5 replies to this topic

[Death Mallet]

Nobody wants a game where everybody is in an assault mech all the time. We'll lose the advantage of the role warefare you guys are building into the game which would be a shame.

Tonnage limits help, teams will just run short of numbers in order to maximze tonnage if that's the only limit.

I feel that:

The matchmaker should be tweaked to accept no more than 4 mechs of any category (Light, Medium, Heavy, Assault) on a 12 man team.

Thus any randomly selected team can comprise:

0 - 4 Light Mechs
0 - 4 Medium Mechs
0 - 4 Heavy Mechs
0 - 4 Assault Mechs

to a limit of 12 total mechs, weighing a total 750 tons or less.

Constructed teams would have to follow the same limits. . . PLUS must have at least 2 mechs from each category.

[Jost]

I understand where you're going and I like it, but I'd disagree on details.

For one thing, that's way too many assault mechs. A regiment from a "normal" faction has about 10% assault mechs - that would be either one or two out of your twelve.

And though the different factions use different numbers of different classes, even Steiner regiments are only (iirc) 15% assault.

Finally, I'd go in the direction of encouragement rather than coercion. Typing out of my heatsink here, but maybe a set of bonuses related to how "fluffy" your force is. And definitely, extra xp and cash to teams which do well despite being significantly outgunned.

[Death Mallet]

I get what you're saying. . . the only problem being:

1. People love to play assault mechs. And creating a fun game sometimes has to take precedence over fluff considerations. Still 0-4 per force of 12 isn't an overwhelming amount.

2. The game is going to be flooded with founders atlases to start. Matchmaker has to be able to give all those mechs a game.

3. Gentle encouragement doesn't work so well in practice, because those teams will consistently lose to less fluffy teams. The rewards of victory will outweigh the benefits of "comp bonuses" that might be applied. And at the end of the day, the game should be about piloting and winning, not about who can put together the most "realistic" mech force.

[I Am Sancho]

I don't think a tonnage limit, but equal distribution of tonnage between the two teams. That is, the total weight of the mechs should be the same on either team. Past that, perhaps a composition algorithm to make sure it's not a handful of assualts against an armada of lights even though the tonnage is the same. The problem I would see with capping quantities of types is that those who don't start off with founders mechs will be stuck running only certain mechs becuase they don't have c-bills to buy new ones. If they only have 1 or 2 mechs then they may spend a lot of time searching for a game that will let them play the mechs in balance with what they own.

[Ahma]

I agree with I Am Sancho (!) Equal tonnage should do it. At least in some game mode. Bit disappointed if its like wot, 12vs12 or what the limit was there. More 'realistic' if the opposing mech number varies.. Element of surprise and such? I found wot dull because of the static number of own and enemy team.

[Jost]

Death Mallet, on 20 June 2012 - 08:08 AM, said:

1. People love to play assault mechs. And creating a fun game sometimes has to take precedence over fluff considerations. Still 0-4 per force of 12 isn't an overwhelming amount.

True, and I completely agree. I'm just trying to look for ways to help keep a mix of mech types without making it impossible to get a match.

Death Mallet, on 20 June 2012 - 08:08 AM, said:

2. The game is going to be flooded with founders atlases to start. Matchmaker has to be able to give all those mechs a game.

Agreed - in fact, that's part of my point. Without some alternative to limiting number of assaults, the assaults will sit in the lobby waiting for someone to stomp.

Death Mallet, on 20 June 2012 - 08:08 AM, said:

3. Gentle encouragement doesn't work so well in practice, because those teams will consistently lose to less fluffy teams. The rewards of victory will outweigh the benefits of "comp bonuses" that might be applied. And at the end of the day, the game should be about piloting and winning, not about who can put together the most "realistic" mech force.

I don't think they'll necessarily consistently lose, if the game is otherwise balanced. Equal BV (yes, BV isn't perfect, but it's better than tonnage), but different distributions? Might be a surprising story.

But completely agreed: "the game should be about piloting and winning". I'd add "or technologically superior" to your "realistic".