91 replies to this topic

[Kiri117]

Wouldn't it make far more sense to break up the larger group, because the group of 2 wants to stay together and the bigger groups are going to be split anyway?

For example, groups are 4 are perfect because it's already a lance. But a group of 5+ is already going to be split, so in the event that you have let's say 5, then 3, then 2 and 2, I would hope the matchmaker actually splits that group of 5 versus one of the groups of 2. The way it's stated in the first post says that it prioritizes smaller groups to be split first.

In pretty much all cases that I can think of, it makes more sense to split the larger group rather than the smaller group. The example given was 4 + 3 + 3 + 2, splitting up the group of 2. That is probably the only situation where splitting the smaller makes more sense (arguably so at that). In any other configuration, you're only really seeing splits when you have a 5+ group, because the lower numbers are easy to match unless it's literally 3 + 3 + 3 + 3 at which point one group is just destroyed completely =p

Anyway, the point is, splitting the smallest group makes little sense to me.

[RjBass3]

Wintersdark, on 03 July 2014 - 06:52 PM, said:

Niko, I can't emphasise these posts enough.

The current spawn points where an interesting play, but they're highly problematic with larger groups and of course as WM Wraith says there's a VERY serious issue right now even in the Solo queue where if you've taken a slow mech, and get dropped in the distant drop point (most maps have one lance dropped far from the rest) you're pretty much doomed from the start, as a fast moving enemy team can isolate and crush that distant lance. Players all know how this works, so faster mechs in the distant lance tend to book ass immediately to rejoin the team, leaving the slow assaults to their death. This, because they understand staying with the Assaults won't help, as the resulting 8v4 will be very onesided anyways.

As said, the spawn points don't need to be on top of each other, but do need to be close enough that players can quickly reposition at the start of the match, or at least don't need to worry about having literally no chance to join up with their team.

Alpine is a very good example of how this works. Terra Therma, too.

The spawn points need to be looked at.

Another great example is Caustic. Sometimes the Charlie lance get assaulted by the enemy before they even have time to get over the next hill let alone join up with the rest of the team.

[Suko]

That's fine and all, but can we PLEASE get some way of identifying those in our groups? Perhaps add a purple outline around all the triangles for team members? Anything quick and easy to identify my buddy in a firefight would be tremendously useful.

[Garlion]

Nikolai Lubkiewicz, on 03 July 2014 - 04:38 PM, said:

Keeping in mind that we have a limit of three lances and four players per lance, and that we also want to keep matchmaking within acceptable time parameters: I'd invite you to offer a suggestion of how you would rather see this implemented.

Offer a flag you can set in your UI to show either Lance or Group as the "Aqua" color normally used for lancemates. It's a simple fix. Perhaps allow us to keybind it so we can switch in battle.

[Bront]

Kiri117, on 13 August 2014 - 06:08 PM, said:

Wouldn't it make far more sense to break up the larger group, because the group of 2 wants to stay together and the bigger groups are going to be split anyway?

In the example where it's 4, 3, 3 and 2, no, the 2 man group being split makes sense. If it's all groups smaller than that, there's no real choice.

Largest group is a 5 man? Already going to split off 1, and there's no grouping 5 or less that should require any other split.

Largest group is a 6 man? With 2 3 mans I guess I could see splitting the 2 stragglers of the 6 man up. No need to split up otherwise with a 4 and 2 man pairing though.

in the case of an 7, 3, and 2? I could see splitting the 7 man into a 4, 2, and 1. Otherwise, you get a 5 man here.

With 8+, it's either 1 other group or 2 2-mans, and they get their own lance for the most part, so no splitting.

So, splitting the larger or smaller group is only an issue in 4-3-3-2s, 6-3-3s, and 7-3-2s anyway. And honestly, why mess with the larger group in the 4-3-3-2 man or the 7-3-2? That leaves the 6-3-3 as the only outlier case where it makes more sense to split the larger group.

[Bront]

Garlion, on 02 September 2014 - 10:44 AM, said:

Offer a flag you can set in your UI to show either Lance or Group as the "Aqua" color normally used for lancemates. It's a simple fix. Perhaps allow us to keybind it so we can switch in battle.

They'll probably offer it as something you can buy for your in game unit. That would be a useful unit upgrade.

[Revengex]

I see that ONCE AGAIN there will be "Clan Weapon Balance changes" this next patch.

Can't you guys just leave it alone for a few weeks? Imagine if you were playing poker and EVERY TIME YOU PLAYED the rules changed to make it harder/inconsistent to play?

Are you guys not thinking about the players?

Give it a rest please.

[Cimarb]

Revengex, on 03 September 2014 - 06:49 AM, said:

I see that ONCE AGAIN there will be "Clan Weapon Balance changes" this next patch.

Can't you guys just leave it alone for a few weeks? Imagine if you were playing poker and EVERY TIME YOU PLAYED the rules changed to make it harder/inconsistent to play?

Are you guys not thinking about the players?

Give it a rest please.

Actually, this is the live implementation of the public test changes that were announced last. Is is not an additional set of changes.

[Kjudoon]

When I did 12man competitive drops, It was in vogue to rearrange the lances. When it was realized that this was wasted time because moving lances did nothing to help out moving the mechs together, I abandoned the whole process. Told the scouts where to go and start their job, and the heavies to rally at another point. THey all went there and off we went. Didn't matter what lance you were in. Your battle buddy was the guy to your left and right.

So who cares who gets moved. It's worthless to get bent out of shape over. Using teamspeak allows me to easily coordinate and ignore all in game commands and restructuring without ever needing to be involved with it. Ergo, this is not an issue in my eyes.

[Cimarb]

Kjudoon, on 03 September 2014 - 06:33 PM, said:

When I did 12man competitive drops, It was in vogue to rearrange the lances. When it was realized that this was wasted time because moving lances did nothing to help out moving the mechs together, I abandoned the whole process. Told the scouts where to go and start their job, and the heavies to rally at another point. THey all went there and off we went. Didn't matter what lance you were in. Your battle buddy was the guy to your left and right.

So who cares who gets moved. It's worthless to get bent out of shape over. Using teamspeak allows me to easily coordinate and ignore all in game commands and restructuring without ever needing to be involved with it. Ergo, this is not an issue in my eyes.

The issue is not necessarily in 12-man drops, though. The issue is primarily when you have smaller groups thrown all over the map.

Say, for instance, we have two stars (5) and a 2-man lance. When we drop, we get tossed in seemingly random lances across one side of the map.

Ideally, your actual group (not lance in the match, but premade group before match) would be signified somehow visibly - maybe an outline around the triangle, so you did not have to hold your Q button and try to pick out names amongst the blue collage of words all over, and then each lance would be colored slightly different to signify which lance each group was on the battlegrid.

[Almond Brown]

In the Drop screen allow a player to select their Lance color. Simple 1 click rotates through the 3 (or 4) available colors. That way if I end up in Bravo Lance, but wish to be Alpha/Charlie lances color, I can just click until Alpha's/Charlie's lance color is selected beside my ID.

Then when the Map loads, pressing B shows me exactly where all the Alpha's lance members (triangles) are and move accordingly if need be.

[Fire and Salt]

Valten, on 08 July 2014 - 03:24 PM, said:

I don't know. I had my 6 man get split between all three lances last night.

6 man + 3 man + 3 man, I would guess.




Anyways, I say that group members could just use a slightly different indicator so we know who is who, kinda like the teal vs. blue we have now. (Disable this feature in 12 mans because it is un-necessary)







All in all, I don't really care for the 'lance' functionality.

Sadly, one of the best tactics in many maps is to just rush the isolated lance and try to gank them all before they can form up with their team.

On some maps, this is the case of the stupid repetitive counter-clockwise metagame. (River City)

Spawn at the tail in a slow mech? Well you are screwed. Maybe you will get a better spawn next time.

Notice how forest colony doesn't suffer from this problem. It is another small map, but the team spawns as a group, so there is no-one to 'gank'






If you got rid of the lance spawn thing and just had the whole team spawn together, then you could presumably have groups of 2, 3, or 4 with no issues.

Edited by Fire and Salt, 06 September 2014 - 12:40 PM.