50 replies to this topic

[East Indy]

Agreed on several points made.

Mediums may influence how a team handles the most based on whether players choose speed or firepower -- but it depends on the chassis, as some models don't really benefit from slower engines. It may turn out that speed rules, and mediums simply enjoy fewer firepower threats.

There may be a paradox with respect to assaults. Lack of speed may make poor positioning even more significant, now that a herd of other assaults can't be counted on, and it may mean the average assault player won't influence a match as much. At the same time, very good players may experience classic, "five on one" victories, and swing matches, due to 50%-67% fewer assaults on the field.

Atlases, particularly, have a chance to ride high again with far fewer competitors (assaults) or firing lines popping a torso fast (heavies).

[Pygar]

3 rule is going to have a weird two-way effect on the mechs we see in matches: on the one hand, we'll see more Mediums and Lights, and less overall tonnage in matches- which will seem to expand the "meta". On the other hand, limited slots in individual weight classes is going to put pressure on pilots to bring the best mech possible for a given slot- constricting the "meta" and making seldom seen mechs (like Dragon, for example) that much more rare on the battlefield. (or even non-existant.)

Edited by Pygar, 23 April 2014 - 09:54 AM.

[Fang01]

If that 1-1 rule is strict you can damned sure expect premade teams gaining proficiency in odd tonned mechs and forcing their use. 3 locust 3Ms and an ecm cicada or a lance of fast bj1xs and a ecm spider sound like a fabulous way to wreck another team's chances. How bout three dragons? All it takes is one good team in bad mechs to bring the whole thing crashing down.

BET

[Cybertek]

It will be interesting playing in 3/3/3/3. Teams that typically outweighed other teams are going to have a hard time adjusting to lighter drops and dealing with certain teams at a more even wieght. I do hope though eventually you could modifiy the 3/3/3/3 and go against teams with similar setups or weights. I always like doing our fun run of 12 Locusts or 11LRM boats and 1 light, just to change things up. Even if there were different setups for the different modes. Assault mode more heavey, Conquest lighter setups.

[Joseph Mallan]

For a minute it will be interesting. but then it will become the vanilla that so many seem to want.

[Pygar]

Khajja nar Jatargk, on 23 April 2014 - 10:06 AM, said:

If that 1-1 rule is strict you can damned sure expect premade teams gaining proficiency in odd tonned mechs and forcing their use. 3 locust 3Ms and an ecm cicada or a lance of fast bj1xs and a ecm spider sound like a fabulous way to wreck another team's chances. How bout three dragons? All it takes is one good team in bad mechs to bring the whole thing crashing down.

BET

Actually, I think that part of the 3 rule is going to change how 4vPUG groups work...only one "pre-made" per side, and the 4 man groups have to go with a direct 1/1/1/1 lance composition.

Edited by Pygar, 23 April 2014 - 10:52 AM.

[Murzao]

meteorol, on 23 April 2014 - 04:28 AM, said:

That post was hilarious in so many ways. Always nice to see guys having their own, very special view on stuff.

You obviously have never played in weight limit 12 mans. Mediums bring the most speedXfirepowerXarmor.

But you will soon play an approximation in the 3/3/3/3 where if your mediums can beat a few heavies/assaults (easy to do), you will win every time. Heck my w/l ratio is 1.5 (mostly pugging) in 100% medium just screwing around in frankenbuilds carrying the assaults in their 'metabuilds' lmao....and people complain about a 50/50 matchmaker yea sure there.

Edited by Murzao, 23 April 2014 - 11:53 AM.

[Charons Little Helper]

Joseph Mallan, on 23 April 2014 - 10:30 AM, said:

For a minute it will be interesting. but then it will become the vanilla that so many seem to want.

It will have a bit more of a boardgame / match type feel. While debatable, I think that the balance it brings will be more than worth it. (From both this and other posts you've made - I'm guessing that you might just disagree. )

Either way - it's a balancing act on PGI's part.

[Demuder]

Agent of Change, on 23 April 2014 - 09:08 AM, said:

I think you will be correct. I think that even distribution is probably a bad idea and won't last very long (or shouldn't but will drag on just because). I think there will be a whole bunch of heavy and assault mech players not able to find matches quickly. i think medium mech players are likely to be the only people who will consistently get matches every time they drop.

Encouraging diversity by giving people a reason to use good spread of mech in their drops is a good plan, Forcing players into a fixed distribution is a mediocre plan at best. But if you want to be paranoid it certainly seems like a good way to encourage people to buy into those private matches (which i'm still wondering why they even bothered with seeing as how 84% of MWO players are solo Puggers. It seems to me given those numbers that a paid mode designed specifically to cater to premade groups would not be a money maker right?).

I am not sure at all. It might also go the other way, and since people will feel finally encouraged to play their mediums, it will be the mediums queue that will be congested.

What I am pretty sure about though is that it will very soon boil down to 3 Jenner/Spider - 3 Shadowhawk - 3 Jag/CTF3D - 3 Atlas/Victor battles. With a varied amount of disconnected/idle players, of that I am sure.

Funniest thing of course, is that in my ELO and time zone (Europe evening, indeterminate ELO) all classes are more or less represented. Maybe not in a 3/3/3/3 format, but I seldom see a light heavy or an assault heavy game, and certainly with the advent of Shadowhawks all the games are rife with those. And Thunderbolts due to the recent give away.

[Charons Little Helper]

dimstog, on 24 April 2014 - 04:21 AM, said:

I am not sure at all. It might also go the other way, and since people will feel finally encouraged to play their mediums, it will be the mediums queue that will be congested.

I don't think that the medium queue will get get more congested than heavy/assault, but I do think that a variant of Adam Smith's invisible hand will keep all the queues relatively short as long as people have a ballpark knowledge of how long each queue is before they launch.

[SpiralFace]

I'm betting the first few weeks will see heavies and assault ques REALLY congested as so many players just gravitate towards those chassis, but as the medium players begin to give them fits now that there is less chance of running into an assault line, you'll see players naturally gravitate towards a well rounded que.

Its really only the mediums that are probably underpopulated at this point. All other weight classes usually have good distribution on teams, with assaults really only being the "big" issue.

[Joseph Mallan]

Charons Little Helper, on 23 April 2014 - 12:58 PM, said:

It will have a bit more of a boardgame / match type feel. While debatable, I think that the balance it brings will be more than worth it. (From both this and other posts you've made - I'm guessing that you might just disagree. )

Either way - it's a balancing act on PGI's part.

Yeah... I know. I am one who is happy to know I don't know what I am going to run into. Knowing that my enemy will be 3/3/3/3 will take away a level of insecurity that makes me automatically work a bit harder. Kinda Like R&R made be take standard over XL to save money in repairs. I used CASE cause dang it blowing up 5 tons of ammo ruined your bottom line.

Complacent. Thats the word I am looking for. knowing you will face 3/3/3/3 will make me more complacent, than MM being like a box of chocolates.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 24 April 2014 - 04:50 AM.

[Charons Little Helper]

Joseph Mallan, on 24 April 2014 - 04:49 AM, said:

Complacent. Thats the word I am looking for. knowing you will face 3/3/3/3 will make me more complacent, than MM being like a box of chocolates.

Frankly - in theory I'd prefer some other balancing factor - such as the battle value which some people promote.

But that's in theory.

In practice - any sort of battle value would be impossible to balance in this type of game. While I don't play battletech - I play enough other TT games (warhammer/40k/warmachine) I know that point values are hard enough to balance in strategy games. It'd be impossible in this game. Especially in solo dropping. (As an extreme example - how do you put a BV on NARC or TAG when they might drop on a team with no LRMs?)

3/3/3/3 isn't likely the best way to balance - but it's the K.I.S.S. way to balance. And in general, I'm a big fan of the K.I.S.S. rule. (Keep It Simple Stupid)

[Karl Streiger]

Charons Little Helper, on 24 April 2014 - 04:59 AM, said:

3/3/3/3 isn't likely the best way to balance - but it's the K.I.S.S. way to balance. And in general, I'm a big fan of the K.I.S.S. rule. (Keep It Simple Stupid)

3/3/3/3 is KISS? Interesting?

A far from that - i can have BattleTech games - made by BV...and the unit composition means that i have no chance to win
made by Tonnage - i have no chance to win

(A really good example - consider Mechs - like Awesome-8Q, Vincidactor and Panther and hm maybe a Wolfhound.... when you match them with good armored medium range fighters using AC 10s or Large Laser you will be beaten on almost any terrain. - > simple you can't prevent them from getting close.

So the best way for balancing - is role: You don't match 4 Snipers vs 4 Juggernauts - you try to balance the game by
2 Snipers and 2 Juggernauts vs 2 & 2.

That's fair

[East Indy]

It has to be the biggest coincidence ever, but most matches I've played this week have seen an average of 4 or fewer assault 'Mechs per side, and generally even distribution of other classes.

On bigger maps with aggressive players, gameplay is dynamic from start to finish. No deathballs, no wall of fire -- instead, fast maneuvers, porous lines, and many more challenges to players' tactical awareness than hiding in cover.

Tuesday can't arrive fast enough.

[Charons Little Helper]

East Indy, on 24 April 2014 - 05:22 AM, said:

It has to be the biggest coincidence ever, but most matches I've played this week have seen an average of 4 or fewer assault 'Mechs per side, and generally even distribution of other classes.

It wouldn't surprise me if people are dusting off their mediums in preparation for Tuesday.

[Joseph Mallan]

Charons Little Helper, on 24 April 2014 - 04:59 AM, said:

Frankly - in theory I'd prefer some other balancing factor - such as the battle value which some people promote.

But that's in theory.

In practice - any sort of battle value would be impossible to balance in this type of game. While I don't play battletech - I play enough other TT games (warhammer/40k/warmachine) I know that point values are hard enough to balance in strategy games. It'd be impossible in this game. Especially in solo dropping. (As an extreme example - how do you put a BV on NARC or TAG when they might drop on a team with no LRMs?)

3/3/3/3 isn't likely the best way to balance - but it's the K.I.S.S. way to balance. And in general, I'm a big fan of the K.I.S.S. rule. (Keep It Simple Stupid)

Simple was Class matching. If we have 4 Heavies, 3 Assaults, 2 Mediums and 3 Lights... So do you! I wasn't a fan of that system for the same reason I am not a fan of 3⁴. As an 8 man we could dictate how many of what class the enemy would have. How do you prove you are the best if you don't battle every and any competitor.

[Charons Little Helper]

Joseph Mallan, on 24 April 2014 - 05:26 AM, said:

How do you prove you are the best if you don't battle every and any competitor.

While I agree to a point - you could make the same argument for boxing/wrestling/MMA. (devil's advocate time!) That there shouldn't be weight classes - as the top featherweight boxer doesn't really deserve to get a championship belt if he can't take out a top tier heavyweight.

The UFC even started sans weight classes.

[East Indy]

Charons Little Helper, on 24 April 2014 - 05:25 AM, said:

It wouldn't surprise me if people are dusting off their mediums in preparation for Tuesday.

Be great if so.

Another cool thing about this will be de facto roles -- if I bring an Atlas build I've wanted to try out, I play as "the assault," not just one among eight.

[Mavairo]

Joseph Mallan, on 24 April 2014 - 04:49 AM, said:

Yeah... I know. I am one who is happy to know I don't know what I am going to run into. Knowing that my enemy will be 3/3/3/3 will take away a level of insecurity that makes me automatically work a bit harder. Kinda Like R&R made be take standard over XL to save money in repairs. I used CASE cause dang it blowing up 5 tons of ammo ruined your bottom line.

Complacent. Thats the word I am looking for. knowing you will face 3/3/3/3 will make me more complacent, than MM being like a box of chocolates.

"Will it be merely 5 assaults or 7 this time"

Pretty much the only question I ask when I que for any given match right now. What isn't an Assault will 90 percent of the time be a heavy.