263 replies to this topic

[Shermburger]

Joseph Mallan, on 18 March 2014 - 09:03 AM, said:

If the guys in the Assaults and heavies are that much better than the rest yes they should dominate.

Nothing to do with them being better. Everything to do with the tonnage difference and the fact that they have more firepower, more armor, and only marginally less speed in most cases when compared to mediums.

[Threat Doc]

PAGE FIVE

Caswallon, on 18 March 2014 - 04:34 AM, said:

TIME OUT!!!

I have misgivings too however lets play it for say oh I dunno a week then dissect it. Nothing can make up for broken promises "change of positions" etc but lets not get bogged down. See how it plays THEN give real feed back.

Why allow PGI the time to program a continuing broken system, when they could actually use the time to build one that is not broken? Game-imposed artificial limits NEED to be removed, which means Elo needs to be replaced by something that's going to make sense, namely an MWO-specific Battle Value system that will recalculate in the MechLab each time a 'Mech is modified, and then game-determined Piloting and Gunnery skills to put a percentage bonus or penalty on the BV of the 'Mech. Then, matches include both pilot and machine balanced values. Right now, Elo provides a point-value for every pilot in the game for each of the weight classes they drive in; however, the problem is not with the numbers the pilots get, it's with the fact that there are only 2800 numbers to be had and, more often than not, especially with the population of the game as low as it is, now, the MM has to widen out to find 24 players to fill each match, which means -at least according to Paul's last post about moving the boundaries to 2300 points- if you get a player filling the last one, two, or three slots on your team, you're getting one from either the lower end or higher end of the Elo spectrum.

It doesn't need to be that way.

[Joseph Mallan]

Tell that to Daesco or Rooster from the Law. The devour Assault Mechs in their sleep. If the Pilot is good at what they do they can beat the imbalance. Its why I don't pilot Lights. I don't have the dervish reflexes needed. I don't blame assaults for not letting me kill them. I use Centurions for that.

[X O]

For PUG play 3/3/3/3 is the easiest way to balance the teams. Battlevalues would be simple to complicated (I remember the rage about heat peneltys .... to complicated and so on) and weight limits would end in assault/light meta.
If we will ever see the CW, this system might be come to an end. But at first I liked it.

[Snowcrow]

After reading the dev's post, I have to say I like their reasoning. 3/3/3/3 seems to be the best solution. I just wish it would come sooner.. but I get that it takes time. Oh well.

[Shermburger]

Joseph Mallan, on 18 March 2014 - 09:54 AM, said:

imbalance.

Something a good multiplayer game doesn't make players fight against. It seems to me that you lack sportsmanship and have no notion of fair play. That's fine, but the majority of players - both in video games and real life - like to feel like their skill and ability is being tested. Not who has the superior tonnage and therefor every advantage right out of the gate. The same goes for observers. There's a reason weight classes in combative sports tend to be segregated.

In a battlefield scenario, mediums would be useful. This is not a battlefield, however. This is Rock 'em Sock 'em robots.

[Joseph Mallan]

Shermburger, on 18 March 2014 - 10:01 AM, said:

Something a good multiplayer game doesn't make players fight against. It seems to me that you lack sportsmanship and have no notion of fair play. That's fine, but the majority of players - both in video games and real life - like to feel like their skill and ability is being tested. Not who has the superior tonnage and therefor every advantage right out of the gate. The same goes for observers. There's a reason weight classes in combative sports tend to be segregated.

In a battlefield scenario, mediums would be useful. This is not a battlefield, however. This is Rock 'em Sock 'em robots.

LOL Win or Lose I don't blame imbalance, weapons, the sun in my eyes. I don't make excuses for losing and I do not T bag someone who I defeat. There are very few here that have more sportsmanship than I do. Win o lose I look for the good in a match, and I lay the blame for my loss where it belongs, at my end of the mouse.

The reason for weight separation is sports is for health and safety. Nobody is going to die cause a lil toon got squashed by a bigger toon.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 18 March 2014 - 10:06 AM.

[Shermburger]

Joseph Mallan, on 18 March 2014 - 10:06 AM, said:

LOL Win or Lose I don't blame imbalance, weapons, the sun in my eyes. I don't make excuses for losing and I do not T bag someone who I defeat. There are very few here that have more sportsmanship than I do. Win o lose I look for the good in a match, and I lay the blame for my loss where it belongs, at my end of the mouse.

The reason for weight separation is sports is for health and safety. Nobody is going to die cause a lil toon got squashed by a bigger toon.

If you're so sporting, then you should have no problem with lighter vehicles being given a chance against machines that carry every advantage over them otherwise.

[Joseph Mallan]

Shermburger, on 18 March 2014 - 10:08 AM, said:

If you're so sporting, then you should have no problem with lighter vehicles being given a chance against machines that carry every advantage over them otherwise.

I don't, And I get beat by them quite often. But an enforced gotta be this way I have a problem with.

[Threat Doc]

PAGE SIX

Shermburger, on 18 March 2014 - 06:48 AM, said:

3-3-3-3 isn't perfect. But it does promise more balanced game play than what we have now. There are certainly things I'd rather see done, but I have a feeling that assault jockies wouldn't like anything that marginalizes their complete and total dominance of the game, as it has been since the dark ages of NetMech.

First, by playing all balanced, now, you're building a bad habit, should you decide to get into a unit and chase contracts, objectives, etc., because you're used to playing balanced, and contract drops for the planetary game, if PGI has any brains amongst them, at all, will not and should not be balanced. There's been enough of a fervor, now, about bringing true objectives into the game that, if IGP's support folks are right, and PGI actually is listening, they're going to need to put into the game at some point. Look, most of BattleTech does not center around planetary assaults -maybe 5% of all battles you'll EVER read about- and most of the games focus around objective raids and smaller conflicts for contract completion. You can't just have 100 battles on various maps to determine whether a planet changes hands or not... that's not fun, that's just the same old BS grind we have, now. You need to have objectives, dynamic and static, to keep the game interesting for everyone, not just the 'kill them all, let the 'Mech gods sort them out'. Anything less will see this game die, in short order. It should have been listed as a mainstay of CW from the outset, from Dev Blog 0, to have objectives, small to large fights, and planetary assaults, not just planetary assaults and these dumb ASS bounties I'm seeing. God, that makes me see red... bounties... what moron thought of that?!

Next, you must be playing in a completely different universe than I am... the Lights are the current kings of the battlefield, since they can turn on a dime at speed and can machine gun you to death without the machine guns ever over-heating, having a runoff, and the heat getting back to the ammo to blow it up. You want an unbalanced weapon, take a look at the machine gun.

[Shermburger]

Joseph Mallan, on 18 March 2014 - 10:10 AM, said:

I don't, And I get beat by them quite often. But an enforced gotta be this way I have a problem with.

Then propose another alternative that isn't just leaving things as they are, because as they are, the medium class is nearly extinct and games are dominated by the (objectively superior) heavies and assaults, leading to less variation and more predictable game-play.

[Joseph Mallan]

Shermburger, on 18 March 2014 - 10:13 AM, said:

Then propose another alternative that isn't just leaving things as they are, because as they are, the medium class is nearly extinct and games are dominated by the (objectively superior) heavies and assaults, leading to less variation and more predictable game-play.

R&R. That got me outta my Atlas and into a Centurion. I made money faster cause a Medium was cheaper to maintain when R&R was a thing. It needs to be handled better than before, but that kind of decision goes into building a fighting force, and we are supposed to be playing Mercs and House Soldiers not Solaris Stars. Make it expensive to play Leroy style. Understand I still ran a Atlas (Archer) with 11 tons of ammo. but I played using Level one tech... once R&R went the dodo way, I used XL no CASE mad rush style. Why? no consequences for bad play.

[Threat Doc]

PAGE EIGHT

Davers, on 18 March 2014 - 08:29 AM, said:

It's funny how in MechCommander I never used assault mechs because their speed was such a liability. But they have no liabilities here.

Neither do Lights, since they can turn on a dime at speed. So, Lights and Assaults are, hands down, the most prominent 'Mechs on the field, and will continue to be until something is done by means of examination and fixing.

Joseph Mallan, on 18 March 2014 - 08:32 AM, said:

Well lets see... IF we keep to the timeline (yeah... I know) then the Clan Invasion is almost over, and the Knights of the Inner Sphere will be the moral compass for Task Force Serpent.

What needs to happen is PGI need to go back and set the clock to 3049, again, and then have the Clan Invasion begin the way it was supposed to, having players with Clan 'Mechs, at a certain maximum number, determine whether they will play Clan or Inner Sphere, on a match by match basis. Then, you have Houses and hired Mercs play OpFor for them, until it is figured out how best to defeat the prodigal children on their return.

Quote

Have I ever mentioned I really like the Knights of the Inner Sphere? Especially Sir Paul Masters!

I really liked both of those, as well, hehe. It was an abortive attempt to reintroduce the idea that the whole of the Inner Sphere, all five Houses, were once run by a modernized Feudal system. I would love to see titles and land grants as achievements in this game, but I know it won't be possible.

[Jonathan Paine]

I think the current matchmaker is built on false assumptions, among these:
- That tonnage matters outside of classes (think Awesome Pretty baby vs meta 'Phract 3D)
- That tonnage matters inside of classes (Pretty Baby vs Meta Victor!)
- That a high elo 4-man running meta can be matched by anything else than another equivalent 4-man running similar meta

Furthermore, with 10,000+ matches under my belt I am fairly certain that parts of the code is actually broken. This tends to show up as finding two 4-man teams both running mostly assaults.... then putting them ON THE SAME SIDE AGAINST MEDIUMS. (ahem)

The new 3-3-3-3 system is not going to be perfect, but it is replacing a broken system that is only marginally better than the old "anything goes, lets roflstomp n00bs" that preceded it. The new system will have its flaws and weaknesses, but we will expose them and suggest ways of fixing them like we did ECM.

Ok, so it will probably take 9 months of concentrated effort to fix the new one, but still! Progress!

[Joseph Mallan]

I would happily volunteer to be the Clanners sparring partner! And resetting the game clock would be very nice since things have not gone well time wise for PGI.

[Mystere]

Shermburger, on 18 March 2014 - 09:50 AM, said:

Nothing to do with them being better. Everything to do with the tonnage difference and the fact that they have more firepower, more armor, and only marginally less speed in most cases when compared to mediums.

I will just quote myself:

Mystere, on 18 March 2014 - 06:43 AM, said:

Well, I on the other hand care more about the quality of my team members and opponents, and less about the hardware they bring. Nitwits in assaults and heavies are dime a dozen in this game. Any good veteran in any mech can deal with those inconsequential folk.

[Bagheera]

Shermburger, on 18 March 2014 - 10:08 AM, said:

If you're so sporting, then you should have no problem with lighter vehicles being given a chance against machines that carry every advantage over them otherwise.

Please go back to page 1 of the thread and re-read Fup's post. Any class limit solution is just more Solaris, less Role Warfare.

You guys are wasting energy arguing over something th that isn't the actual problem.

[Mystere]

Jonathan Paine, on 18 March 2014 - 10:43 AM, said:

Ok, so it will probably take 9 months of concentrated effort to fix the new one, but still! Progress!

You say "progress", I say "a colossal waste of time and resources better spent on developing Community Warfare".





If PGI still hasn't gotten the hint yet, they're in for a very nasty surprise when this game goes Solaris!

Edited by Mystere, 18 March 2014 - 11:07 AM.

[Shermburger]

Bagheera, on 18 March 2014 - 10:58 AM, said:

Please go back to page 1 of the thread and re-read Fup's post. Any class limit solution is just more Solaris, less Role Warfare.

You guys are wasting energy arguing over something th that isn't the actual problem.

And as I've said ad nauseam, no successful gaming company will put that much work into a game post-release. Role warfare is something that needs to be engineered during development, not after. Direct weight limits is the closest thing we will likely get.

[Mystere]

Shermburger, on 18 March 2014 - 11:07 AM, said:

And as I've said ad nauseam, no successful gaming company will put that much work into a game post-release. Role warfare is something that needs to be engineered during development, not after. Direct weight limits is the closest thing we will likely get.

See my post right above yours.