271 replies to this topic

[kapusta11]

Ok, I've got your point, if weapon balance is not a concern of MM, how can you tell that NUMBER of players playing specific class influence anything? You simply took it on faith. The noise of broken weapon balance is to high to separate any info from it. It is possible that there is nothing to fix, if you put it that way.

People don't like 4x3 because it's another step in wrong direction from PGI side that will change nothing but to set a chain reaction of people who leave because of long wait times an those who leave because of small player base (even longer wait times).

Edited by kapusta11, 22 June 2014 - 04:09 AM.

[BLOOD WOLF]

kapusta11, on 22 June 2014 - 04:07 AM, said:

Ok, I've got your point, if weapon balance is not a concern of MM, how can you tell that NUMBER of players playing specific class influence anything? You simply took it on faith. The noise of broken weapon balance is to high to separate any info from it. It is possible that there is nothing to fix, if you put it that way.

People don't like 4x3 because it's another step in wrong direction from PGI side that will change nothing but to set a chain reaction of people who leave because of long wait times an those who leave because of small player base (even longer wait times).

I do not have any clue as to what you are talking about. I can tell you that players who play specific classes will affect the MM, I never said that i did not. I did not take it on faith, also i do not see what weapon balance has anything to do with it. It is not a step in the wrong direction, going by anything solution given here would be a step in the wrong direction. to add to that how is making sure each team has the same number of weight classes a wrong move. No sir you did not get my point.

[Jolly Llama]

3/3/3/3 is just wrong. I bought or played for each mech I own. I should be able to play them. This rule limits when I can do that. Each and every time they have turned this on, wait times have skyrocketed and matches are boring as ****. If you cant handle a heavier team, then you need to learn to play.

Ironically, a couple of weeks ago in private matches, heavy tonnage was not the problem. A friend and I were asked to play heavier mechs because our medium/light combonation was hard for the big guys to take out. People want to blame the Assault pilots for this rule being dreamed up, but if you have ever run across a competent light pilot or four man pack then you will know that they are the truly dangerous mechs. Assaults are just too easy to isolate and destroy. That being said, tonnage has little to do with victory when skill and teamwork are present.

Anyway, I know that a lot of fanboys are gonna be all whiny about people that believe PGI is ********. There are also a lot of low skill medium pilots out there that think they should be able to hit the easy button and win with 3/3/3/3. Those will be the ones that argue and flame this post. Take note when you see them bitching in chat. BTW, there is the real nerf that needs to happen. Let me turn that **** off in game.

[BLOOD WOLF]

geodeath, on 22 June 2014 - 04:18 AM, said:

3/3/3/3 is just wrong. I bought or played for each mech I own. I should be able to play them. This rule limits when I can do that. Each and every time they have turned this on, wait times have skyrocketed and matches are boring as ****. If you cant handle a heavier team, then you need to learn to play.

Ironically, a couple of weeks ago in private matches, heavy tonnage was not the problem. A friend and I were asked to play heavier mechs because our medium/light combonation was hard for the big guys to take out. People want to blame the Assault pilots for this rule being dreamed up, but if you have ever run across a competent light pilot or four man pack then you will know that they are the truly dangerous mechs. Assaults are just too easy to isolate and destroy. That being said, tonnage has little to do with victory when skill and teamwork are present.

Anyway, I know that a lot of fanboys are gonna be all whiny about people that believe PGI is ********. There are also a lot of low skill medium pilots out there that think they should be able to hit the easy button and win with 3/3/3/3. Those will be the ones that argue and flame this post. Take note when you see them bitching in chat. BTW, there is the real nerf that needs to happen. Let me turn that **** off in game.

3's does not limit what mechs you can run. the worst thing is disliking something while running under false pretenses. the example you gave doesn't say much about 3's

If you say 3's are wrong you are saying balanced teams are wrong, I do not understand that. You like a game being unbalanced for the sake of play style? Premium private matches were made for that, of course some complain that not earning c-bills is a detractor but at least you do not have to do three's. Also I doubt CW will work in such a way

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 22 June 2014 - 04:30 AM.

[Jolly Llama]

BLOOD WOLF, on 22 June 2014 - 04:24 AM, said:

3's does not limit what mechs you can run. the worst thing is disliking something while running under false pretenses. the example you gave doesn't say much about 3's

If you say 3's are wrong you are saying balanced teams are wrong, I do not understand that. You like a game being unbalanced for the sake of play style? Premium private matches were made for that, of course some complain that not earning c-bills is a detractor but at least you do not have to do three's. Also I doubt CW will work in such a way

It limits your mech selections by definition of the idea, only 3 mechs of each class are allowed. When wait times are over ten minutes just because I want to play a certain mech, then my choice of mechs is limited. It is a **** idea and there is no defending cookie cutter matches. They are boring and there is never a challenge. A good lance of three lights and a fast medium will always just hunt down the split up lights, then focus the assaults, who usually get strung out. It is all down hill from there. Every match, every time. Boring.

3/3/3/3 does nothing for balance, especially when most PUG matches consist of at least one disco, two or three fail builds, and a dumbass that wants to suicide.

Edited by geodeath, 22 June 2014 - 04:39 AM.

[kapusta11]

BLOOD WOLF, on 22 June 2014 - 04:17 AM, said:

I do not have any clue as to what you are talking about. I can tell you that players who play specific classes will affect the MM, I never said that i did not. I did not take it on faith, also i do not see what weapon balance has anything to do with it. It is not a step in the wrong direction, going by anything solution given here would be a step in the wrong direction. to add to that how is making sure each team has the same number of weight classes a wrong move. No sir you did not get my point.

Are you sure that class selection matters at all? Who'd win in a fight between Gauss+ER PPC Shadowhawk and Awesome (lets assume that player skill is even). What problem does 4x3 fixes again? Is there any on that matter then?

[BLOOD WOLF]

Let me start from the top

It does not limit your mech selection, if you are a solo player. You can still choose whatever mech you wish. they wait time will only effect you based on which class and how many players are running that class. It has nothing to do with MM. as a matter of fact it is not easy to match thousands of players at once and fitting them into matches were they should go only in a group are you limited to 3 per class. Most group players can compromise, a good example is when the clans came out I was playing with 4 people. They all wanted to run T-Wolfs so I decided that I would just switch to another class; I would be able to run my heavy later. Yea I wish we can all run the same class but it is a small sacrifice is worth an even match.

Wait times are unavoidable no matter what. They have hundreds of players on who all want to run the mech of their choice so it is gonna affect the MM at the end of the day. So using that as a reason why the MM is faulty is poor reasoning.

A good lance of 3 lights and a medium has nothing to do with the MM, that is player related. Aslo we have not had enough time to see if that stands so come back after 3's with that analysis.

3/3/3/3 is good for balance because it makes sure each time has the same classes. what the Pugs do or who disco's is not in the hands of the MM

[BLOOD WOLF]

kapusta11, on 22 June 2014 - 04:41 AM, said:

Are you sure that class selection matters at all? Who'd win in a fight between Gauss+ER PPC Shadowhawk and Awesome (lets assume that player skill is even). What problem does 4x3 fixes again? Is there any on that matter then?

The MM has no affect on what a person brings, i do not know who will win the fight? I do not see what that has to do with anything. Your talking about a medium vs a assault. I guess the Awsome?

I should say for the individual, for groups they can only have 3 of any class.

The problem 4x3's fixes is class balance in a match. No more 6-7 assaults on one team with 2 on the other. Once again the current MM is just balancing the teams so they have the same classes on each side and will try to balance weight effectively but that is not always 100%. Stop throwing unnecessary variables into the mix, as a way to find fault in the MM on things it has no control over.

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 22 June 2014 - 04:51 AM.

[Jolly Llama]

BLOOD WOLF, on 22 June 2014 - 04:46 AM, said:

Let me start from the top

It does not limit your mech selection, if you are a solo player. You can still choose whatever mech you wish. they wait time will only effect you based on which class and how many players are running that class. It has nothing to do with MM. as a matter of fact it is not easy to match thousands of players at once and fitting them into matches were they should go only in a group are you limited to 3 per class. Most group players can compromise, a good example is when the clans came out I was playing with 4 people. They all wanted to run T-Wolfs so I decided that I would just switch to another class; I would be able to run my heavy later. Yea I wish we can all run the same class but it is a small sacrifice is worth an even match.

Wait times are unavoidable no matter what. They have hundreds of players on who all want to run the mech of their choice so it is gonna affect the MM at the end of the day. So using that as a reason why the MM is faulty is poor reasoning.

A good lance of 3 lights and a medium has nothing to do with the MM, that is player related. Aslo we have not had enough time to see if that stands so come back after 3's with that analysis.

3/3/3/3 is good for balance because it makes sure each time has the same classes. what the Pugs do or who disco's is not in the hands of the MM

If you think that tonnage makes things even, then that says a lot about how you play. *** for tat drop decks are a losing bet. Ask any 12 man commander. You always set up to inflict the most amount of damage possible in the shortest time, while matching your mechs to to your overall plan of attack. Trying to match mechs against an opposing team just insures that you fight their fight and you lose. That is the true crux of 3/3/3/3, low skill plays want tonnage balance so that they can fight their fight and beat people who know how to use masses of lighter mechs. The assaults have really nothing to do the the whine that brought on this dumb idea.

Edited by geodeath, 22 June 2014 - 04:56 AM.

[BLOOD WOLF]

geodeath, on 22 June 2014 - 04:54 AM, said:

If you think that tonnage makes things even, then that says a lot about how you play. *** for tat drop decks are a losing bet. Ask any 12 man commander. You always set up to inflict the most amount of damage possible in the shortest time, while matching your mechs to to your overall plan of attack. Trying to match mechs against an opposing team just insures that you fight their fight and you lose. That is the true crux of 3/3/3/3, low skill plays want tonnage balance so that they can fight their fight and beat people who know how to use masses of lighter mechs. The assaults have really nothing to do the the whine that brought on this dumb idea.

When did i say anything about even tonnage? And are you telling me I am a low skill player?

The Crux of 3's and I am getting tired of repeating this. Also i will say this as simple as possible. If my team has 3 assaults, 3 heavies, 3 meds, 3 lights then the other team will mirror that in class only. Mech variation is still up to the players.

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 22 June 2014 - 05:01 AM.

[kapusta11]

BLOOD WOLF, on 22 June 2014 - 04:49 AM, said:

The problem 4x3's fixes is class balance in a match. No more 6-7 assaults on one team with 2 on the other. Once again the current MM is just balancing the teams so they have the same classes on each side and will try to balance weight effectively but that is not always 100%. Stop throwing unnecessary variables into the mix, as a way to find fault in the MM on things it has no control over.

I was about to ask how does current class "imbalance" affects the outcome of the game but

BLOOD WOLF, on 22 June 2014 - 04:49 AM, said:

The MM has no affect on what a person brings, i do not know who will win the fight? I do not see what that has to do with anything. Your talking about a medium vs a assault. I guess the Awsome?

This was all I needed.

[Jolly Llama]

3/3/3/3 is all about evening out tonnage, and it has been my experience that people who want to even out tonnage are trying to change the rules to compensate for their inability to overcome perceived advantages rather than learning how to do that tactically.

[BLOOD WOLF]

kapusta11, on 22 June 2014 - 04:59 AM, said:

I was about to ask how does current class "imbalance" affects the outcome of the game but



This was all I needed.

Nice mis qoute.

geodeath, on 22 June 2014 - 05:00 AM, said:

3/3/3/3 is all about evening out tonnage, and it has been my experience that people who want to even out tonnage are trying to change the rules to compensate for their inability to overcome perceived advantages rather than learning how to do that tactically.

It has nothing to do with tonnage evening out that is secondary and like i said is not the main objective but the MM will try its best to even it out. The goal is for each side to have an equal amount of classes. I doubt that tonnage will even be stressed as much as Class.

[Jolly Llama]

BLOOD WOLF, on 22 June 2014 - 05:05 AM, said:

Nice mis qoute.
It has nothing to do with tonnage evening out that is secondary and like i said is not the main objective but the MM will try its best to even it out. The goal is for each side to have an equal amount of classes. I doubt that tonnage will even be stressed as much as Class.

It is the same difference due to movement archetypes and numbers of hardpoints. The bottom line is that it limits the game, which needs no more limiting. We are overrun with that currently. It will also limit players. People will remain at the same skill level once they plateau. They will never take an ass beating and then get better. It creates a boring game environment and will be the last nail that slowly drains this game of all but the most die hard fans of the franchise.

Hide and watch, if they implement this permanently then there will be even fewer players onliine in six months than there were before the release of Clan mechs. This is a terrible idea and I am sad to see so many people getting onboard with it instead of training to be better at their preferred weight class.

[Davers]

It all comes down to a simple question. Is having 60-70% heavy and assault mechs good for game balance? If your answer is yes then you probably won't agree with any kind of limitations.

[Jolly Llama]

Davers, on 22 June 2014 - 05:34 AM, said:

It all comes down to a simple question. Is having 60-70% heavy and assault mechs good for game balance? If your answer is yes then you probably won't agree with any kind of limitations.

And I don't see a problem with that. They are easy to kill with lights and mediums. It is the outnumbered assaults and heavies, that use no cover and want to charge into a fight, that claim that is not balanced.

[Cavendish]

geodeath, on 22 June 2014 - 05:41 AM, said:

And I don't see a problem with that. They are easy to kill with lights and mediums. It is the outnumbered assaults and heavies, that use no cover and want to charge into a fight, that claim that is not balanced.

While I agree that IS lights have small issues killing off heavies and assults that are seperated due to the speed and hitboxes, even they face a problem when you have 10 light/mediums on your team and red team is flying 8+ assults.

I might not agree 100% with the 3/3/3/3 since I would prefer a tonnage balance but something needs to be done about how the MM builds teams.

[Belorion]

I am not a fan of 3/3/3/3, nor am I a fan of tonnage limits, but I would rather see that than the 3/3/3/3 abomination.

[Jolly Llama]

First come, first serve. Trash everything else. It is more realistic.

[Cavendish]

geodeath, on 22 June 2014 - 07:02 AM, said:

First come, first serve. Trash everything else. It is more realistic.

Heh no, "realistic" would be more of a 3/3/3/3. You do not send in a heavy tank division without scouting and support.