795 replies to this topic

[Joseph Mallan]

Roadbeer, on 10 April 2014 - 03:20 PM, said:

The whole reason I made this thread, is so on May 5th, I can post this a lot...

I finally watched the video...
...
...
I don't remember him ever saying that in the episodes?!?

[Demuder]

Mystere, on 11 April 2014 - 06:01 AM, said:

If I ever find myself surrounded by four mechs and get killed in seconds, I:

• blame myself for getting into that situation in the first place
  
• blame myself for not getting out of there in a jiffy
  
• do not blame anyone or anything else

It was I who caused it and therefore I am solely to blame.

Excellent. If that's good enough for you, PGI can't do wrong and you've found the game of your dreams.

However, that's not what I was talking about, you would have understood that if you took the time to read instead of mashing the reply button.

[Roadbeer]

Almond Brown, on 11 April 2014 - 06:31 AM, said:

And as long as you get your pound of flesh, surely the rest of us will also feel better about ourselves. Thanks for that.

Yeah well, there's an 80 page threadnaught where all of this and more has been pointed out, that has gone without comment from the "Big 3", not to mention every subsequent threads on the topic has gone unaddressed.

Oh, and we've had 2 iterations of PTS run that hasn't had the Launch Module on it, which says it's barely a BETA, and even if it was thrown on PTS tomorrow, there wouldn't be enough time to fix any big issues that are in it before it's Launch in just over 2 weeks. With their limited QA abilities and automated simulations they run, they rarely catch "User Experience" issues (see PTS data from UI 2.0) and when presented with it, take several weeks/months to correct (See social tab, mechlab and store issues from UI 2.0).

So yeah, since they have soldiered through with this, feedback be damned, I'm going to be a little smug about it all if/when it all goes

Edited by Roadbeer, 11 April 2014 - 07:17 AM.

[Mystere]

dimstog, on 11 April 2014 - 06:56 AM, said:

Excellent. If that's good enough for you, PGI can't do wrong and you've found the game of your dreams.

Obviously, you do not know me.

dimstog, on 11 April 2014 - 06:56 AM, said:

However, that's not what I was talking about, you would have understood that if you took the time to read instead of mashing the reply button.

Oh, I did read. But, the gist of the matter is: you were surrounded. What more is there to say? Game mechanics or not, chances are you will be dead and good opponents will dispatch you quickly via focus fire.

It's like you expect a King Tiger to last long when surrounded by 4 T-34s. The former will still die quickly via shots to it's flanks and rear.

Edited by Mystere, 11 April 2014 - 07:12 AM.

[M4NTiC0R3X]

... 'tis what it is they say

[Craig Steele]

Mystere, on 11 April 2014 - 07:09 AM, said:

It's like you expect a King Tiger to last long when surrounded by 4 T-34s. The former will still die quickly via shots to it's flanks and rear.

T-34 would need to get to around 500m or so, depending which variant you're using. The /85 might be 1,000m

King Tiger is cutting through either of them at 2,000m. And has better optics, and better comms

You're gunna need more than 4.

[Demuder]

Mystere, on 11 April 2014 - 07:09 AM, said:

Obviously, you do not know me.

Oh, I did read. But, the gist of the matter is: you were surrounded. What more is there to say? Game mechanics or not, chances are you will be dead and good opponents will dispatch you quickly via focus fire.

It's like you expect a King Tiger to last long when surrounded by 4 T-34s. The former will still die quickly via shots to it's flanks and rear.

You're right, I don't know you, I am sorry. Maybe my example(s) were poor as well.

My point is, mech destruction in the game is quite fast, and I believe that's the main reason for the numerous 12-1 stomps people see all the time. A side loses a couple of mechs and it's all downhill from there. Not just because of the lack of skill in the pugs or of the uber skills of premades but mainly because of mechanics and values and maps and mission types and whatever. That's my take on it after playing a year or so.

The main and only point to a game is to provide entertainment to the participants. And that includes all participants. When most matches end up in a 12-1 stomp, chances are that half the players did not have fun. Since MM does not have a bias on assigning "skill" or "mechs" to either team, it's because of anything but the players, and mechanics/values/call it whatever you want, should be fixed, plain and simple. If there is bias to begin with, MM should be fixed.

Also for argument's sake, I don't think that the King Tiger would go down as fast as one would expect, but my knowledge of WW2 tanks is quite limited. What I know is, that neither the German or the Russian commanders would expect their tanks to have fun fighting one another, something that PGI should have at the top of their priorities instead.

[Joseph Mallan]

dimstog, on 11 April 2014 - 01:09 AM, said:

1)Why do you assume that I die in seconds instead of me killing others in seconds ? I feel just fine.

The premise however, is very simple.

2) When a pilot makes a mistake and find themselves surrounded by four mechs, they are obliterated in 2 seconds - that's because of mechanics, not because of the lack of skill of the doomed pilot or the excellent skills of the ganging pilots, no matter if they are on TS or just solo pilots. Maybe if it took them 20 seconds to destroy an assault, his/her friends would have the time to join the fray and maybe things would turn out a lot different. Or maybe just the same. What would be definitely different would be the amount of enjoyment both sides would take out of the fight. 3)What happens now is that someone makes a mistake and sees some flashes for 2 seconds and then they are dead. That doesn't seem right for a Battletech game, unless you believe that driving and dying in a 100 ton behemoth should be exactly the same with your run of the mill FPS Call-of-Duty clone.

On the other hand, if destroying a mech took a little bit of time, the 5 minutes it takes to go into a 2-9 stomp, might actually take 10 minutes, and maybe the other team might have the time to turn the odds around a bit, not winning, but not leaving the game feeling hopeless and stomped.

Finally, although we may argue about balance or mechanics, you can't argue about player skill. 4)The 12-2 or 12-1 stomps I see so often can't be attributed to player skill. Since the MM does not have a reason to put all the imba players on one team and all the unskilled players on the other, we can safely assume that in most matches skill on both sides is relatively even. Most matches however end up in one team stomping the other, which by my limited statistics knowledge, means there's no correlation between the two. Same can be said about premades, although I am solo dropping nowadays, having a premade in the game doesn't seem to affect the stomping one way or the other.

I'd like a crack at this one.
1) Cause you are complaining about it and not bragging?

2) Its because of Obvious. 6 against one will obviously end one way barring the usual exceptions.

3) in a combat game where the goal is to kill your enemy and take his stuff... This is how I want it to be. I make a mistake I pay for it.

4) It can be Player skill but it is more likely effects of Attrition. whach is what is supposed to happen in combat, as a side loses its support it becomes more and more difficult to gain advantage. Its why I don't like respawn. I killed you. you don't get to get back up. it ruins the effect of attrition.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 11 April 2014 - 08:04 AM.

[Mystere]

Craig Steele, on 11 April 2014 - 07:32 AM, said:

T-34 would need to get to around 500m or so, depending which variant you're using. The /85 might be 1,000m

King Tiger is cutting through either of them at 2,000m. And has better optics, and better comms

You're gunna need more than 4.

The scenario in question was that the King Tiger was already surrounded.

[Almond Brown]

Roadbeer, on 11 April 2014 - 07:08 AM, said:

Yeah well, there's an 80 page threadnaught where all of this and more has been pointed out, that has gone without comment from the "Big 3", not to mention every subsequent threads on the topic has gone unaddressed.

Oh, and we've had 2 iterations of PTS run that hasn't had the Launch Module on it, which says it's barely a BETA, and even if it was thrown on PTS tomorrow, there wouldn't be enough time to fix any big issues that are in it before it's Launch in just over 2 weeks. With their limited QA abilities and automated simulations they run, they rarely catch "User Experience" issues (see PTS data from UI 2.0) and when presented with it, take several weeks/months to correct (See social tab, mechlab and store issues from UI 2.0).

So yeah, since they have soldiered through with this, feedback be damned, I'm going to be a little smug about it all if/when it all goes

My point. How many times has the Community had its finger on that Trigger? We are still here and yours is not the first, nor will it be the last "I told ya so!" moment. So have at it, I hope you get your pound. You certainly sound as if it has been earned... somehow.

[Almond Brown]

Craig Steele, on 11 April 2014 - 07:32 AM, said:

T-34 would need to get to around 500m or so, depending which variant you're using. The /85 might be 1,000m

King Tiger is cutting through either of them at 2,000m. And has better optics, and better comms

You're gunna need more than 4.

So in effect, it is more about the enemies Tactics, then it is about how much armor the King has... Hmmm, interesting....

P.S. I do believe the number of Sherman's required was 5.

[111DOA111]

plz STFU ABOUT WOT's ...THIS IS NOT! and SHOULD NOT BE! WOT's...JEBUS SAVE ME...no WAIT JEBUS SAVE MWO.

[Joseph Mallan]

111DOA111, on 11 April 2014 - 08:15 AM, said:

plz STFU ABOUT WOT's ...THIS IS NOT! and SHOULD NOT BE! WOT's...JEBUS SAVE ME...no WAIT JEBUS SAVE MWO.

Yeah Our Tanks have legs and fire lazorz!

[Mystere]

111DOA111, on 11 April 2014 - 08:15 AM, said:

plz STFU ABOUT WOT's ...THIS IS NOT! and SHOULD NOT BE! WOT's...JEBUS SAVE ME...no WAIT JEBUS SAVE MWO.

WOT? What is that?

<And I think you need your meds right now.>

[Demuder]

Joseph Mallan, on 11 April 2014 - 07:48 AM, said:

I'd like a crack at this one.
1) Cause you are complaining about it and not bragging?

2) Its because of Obvious. 6 against one will obviously end one way barring the usual exceptions.

3) in a combat game where the goal is to kill your enemy and take his stuff... This is how I want it to be. I make a mistake I pay for it.

4) It can be Player skill but it is more likely effects of Attrition. whach is what is supposed to happen in combat, as a side loses its support it becomes more and more difficult to gain advantage. Its why I don't like respawn. I killed you. you don't get to get back up. it ruins the effect of attrition.

My grandma taught me that "show me someone who brags, and I'll show you a liar" so I do tend to avoid it. However, in order to remove the mystery about my skillz, I'll say that I stomp and get stomped in turn like the best of them :-)

Since you want to take a crack, take a crack at this.

Do you believe that the game is balanced ? When I say balanced, I mean does it work as intended, compared to the expectations created by the description and the developers themselves? If the answer is yes, then rightfully so, all there is to blame is player skill for lopsided matches. But if the answer is no -no matter what you believe should be fixed- you should leave player skill out of the argument completely. Fix the game first, then start blaming solo players for being idiots and pugs for being uber skilled players.

[Mystere]

dimstog, on 11 April 2014 - 08:26 AM, said:

My grandma taught me that "show me someone who brags, and I'll show you a liar" so I do tend to avoid it. However, in order to remove the mystery about my skillz, I'll say that I stomp and get stomped in turn like the best of them :-)

Since you want to take a crack, take a crack at this.

Do you believe that the game is balanced ? When I say balanced, I mean does it work as intended, compared to the expectations created by the description and the developers themselves? If the answer is yes, then rightfully so, all there is to blame is player skill for lopsided matches. But if the answer is no -no matter what you believe should be fixed- you should leave player skill out of the argument completely. Fix the game first, then start blaming solo players for being idiots and pugs for being uber skilled players.

What is so wrong about accepting personal responsibility, regardless of the underlying environment?

[Joseph Mallan]

dimstog, on 11 April 2014 - 08:26 AM, said:

My grandma taught me that "show me someone who brags, and I'll show you a liar" so I do tend to avoid it. However, in order to remove the mystery about my skillz, I'll say that I stomp and get stomped in turn like the best of them :-)

Since you want to take a crack, take a crack at this.

1) Do you believe that the game is balanced ? When I say balanced, 2)I mean does it work as intended, compared to the expectations created by the description and the developers themselves? 3)If the answer is yes, then rightfully so, all there is to blame is player skill for lopsided matches. But if the answer is no -no matter what you believe should be fixed- you should leave player skill out of the argument completely. Fix the game first, then start blaming solo players for being idiots and pugs for being uber skilled players.

Your Grandma is wise... cause bragging is stretching the truth Did yor Granma ever tell you to "Tell it to a Marine"?

1) My win loss since wipe is .500, My Kill Death is a even 1.0... can't be more balanced than that can it.

2) I think this is sorta vague, Cause I don't know fro sure what PGI intended. I know I can kill some Jenners an not others. I know My missiles are effective against some groups and a waste of tonnage against others. I know that overlapping fields of fire and massed firepower should kill my teams enemy in an effective systematic manner. I know I am playing a combat game against people who want a hand tied behind the back of their enemy, because they "deserve" a fair fight even though simple logic is the best team wins the match. Back when we were in Closed Beta and I could play as part of an 8 man team I won and lost 60/40. I got rolled and rolled others on a fairly even balance So over all the game was exactly what I expected. I got to be rolled by the best and beat those not as good as we were as a team. Now I can at best only team up with 3 Lawmen and that is sad, cause listening to 11 drunken baby killing psychopaths is freaking hilarious!

3) I only do blame myself for my lopsided losses... just as I pat my back when I Score 1,000 damage 4 kills and 7 assists in a victory. I have yet to face a Meta that the right strategy and good team work can not overcome... But the Solo players don't want to see what real team players can do when they are working as one. I marvel at watching a team "doing it right" and cannot find it in me to get mad when I see thunder and precision storming over my team. The game's mechanics does not make a good player into an idiot. But they will distinguish the two pretty quickly.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 11 April 2014 - 09:20 AM.

[111DOA111]

Mystere, on 11 April 2014 - 08:21 AM, said:

WOT? What is that?

<And I think you need your meds right now.>

........your talking about WOT's (WORLD OF TANKS) yet you don't know its abbreviated title IS WOT's.... o.O AND I NEED TO TAKE MEDS...LUL!

[Joseph Mallan]

111DOA111, on 11 April 2014 - 09:15 AM, said:

........your talking about WOT's (WORLD OF TANKS) yet you don't know its abbreviated title IS WOT's.... o.O AND I NEED TO TAKE MEDS...LUL!

Why the Apostrophe in WOT's does the World belong to the Tanks?

[Mystere]

111DOA111, on 11 April 2014 - 09:15 AM, said:

........your talking about WOT's (WORLD OF TANKS) yet you don't know its abbreviated title IS WOT's.... o.O AND I NEED TO TAKE MEDS...LUL!

Oh! WOT stands for an arcade-style video game named "World of Tanks". How grand.

I was talking about tank battles that happened on the Eastern Front during the Second World War.

Your wording and use of capitalization still indicate some emotional and possibly mental instability. As such, you really need to take your meds right now.

Joseph Mallan, on 11 April 2014 - 09:17 AM, said:

Why the Apostrophe in WOT's does the World belong to the Tanks?

That suggests an insufficient grasp of the English language. I do hope that is not his primary tongue. Otherwise, that will suggest something even worse.

Edited by Mystere, 11 April 2014 - 09:29 AM.