Where do I give the impression I am against cookie cutter? Honestly I don't remember saying anything that would imply that?

Mystere, on 18 March 2014 - 07:43 AM, said:

I am not a filler. Your superiors hired me specifically to show you greenhorns how things are really done.

Exactly... a filler.

[Mordin Ashe]

3/3/3/3 is the best they could have discovered. I just had a battle against 9 assaults with only 1 assault and 5 heavies on my side. No other MM rule than 3/3/3/3 won't adress this situation properly.

[Mystere]

R Razor, on 18 March 2014 - 04:13 AM, said:

You'll notice that his favorite mechs are either a light with the hit boxes of a Spider and the firepower of a medium, or an ECM Spider with, well, the hit boxes of a Spider..........both very hard to consistently put damage on, both capable of fighting well outside of their weight class in even unskilled hands, and both detrimental to the game when not restricted in number on the battlefield.

You have to expect people like that to cry when they know their advantage is going to go the way of the Dodo Bird.

And yet almost all MM-related QQ explosions are triggered by complaints about the excessive overabundance of meta-humping heavies and assaults. So I say "Pfft!" to your ad hominem, especially given that it's the best you can do.

[wanderer]

Quote

3/3/3/3 is the best they could have discovered. I just had a battle against 9 assaults with only 1 assault and 5 heavies on my side. No other MM rule than 3/3/3/3 won't adress this situation properly.

How about putting the same number of assaults on your side instead?

[o0Marduk0o]

PhoenixFire55, on 18 March 2014 - 07:13 AM, said:

PGI says its working as intended and then change it. One whole year of working on MM ... wasted. How many years till no one will bother to play a broken game?

Why wasted? They are not removing Elo.

Joseph Mallan, on 18 March 2014 - 07:25 AM, said:

Cause we had Class matching back in Beta... the crying was just the same as it is now.

Someone is going to bring
3x 35
3x 55
3x 75
3x 100

Or 695 Tons
2x Highlanders+ 1 Victor
3x Cataphracts
3x ECMCicada
3x ECMSpiders

And let the fair and balanced begin. No matter how balanced YOU want the ame someone WILL find a way to bring more bang than you want them to have.

We don't get only class matching. The tonnage of every single mech is matched. The extreme situation written above won't happen.

[Shermburger]

Joseph Mallan, on 18 March 2014 - 07:50 AM, said:

Where do I give the impression I am against cookie cutter? Honestly I don't remember saying anything that would imply that?

You didn't say you were against cookie cutter. You said that you want people who don't build their teams to a cookie cutter format to be punished. That is the definition of elitism and is lousy for games.

[PhoenixFire55]

o0Marduk0o, on 18 March 2014 - 07:55 AM, said:

Why wasted? They are not removing Elo.

There is no difference if its there or not. It doesn't do anything in terms of better match balancing.

[Truesight]

Joseph Mallan, on 18 March 2014 - 07:35 AM, said:

LOL You do know the game is Inner Sphere vs Clan forces... Depending on if you are a House Unit or a Merc Our opponents are already selected If they will keep to this original truth. If not, if this is going t be a Solaris style game with trophies and leader boards... So long, and thanks for all the fish.

Yes, it will be a solaris type game, you will get a Lobby, where you can choose the Team you drop against. You can USER define rules for that game (Tonnage, class Limits,...), they are not set in Stone for 12man drops, but these requirements have to be met by both teams.

And about the Clans.... since there will not be sperate Clan Queues at all, PGI will probably nerf the hell out of all the Clan Tech, which brings them down to IS Standart. I am not a fan of this, but it is going to happen.

[Joseph Mallan]

Truesight, on 18 March 2014 - 08:05 AM, said:

Yes, it will be a solaris type game, you will get a Lobby, where you can choose the Team you drop against. You can USER define rules for that game (Tonnage, class Limits,...), they are not set in Stone for 12man drops, but these requirements have to be met by both teams.

And about the Clans.... since there will not be sperate Clan Queues at all, PGI will probably nerf the hell out of all the Clan Tech, which brings them down to IS Standart. I am not a fan of this, but it is going to happen.

That is not the game I was told I was buying into.

[Mystere]

Shermburger, on 18 March 2014 - 07:01 AM, said:

Better than 3/1/4/4, or 2/1/4/5 like we typically get these days. It's not like there's actually any missions in this game. It all boils down to tdm. Even Conquest often just boils down to tdm, with the team that actually went to capture the arbitrary flags being punished for doing so because the enemy team deathballed.

There is one very simple explanation for this. People demanded to the high heavens -- with threats of rage quitting, as always -- that capping times be significantly increased because their magnificent but slow-as-molasses all heavy/assault murder balls were consistently losing to "capwarriors".

And the rest, as they say, is history.

[Joseph Mallan]

Shermburger, on 18 March 2014 - 07:56 AM, said:

You didn't say you were against cookie cutter. You said that you want people who don't build their teams to a cookie cutter format to be punished. That is the definition of elitism and is lousy for games.

I am trying to support personal preference not a etched in stone must be this way... If cookie Cutter is 3/3/3/3, and I am in favor of letting folks form up how they want... How am I punishing anyone?

[Mawai]

Joseph Mallan, on 18 March 2014 - 07:35 AM, said:

LOL You do know the game is Inner Sphere vs Clan forces... Depending on if you are a House Unit or a Merc Our opponents are already selected If they will keep to this original truth. If not, if this is going t be a Solaris style game with trophies and leader boards... So long, and thanks for all the fish.

Much as folks might wish for IS vs. Clan. That does not appear to be the direction that MWO is moving. It is pretty clear from their already published statements on clan mechs and technology that (at least when the clans are first introduced) we will be dropping in mixed clan/IS tech teams against other mixed clan/IS mech teams. The idea being that the clan mechs available have been salvaged (I know it makes no sense but there it is).

It is still possible that later on they will introduce some form of clan vs IS elements into the game but from everything I have read it certainly won't be any time soon.