51 replies to this topic

[SirLANsalot]

Roland, on 25 May 2014 - 05:00 PM, said:

Pretty much everything you said here is wrong, or shortsighted and based on a flawed assumption of implementation of things like battlevalue.

How would you balance a game with BV then? Have MM making games over 10k BV a side with a 200BV buffer? MW:T uses BV straight out of the book, and matches your lances BV vs another one of the same number, or within 50. Same stuff that happens on TT.

It however can never take into account the SKILL of a player behind the mech. I could take a low BV mech, with few weapons, and just pwn everyone else because they were lower skilled then I. I am not saying our "ELO" system is any better (its not) but solutions do need to be factored in to give more to the ELO system then just W/L. Such as damage dealt that match/kills/assists all need to factored in, which will give the MM a better picture of how "good" you are.

[El Bandito]

Personally I'd like to keep it simple. I'd prefer to play with/against anyone with similar W/L ratio (must also factor in the number of matches played), regardless of KDR or damage dealt. Combined with 3/3/3/3 of course.

Edited by El Bandito, 26 May 2014 - 02:21 AM.

[vondano]

i am aslo the last of my bunch... and im not sure i will be around long...

im sorry, but OP is right, they lied to us...

i paid for a CW, a big engaging experience, a MW game...

not some COD style thing...

[Belorion]

Jack Corban, on 24 May 2014 - 08:07 PM, said:

Hello Russ,

i am in this from the start and i supported you a great deal all the way. I made plenty of posts on the forums regarding a variety of topics and i have certainly vented alot of frustration over certain developments in the past and present.

<snip>

1) Monetization

<snip>

2) Balancing

<snip>

3) Privat matches / E-Sport viability

<snip>

Same ol tired arguments, that don't mean anything. Even if you weren't the last in your small little group, then someone else would be the last. You aren't seeing drop off because of the specifics of what PGI has done. You are just seeing the drop off you would have anyway. The group I drop with has plenty of Founders/Phoenix package purchasers.

The monitization is fine. It doesn't matter what the ragular mechs cost because they are also free. If you don't want to pay money for them then don't. Out side of the Founders mechs, the phoenix mechs, and the hero mechs that I have purchase on sale, all of my mechs have been purchased with c-bills.

Balance is fine. Your balance isn't everyones balance. If they balanced the game the way you wanted then an equal number of people would still be complaining about balance.

There is nothing wrong with requiring premium time for private lobbies. Its only the two drop commanders who need premium time. The other 22 people can be 100% free. WoW is an esport, and that requires every player to have premium time.

[Jack Corban]

Belorion, on 26 May 2014 - 06:07 AM, said:

Same ol tired arguments, that don't mean anything. Even if you weren't the last in your small little group, then someone else would be the last. You aren't seeing drop off because of the specifics of what PGI has done. You are just seeing the drop off you would have anyway. The group I drop with has plenty of Founders/Phoenix package purchasers.

The monitization is fine. It doesn't matter what the ragular mechs cost because they are also free. If you don't want to pay money for them then don't. Out side of the Founders mechs, the phoenix mechs, and the hero mechs that I have purchase on sale, all of my mechs have been purchased with c-bills.

Balance is fine. Your balance isn't everyones balance. If they balanced the game the way you wanted then an equal number of people would still be complaining about balance.

There is nothing wrong with requiring premium time for private lobbies. Its only the two drop commanders who need premium time. The other 22 people can be 100% free. WoW is an esport, and that requires every player to have premium time.

1. theres probably lots of people that wouldn't mind buying a mech every now and then with MC but most shy away due to pricing

2. You know its not and defending it makes you look very uninformed

3. There is everythig wrong with money beeing involved in the tools for competitive Gameplay and if you don't understand why then you are beyound help

Whitenights unite the Crusade continues.

Edited by Jack Corban, 26 May 2014 - 09:51 AM.

[ReighnOfDeath]

Black Ivan, on 26 May 2014 - 01:23 AM, said:

I 100 % agree with Jack Corben.

Well said man, but think nobody at PGI cares

If they did not care, they would have never created this game in the first place.
Please think before you post something like this man.

Jack does have valid points, and I hope that things improve.
Also for those of you that hate on playes like Jack, don't!
Usually if people complain or make statements like that it means that they care and don't want to see things go south. (although not always true, because some people do tend to get carried away, this is the webs afterall)

As for me, I'm hopefull, I have always enjoyed this franchise and I sencerely hope that things even out.

Edited by ReighnOfDeath, 26 May 2014 - 02:34 PM.

[Butane9000]

Jack Corban, on 25 May 2014 - 08:30 PM, said:

Probably never. But its a nice feeling to have it of my heart, also i enjoy seeing feedback from both camps regarding what i talked about as long as it is presented in a civil manner.

Yes i'm talking to you BUTTane9000

[Jack Corban]

Its ok man i'm a caring and forgiving person. No hard feelings.

[CeeKay Boques]

Oh Jack, I know what you want. I THINK their hearts are in it... but wouldn't we know by now?

SirLANsalot, on 26 May 2014 - 01:46 AM, said:

How would you balance a game with BV then? Have MM making games over 10k BV a side with a 200BV buffer? MW:T uses BV straight out of the book, and matches your lances BV vs another one of the same number, or within 50. Same stuff that happens on TT.

It however can never take into account the SKILL of a player behind the mech. I could take a low BV mech, with few weapons, and just pwn everyone else because they were lower skilled then I. I am not saying our "ELO" system is any better (its not) but solutions do need to be factored in to give more to the ELO system then just W/L. Such as damage dealt that match/kills/assists all need to factored in, which will give the MM a better picture of how "good" you are.

Your account get a battle value (totally gameable, sorry) , 0-10 or 1-100 if you like. Multiply that chit in. All done.

[Sandtiger]

Jack Corban, on 25 May 2014 - 11:59 PM, said:

The problem with Balance at the moment are varied and way to diverse to explain them and all their individual interconnections with one another without having a constructive talk face to face and a whiteboard at hand.

But lets me try to give you an idea about what i am talking here apart from Battle Value.

I will start of with ELO.

While i get the idea behind ELO i am not a big fan of it simply because people learn by mistakes made and by copying tactics and maneuvers from players they got beaten by. While i do understand that poeple get frustrated by loosing it is at the same time a learning experience.

The Problem however is much less the ELO then it is the current Meta and all the variables that enable it.

First off Tech in Battletech and subsequently in this game aswell has never been balanced. At least not in a way that most people expect to see. Like a overall same DPS for instance. Thats not what Battletech does. Battletech has a value for every component a Mech can fit including the chassis itselfe and adds it up. Much like in Warhammer 40k where you have a match against Player X and you beforehand decide how many points both players will be able to spend on their Army. The only differenc in MWO would be that Teams with similar Battlevalue would get teamed up. That is a pretty fair balance. It goes as far as getting rid of most the Problems they try to circumvent with their (PGI) way of balancing the Clan Tech/Mechs. Because as i stated before a lance of Clanners in Heavy's is roughly worth a complete Assault Lance of IS mechs. And you know this is ok. The Clanners have the upper hand on weapon tech on that scenario as they can fire more frequently because their weapons produce less heat and they have a slight advantage on damage BUT the IS assault lance is not Pushover aswell they have way thicker armor and cary pobably 1-3 weapons more per mech then the Clan heavies. So tell me what the futsh is everyone so afraid of ?

The next thing is the overly abused Customization of mechs to a degree where the only characteristics viable on a mech are does it have JJ's can it carry SSRMS/PPC's/Gauss or AC/X. That does not really add to variety in playstyles as much as people would think it does. People have by nature the desire to win and for that goal they will allways use the way of the least resistance. In other words they will use the Mech configuration that most Pinpoint players use these days.

I made a very extensive post on Stockmech viability and limited Hardpoints to prevent Mechs from becoming obsolete in the past and i got talked down by many players. But if you see the greater picture of what this game is and how its mechanics enable what we have today you may actually see some wisdom in what i wrote nearly 6 month ago (may be longer ago).

Anyways to come back to you not seeing the problem with Balance its way way more diverse then most people think it is.
I'm just trying to draw up a solution with a multitude of interconnecting mechanic changes that would and i do really believe so change this game around for the better.

I agree with you Jack, Battle value would be so much better than "Balance" which to me, is simply R-E-T-A-R-D-E-D. You make my equipment suck so that players who aren't as good as I am will have a sporting chance? Am I the only one who is scratching his head over this? As theodore42 just mentioned ^ "an overbalance of skill" Funny, is this not a first person shooter? Is this game not supposed to revolve around a players skill and tactics? Is it fair that we as players are punished because we can shoot straight, or have the common sense, not to get caught out in the open by ourselves? However, I disagree with you about stock mech viability and limited hard points. This game has always been about how diverse of a build you can make. When PGI started balancing equipment, they devoured the soul of this game. If they continue on this course, this game should be renamed rockem sockem robots. The end result will be cookie cutter mechs. If I want that, I can go play Hawken, or similar.

Edited by Sandtiger, 12 June 2014 - 01:26 PM.

[Jon Gotham]

Trouble is mate, it already Is cookie cutter mechs.

[Sandpit]

Jack Corban, on 24 May 2014 - 08:07 PM, said:

Hello Russ,

i am in this from the start and i supported you a great deal all the way.

Check out Russ' twitter (or I can send screenshots if he deleted the tweet), your support is only "true" support if you agree with him and PGI. If not, then peace out and your "support" didn't count.