Jump to content

3/3/3/3 Will Be Easy To Abuse.

Balance

795 replies to this topic

#121 Roadbeer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • 8,160 posts
  • LocationWazan, Zion Cluster

Posted 06 April 2014 - 07:49 PM

View PostKoniving, on 06 April 2014 - 06:51 PM, said:

If 3/3/3/3 is just for random public matches, mkay, sure, whatever. But for Community Warfare, don't take away my dropships and logistics.

Unfortunately, the 3/3/3/3 is going to be the defining rule for the game.
It's the rule for Pub matches
it's the rule for the 12 queue
It's the rule for the 12 v 12 private matches.
the only place that the rule can be violated is in the Premium Private Matches when you're paying for that privilege.

They've already said that there won't be large group support before CW, so, put on your sad llama face.

Edited by Roadbeer, 06 April 2014 - 07:49 PM.


#122 FupDup

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 26,888 posts
  • LocationThe Keeper of Memes

Posted 06 April 2014 - 07:50 PM

View PostRoadbeer, on 06 April 2014 - 07:49 PM, said:

...so, put on your sad llama face.

Posted Image

#123 Koniving

    Welcoming Committee

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 23,384 posts

Posted 06 April 2014 - 07:58 PM

View PostRoadbeer, on 06 April 2014 - 07:49 PM, said:

Unfortunately, the 3/3/3/3 is going to be the defining rule for the game.
It's the rule for Pub matches
it's the rule for the 12 queue
It's the rule for the 12 v 12 private matches.
the only place that the rule can be violated is in the Premium Private Matches when you're paying for that privilege.

They've already said that there won't be large group support before CW, so, put on your sad llama face.


*Eyes pitchfork.*
That's getting more and more tempting with each passing day.
*Slips back to writing up hashed out game concepts for a Battletech Online game.* Not nearly soon enough, but soon™.

Btw does anyone have an online attainable resource for how Battletech handles hand-equipped weaponry like the Thunderbolt's 6 and 12 ton weapon mounts, melee weapons, and Rifles?

A vehicle-related rulebook and/or resource would be great too (Sarna doesn't explain much about how actual vehicles work in terms of damage mechanics and the ones without heatsinks).

#124 Roadbeer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • 8,160 posts
  • LocationWazan, Zion Cluster

Posted 06 April 2014 - 07:59 PM

View PostKoniving, on 06 April 2014 - 07:58 PM, said:


*Eyes pitchfork.*
That's getting more and more tempting with each passing day.
*Slips back to writing up hashed out game concepts for a Battletech Online game.* Not nearly soon enough, but soon™.

Btw does anyone have an online attainable resource for how Battletech handles hand-equipped weaponry like the Thunderbolt's 6 and 12 ton weapon mounts, melee weapons, and Rifles?

A vehicle-related rulebook and/or resource would be great too (Sarna doesn't explain much about how actual vehicles work in terms of damage mechanics and the ones without heatsinks).

Your views intrigue me and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter

#125 Lindonius

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 575 posts
  • LocationTokyo

Posted 06 April 2014 - 07:59 PM

View PostKoniving, on 06 April 2014 - 07:36 PM, said:


If you want to update the quote, I tacked on a bit more. ^_^


Fixed.

#126 Nick Makiaveli

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • Bridesmaid
  • 2,188 posts
  • LocationKnee deep in mechdrek

Posted 06 April 2014 - 08:13 PM

View PostEast Indy, on 06 April 2014 - 09:15 AM, said:


People will notice and players will get banned, and there may be a helpful, neighborhood watch-style list of units/clans so groups larger than four can be easily identified.

Remember, we're dudes playing a game run by other dudes actively monitoring us. It's not like there aren't social controls to prevent cheating.


Notice and report what? That we are playing the game? Or are you saying that if we have solos dropping at the same time as a group they have to run the same weight class to as to not drop with us?

Yea good luck with that.

#127 Roland

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,260 posts

Posted 06 April 2014 - 08:15 PM

View PostFupDup, on 06 April 2014 - 07:50 PM, said:

Posted Image

I feel the need for meme.

#128 Roadbeer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • 8,160 posts
  • LocationWazan, Zion Cluster

Posted 06 April 2014 - 08:19 PM

View PostRoland, on 06 April 2014 - 08:15 PM, said:

I feel the need for meme.

Posted Image

#129 Koniving

    Welcoming Committee

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 23,384 posts

Posted 06 April 2014 - 08:32 PM

View PostRoadbeer, on 06 April 2014 - 07:59 PM, said:

Your views intrigue me and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter

People keep asking about that. Zhizhu even asked me to make one. I just might so I can field them all into one place.

A few things that have really interested me as of late include:
*Quadrupedal 'Mechs
*Convergence; specifically how the game would work without it for torso-based weapons.
*Mech-mounted turrets (Locust, Wolverine). I would have these track the "o" reticule with arms, and able to aim left and right regardless of arm type (arms that cannot aim left or right will not).
*Separate-able arm reticules. Optional ability to control them independently.
*Mechs that do not have twisting torsos; how would they suffer? How would they cope?

*Animation/movement-based accuracy; adjustments to the crosshair based on the mech's movements (example: when moving forward Firestarters lean forward, tilting their guns downward but otherwise are very steady at high speed. Coincidentally at slower speeds they have a vertical bounce to their arms. Commandos on the other hand barely have any bounce or movement at high speed. Ravens and Locusts however have an extreme full body bounce with every high speed step. Third person handles this pretty well, but first person makes every mech an impossibly sniper-ready mech at any speed.)

*Hand-mounted weaponry. Predesigned hand-carried weapon mounts with their own armor are known to exist. The Thunderbolt has a few of them. Wolverine is depicted with such a weapon.
*Vehicles.
*Civilian Grade Mechs.
*Pilot Ejection.
*Mech Quirks: (Using the Quickdraw: Hyper-extending actuators. The Quickdraw not only has rear-mounted weaponry but can flex its arms to shoot behind as well as in front. Its ankles are extra flexible allowing it to climb steeper slopes even without using its jumpjets.)
*Mech Flaws: (The same quirk above is also a flaw; the Quickdraw's ankle actuators are exposed and easily disabled.)
*Attachments: Looking at the Centurion's shield, and certain Sarna entries, I'm thinking that something could be done here.

*Armor concept: Removing the number 1 Battletech "Create A Mech"-Friendly rule that has obsoleted so many mech variants in MWO: Universal armor for weightclass. Instead using something that allows the upgrading of armor with set maximum armor tonnages, established per variant with the intention of keeping stock armor ratios between variants and mechs intact even when everyone is maxed. (Example: Stock armor tonnage + 3 tons = new max armor. A ton of armor is 32 points in MWO; a ton of Ferro is 36 points. A ton is a ton.
Example: 128 point armor Locust. 128/32 = 4 tons armor. Current max: 136. New max standard: 224. New max Ferro (4 tons = 144 + 3 tons = 252 max ferro. Interestingly enough, round Huginn's armor to the nearest half ton, and then figure tonnage based on Ferro and change it to standard; the Huginn has exactly the same armor as a Raven 2X. All heroes except Dragon Slayer fit perfectly with this concept.)
*Lore-based ACs (burst, autofire, damage over time).
*Weapon variants based on available lore and fluffed out with speculation.
*Equipment variants. (example, a Vlar 300-rated XL engine isn't actually the same thing as a Hermes 300-rated XL engine. This brand jumpjet is better for this, but that brand jumpjet is better for that.)
*Proper ECM with a huge emphasis on the Information Warfare design pillar that was abandoned by PGI. Ghost targets. Denies target information but does not block locks.
*True to lore LRMs, SRMs, MRMs, and Streaks.

...This has been only a few things.. and lately.

#130 Roadbeer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • 8,160 posts
  • LocationWazan, Zion Cluster

Posted 06 April 2014 - 08:37 PM

View PostKhobai, on 06 April 2014 - 06:04 PM, said:


According to PGis stats 85% of players drop solo. And half the remaining 15% drop in groups of 2.

So only 7-8% of the player base would be affected. Certainly the game would not die. Thats a gross exaggeration.


Tell you what, if you want those numbers to mean something, how about you get Russ, Paul or Bryan to answer the question that has been asked a thousand times.

When were those numbers collected?

I'm willing to bet that those numbers came in the period of time after UI 2 was launched, and probably up to the Centurion event. Lets see, what was going on then that would cause those numbers to look like that?

Well, the social aspect was pretty much broken in the UI, preventing anyone with a friends list over 100 from being able to populate that list in less than 1 minute, and crashing those with unusually large friends list every time they opened the social tab. Hell, even in my group of friends, many took to just playing solo (if they even played at all) because grouping was just such a hassle, and would drag the speed of a relaunch down to a crawl.

That couldn't have an effect on it.

What else...

Oh yeah, an event where 5 wins would get you a mechbay and a free Centurion.

Nah, nobody was quick dropping solo so they could get that hammered out as quickly as possible, so it couldn't have been that.

Let's also not forget, that just a year ago, Bryan said in ATD 34 that there wouldn't be a solo only queue because the majority of players at that time played in groups... yet flash forward to now (after imposing the 4 player cap and the ever so painful 12 player queue) 84% are now dropping solo. Weird, almost a self-fulfilling prophesy.

^_^

#131 El Bandito

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Daddy
  • Big Daddy
  • 26,736 posts
  • LocationStill doing ungodly amount of damage, but with more accuracy.

Posted 06 April 2014 - 08:43 PM

Solo only Queue.

All I ask. Much harder for pre-mades to game it.

Edited by El Bandito, 06 April 2014 - 08:45 PM.


#132 Roadbeer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • 8,160 posts
  • LocationWazan, Zion Cluster

Posted 06 April 2014 - 08:48 PM

View PostKoniving, on 06 April 2014 - 08:32 PM, said:

Cool stuff

I want to play THAT game.

#133 Wintersdark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,375 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationCalgary, AB

Posted 06 April 2014 - 08:52 PM

View PostRoadbeer, on 06 April 2014 - 08:48 PM, said:

I want to play THAT game.
I think that practically every time Koniving posts anything.

#134 GRiPSViGiL

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Vicious
  • The Vicious
  • 1,904 posts
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationHillsboro, OR

Posted 06 April 2014 - 09:02 PM

I wouldn't consider this abuse at all. 3/3/3/3 is in essence a tonnage range limit. If people can drop to occasionally end up in larger teams on the same side then so be it. I will just be glad to know there are only 3 Assaults to deal with on the other side as I have heard several top pilots say as well.

Edited by GRiPSViGiL, 06 April 2014 - 09:24 PM.


#135 Roadbeer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • 8,160 posts
  • LocationWazan, Zion Cluster

Posted 06 April 2014 - 09:05 PM

View PostGRiPSViGiL, on 06 April 2014 - 09:02 PM, said:

I wouldn't consider this abuse at all. 3/3/3/3 is in essence a tonnage limit. I will just be glad to know there are only 3 Assaults to death with as I have heard several top pilots say as well.

Good point, it's not really abusing the weight mechanic itself, but the intent of preventing sync drops, with the single group per team, limitation and game the matchmaker.

#136 Craig Steele

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,106 posts
  • LocationCSR Mountbatton awaiting clearance for tactical deployment

Posted 06 April 2014 - 09:32 PM

View PostRoadbeer, on 06 April 2014 - 08:37 PM, said:


Tell you what, if you want those numbers to mean something, how about you get Russ, Paul or Bryan to answer the question that has been asked a thousand times.

When were those numbers collected?




Didn't they say in the vid log that it was back to the Open Beta? Around the same mouthful as "We were surprised"

EDIT: Podacst 103 at about 11 minutes Bryan in response to a question about the "stats" just offered says "This is average for the life of the game".

A few seconds after that he talks about group queues?

Edited by Craig Steele, 06 April 2014 - 09:52 PM.


#137 Eglar

    Banned - Cheating

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 921 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 06 April 2014 - 10:42 PM

View PostWintersdark, on 06 April 2014 - 11:08 AM, said:

No. I'm not. The population is irrelevant; though the populations may be equally distributed - that is, bucket limits determined by 1/3's of the population, not thirds of the ranking. Regardless, it doesn't matter.

What matters is that it'll be easier than it is now to sync drop, and its not terribly hard right now. This isn't opinion, its simple, clear math.

Sync dropping is directly related to the amount of players available in the player-pool which is determined by your elo. If you fail to see this, you probably failed at high-school math. For instance:

with a player pool of 50 launching within your search window:

someone who took a random mech and synced would have a 13.53% chance of landing into the same team as the other player whereas someone who took a mech which is conforms the 3/3/3/3 rule and syncs with a 4-men premade would have a 21.51% chance of syncing successfully.

with a player pool of 200 launching within your search window:

someone who took a random mech and synced would have a 3.09% chance of landing into the same team as the other player whereas someone who took a mech which is conforms the 3/3/3/3 rule and syncs with a 4-men premade would have a 4.69% chance of syncing successfully.

This means that with a player-pool of 200 even if you match your weight chassis and attempted to syncdrop 100 times you would have a chance of successfully syncing roughly 5 times.
.. oh, joy.

If anything it should be high and low elo brackets that should be concerned about sync-dropping.

Edited by Eglar, 06 April 2014 - 10:43 PM.


#138 YueFei

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,184 posts

Posted 06 April 2014 - 11:18 PM

View PostKoniving, on 06 April 2014 - 08:32 PM, said:

<snip>
...This has been only a few things.. and lately.


I wish you worked for PGI....

#139 Rushin Roulette

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • WC 2018 Top 12 Qualifier
  • WC 2018 Top 12 Qualifier
  • 3,514 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 06 April 2014 - 11:27 PM

And the difference to groups being able to sync 8 Highlanders and 1 Shadowhawk and 3 Lights is what exactly? There will never be any possibility of any matchmaker which will not be able to be abused by players in some way or another.

Do you really think such low skill players who need to sync their matches now, will never find any way to sync their matches at a later date after a change in the code?

EDIT: the main difference the 3/3/3/3 system will make is that the teams can only be a max of 260 Tons apart instead of the theoretical 960 Tons difference as it is now (12 Locusts vs. 12 Atlai). No matter how great the 12 Locust players are they would have hardly any chance against even noobs in the Atlai team because any lucky hit would mean the Locusts will be down a player with just about any Alpha.

Edited by Rushin Roulette, 06 April 2014 - 11:33 PM.


#140 Koniving

    Welcoming Committee

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 23,384 posts

Posted 06 April 2014 - 11:27 PM

View PostYueFei, on 06 April 2014 - 11:18 PM, said:

I wish you worked for PGI....


Been a long time. :rolleyes:
You should totally see the huge post on page 6. ^_^
It's about weight-based matches with dropships, not knowing what's around the corner, and a little scenario in community warfare.

Edited by Koniving, 06 April 2014 - 11:44 PM.






4 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 4 guests, 0 anonymous users