Jump to content

Clan Vs Is Happening Again


576 replies to this topic

#501 Yokaiko

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 6,775 posts

Posted 01 August 2014 - 03:40 PM

View PostPhaeric Cyrh, on 01 August 2014 - 03:38 PM, said:


I wasn't aware we had LRM mech vs non LRM mech matches and the LRM mech's got skunked (of course they would). Not sure how relevant your point is. I'm not making this argument out of thin ait because it feels like it. W eare discussing the results of the C v IS matches and how they seemed to heavily favor the Clans. There have been several screens posted and many more anecdotes of clan rolls.


We don't have the results. That one dude that does all of the statistic analysis may have an idea and PGI do. I don't know what the hell the results were.

I can tell as a scientist that the methodology was as crap as possible. If I had known either time that they were doing it I would have jumped into IS mechs. I was playing Kitfoxes the first one, and the second one I didn't log in until to late.


Point being the forums are a bad indicator. If you listened to the forums, we would be stuck with stock mechs that exploded if you fired more than two weapons at once.

Edited by Yokaiko, 01 August 2014 - 03:41 PM.


#502 Mcgral18

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2019 Top 8 Qualifier
  • CS 2019 Top 8 Qualifier
  • 17,987 posts
  • LocationSnow

Posted 01 August 2014 - 03:41 PM

View PostPhaeric Cyrh, on 01 August 2014 - 03:38 PM, said:


I wasn't aware we had LRM mech vs non LRM mech matches and the LRM mech's got skunked (of course they would). Not sure how relevant your point is. I'm not making this argument out of thin air because it feels like it. We are discussing the results of the C v IS matches and how they seemed to heavily favor the Clans. There have been several screens posted and many more anecdotes of clan rolls.


Has there been any testing other than PUGs?

In both of my matches, 7 players failed to reach 200 damage. With a competent 12 man, I'm sure there would be different results, with 24 competent players split between the IS and Clan, which would then switch. Let's say a 3/3/3/3 composition.

If Clan mechs are winning from both teams by a landslide, you'll have a good argument. PUGs dying to steamrolls is nothing new.

#503 Yokaiko

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 6,775 posts

Posted 01 August 2014 - 03:43 PM

View PostMcgral18, on 01 August 2014 - 03:41 PM, said:


Has there been any testing other than PUGs?

In both of my matches, 7 players failed to reach 200 damage. With a competent 12 man, I'm sure there would be different results, with 24 competent players split between the IS and Clan, which would then switch. Let's say a 3/3/3/3 composition.

If Clan mechs are winning from both teams by a landslide, you'll have a good argument. PUGs dying to steamrolls is nothing new.


I used to make that point back in beta "I DID 1200 damage" ok, what did the rest of your team do? Because an 8-0 stomp with a good team the outliers were pulling maybe 450 (and those usually x3 ASRM Atlases)

There are WAY to many variables to go SEE THIS SCREEN SHOT IS GOSPEL LOOK LOOK I'M RIGHT.

#504 Phaeric Cyrh

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary
  • Mercenary
  • 123 posts

Posted 01 August 2014 - 03:44 PM

View PostMcgral18, on 01 August 2014 - 03:41 PM, said:


Has there been any testing other than PUGs?

In both of my matches, 7 players failed to reach 200 damage. With a competent 12 man, I'm sure there would be different results, with 24 competent players split between the IS and Clan, which would then switch. Let's say a 3/3/3/3 composition.

If Clan mechs are winning from both teams by a landslide, you'll have a good argument. PUGs dying to steamrolls is nothing new.


Sure, but you would think if it were random PUG rolls the results wouldn't seem to so heavily favor the one side.. I can tell you, in the months I have been playing (a short time to many I know), I have never been rolled 4 times in a row, the last 2 were shutouts. Doesn't that seem off to you? I think it did to most people who took part in it.

Edited by Phaeric Cyrh, 01 August 2014 - 03:44 PM.


#505 JTAlweezy

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 269 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationConnecticut, USA

Posted 01 August 2014 - 03:46 PM

View PostKhushrenada, on 30 July 2014 - 11:34 AM, said:

just had the same happen to me.... 12 clan vs 12 is.... stompfest.
canon wise it would be 8 clan vs 12 is or something like that and that actually might be balanced, right now its a ******* joke.

and now we also have arti spamming... thanks pgi for ruining my fun completely after i just had found my way back into the game after a long time and was having some fun.


I feel you man, pgi as messed with this game so much its broken. Light mechs die instantly to arti, narc is fun because it lasts forever, and forces people to use cover more, but otherwise op with its time limit, id say 15 seconds is enough.

Still no new features to the game, mechs dont count as content cause pgi has mastered that since beta, oh wait we are porbably still in beta

#506 Yokaiko

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 6,775 posts

Posted 01 August 2014 - 03:47 PM

View PostPhaeric Cyrh, on 01 August 2014 - 03:44 PM, said:


Sure, but you would think if it were random PUG rolls the results wouldn't seem to so heavily favor the one side.. I can tell you, in the months I have been playing (a short time to many I know), I have never been rolled 4 times in a row, the last 2 were shutouts. Doesn't that seem off to you? I think it did to most people who took part in it.



I've had EXACTLY that same result in mixed pug matches, pugs be pugging, no communication, no smart positioning, no reaction time ...ever. Its a pug game.

Like I said the methodolgy is terrible, the guys that did private games 5 DSs against 5 timbers at least had a control.

....and guess what, those results where split pretty evenly

Edited by Yokaiko, 01 August 2014 - 03:47 PM.


#507 Mcgral18

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2019 Top 8 Qualifier
  • CS 2019 Top 8 Qualifier
  • 17,987 posts
  • LocationSnow

Posted 01 August 2014 - 03:48 PM

View PostJTAlweezy, on 01 August 2014 - 03:46 PM, said:

I feel you man, pgi as messed with this game so much its broken. Light mechs die instantly to arti, narc is fun because it lasts forever, and forces people to use cover more, but otherwise op with its time limit, id say 15 seconds is enough.

Still no new features to the game, mechs dont count as content cause pgi has mastered that since beta, oh wait we are porbably still in beta


NARC lasts 30 seconds, or 40 with the 4 million Cbill module. 15 would barely be enough time for a volley of Lurms to get there.

#508 Jeb

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 441 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationHalifax

Posted 01 August 2014 - 03:52 PM

I have pulled off 1k+ dmg matches, but if I run into 4 mechs that want me dead, I am lucky to get in a 100 before I die in a lot of cases... and less depending on the mech... If I am in an ecm kitfox trying to cover people, I might get caught and do 0 dmg for example...

Also 200 dmg to a few mechs CTs is better then 500 dmg to 12 mechs spread out over every location possible...

Dmg numbers really dont' mean that much... people know it pays better if you win if you spread your dmg over 12 mechs... but its always better to do more dmg to one mech and actually kill it when it comes to trying to win... and they forget that someone has to kill those mechs for the payout to happen...

View PostPhaeric Cyrh, on 01 August 2014 - 03:44 PM, said:


Sure, but you would think if it were random PUG rolls the results wouldn't seem to so heavily favor the one side.. I can tell you, in the months I have been playing (a short time to many I know), I have never been rolled 4 times in a row, the last 2 were shutouts. Doesn't that seem off to you? I think it did to most people who took part in it.


I have had entire nights of stomps and been on the losing side... I posted about it, search the forums... one weekend I went from being down 30 games to almost 90... just stomp after stomp.. Did I suck more that one weekend then other nights where I have decent runs? Maybe? But I have 11 other people on my team that should have balanced that out, but it didn't...

Just bad match making, and bad tactics, or at least better tactics on the other team...

Edited by Jeb, 01 August 2014 - 03:53 PM.


#509 Mystere

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 22,783 posts
  • LocationClassified

Posted 01 August 2014 - 03:56 PM

View PostPhaeric Cyrh, on 01 August 2014 - 03:38 PM, said:

I wasn't aware we had LRM mech vs non LRM mech matches and the LRM mech's got skunked (of course they would). Not sure how relevant your point is. I'm not making this argument out of thin air because it feels like it. We are discussing the results of the C v IS matches and how they seemed to heavily favor the Clans. There have been several screens posted and many more anecdotes of clan rolls.


Are you aware of all the underlying conditions on which those matches were made? I am asking because so-called "data" without context is worthless.

#510 RetroActive

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 405 posts
  • LocationFL, USA

Posted 01 August 2014 - 04:28 PM

View PostRoland, on 01 August 2014 - 01:35 PM, said:

Maybe you don't realize this, but the stalker nose body type is actually one of the most durable in the game, exactly because, as you inadvertently point out, you can basically force your enemy to shoot your side torso. But because of the way it sticks out, you can effectively protect the strong side of your mech with fairly minimal torso twisting, soaking damage with the shield side. And with the huge engine, the mad cat ends up being incredibly nimble.

With the 3d, you are forced to either run a standard engine acne go incredibly slow, which due to the way engines work, also reduces your twist and turn speed... Or you run an xl and die when you lose a torso.

The twolf is currently one of the most durable mechs in the game, and it's hilarious that you would try to suggest a ctf is more durable since everyone knows it's not.

The twolf is a straight upgrade from the ctf. Once people are given the choice, no one is going to drive a ctf unless they have to for some reason. Anything the ctf can do, the twolf does better.


Roland, I am more than aware of the Stalker and TWs durability. I said nothing to the contrary. What I did say is that the side torso of the MadCat is beyond easy to hit. Your rarely see a TW die who hasn't first lost a side torso.

I do not suggest that a CTF is more durable than a MC. I suggest that a MC has easier to hit side torsos than the CTF. Which in turn means that its side torsos are easier to destroy.

What happens when the weapon side torso of your gauss +erppc TW is destroyed? You might as well have an IS XL engine, because you're useless.

Plenty of people will still drive CTFs once TWs are out for CBills. You're delusional if you think they won't.

Edited by RetroActive, 01 August 2014 - 04:30 PM.


#511 Roland

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,260 posts

Posted 01 August 2014 - 04:50 PM

The reason you see good mad cats die only after losing a side torso is because they are intentionally using that torso to shield themselves, since there is nothing in that side of their mech.

It's a sword and board build. They WANT you to shoot their side torso.

What happens when you lose your sword side? You don't, unless you have screwed up. The whole point of the build is that you are able to protect that side.

And no, no one will drive ctfs instead of twolves, if they are freely able to drive either. There is no reason to drive the ctf. The twolf is better in every way.

Edited by Roland, 01 August 2014 - 04:51 PM.


#512 Yokaiko

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 6,775 posts

Posted 01 August 2014 - 05:05 PM

View PostRoland, on 01 August 2014 - 04:50 PM, said:

And no, no one will drive ctfs instead of twolves, if they are freely able to drive either. There is no reason to drive the ctf. The twolf is better in every way.



Weapons higher in the chassis so you can minimize exposure the Timber the arms are straight low, and the highest you can get the torso direct fire weapons is below the cockpit.

#513 RetroActive

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 405 posts
  • LocationFL, USA

Posted 01 August 2014 - 05:53 PM

View PostRoland, on 01 August 2014 - 04:50 PM, said:

The reason you see good mad cats die only after losing a side torso is because they are intentionally using that torso to shield themselves, since there is nothing in that side of their mech.

It's a sword and board build. They WANT you to shoot their side torso.

What happens when you lose your sword side? You don't, unless you have screwed up. The whole point of the build is that you are able to protect that side.

And no, no one will drive ctfs instead of twolves, if they are freely able to drive either. There is no reason to drive the ctf. The twolf is better in every way.


Of course they want you to shoot their board side. That's how you are effective in that build. At some point in time you're actually going to have to face an enemy to shoot at them, though, and your sword side will be open to return fire.

The 3D can do that build AND have two shield arms, plus it has high mounted PPCs for minimum exposure.

It's not that black and white, Roland. Believe it or not some will still prefer the CTF over the TW. Some people will own both chassis and will still do better in their CTF. Some will do better in the TW.

I'm not saying that the CTF is better than the TW. But it is on par.

#514 Scratx

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 3,283 posts

Posted 01 August 2014 - 05:57 PM

The Timberwolf can't mount quad-AC5 with several tons of ammo for Maximum Dakka. Seriously, don't underestimate the power of an AC20 every 1.67s with the ballistic properties of AC5's.

My only CTF, the 4X, is murderous.

Yes, I have Timberwolves. I like them too, for different reasons. Neither mech invalidates the other, no matter what people might like to think and argue.

#515 Roland

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,260 posts

Posted 01 August 2014 - 06:02 PM

No retro, it isn't even remotely on par. The timber wolf is dramatically better.. Hell even in your attempt to try and draw a fictitious parity between the two, you are taking about a ctf running a slow std engine against a twolf running at 90 kph.

It's not even close. It is flat out worse in every way, no matter how bad you want to pretend otherwise. And it's going to be painfully obvious even to people trying to bury their heads in the same when people can all drive them.

Hell, even behind a paywall, it's already the most popular mech in the game, lol.

#516 Yokaiko

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 6,775 posts

Posted 01 August 2014 - 06:03 PM

View PostRoland, on 01 August 2014 - 06:02 PM, said:


Hell, even behind a paywall, it's already the most popular mech in the game, lol.



......Its the most iconic mech in the game.

Duh.

#517 MischiefSC

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Benefactor
  • The Benefactor
  • 16,697 posts

Posted 01 August 2014 - 06:07 PM

View PostAresye, on 01 August 2014 - 03:02 PM, said:


Lowering the price for Clan mechs essentially devalues the equipment and weapons of Clan mechs below the prices of IS equipment, which doesn't make sense, considering they're overall better equipment and more rare on the market. Know how much Clan mechs were over IS mechs in MW2 Mercs? A LOT.

Imagine you're buying a house. You have 2 choices:
1. Decent house with no upgrades.
2. Better house with central air, heated tiles, in-ground pool, etc.

Yes, you can customize the decent house and pick the upgrades you want to save money, but the better house comes "as is." Just because you don't see the necessity of having an in-ground pool doesn't mean the property value should be lowered.

The Clans do have advantages. They aren't supposed to be equal to IS tech. They also frequently bid low for the forces to take over a planet, meaning balance issues for CW can simply be (and should be) compensated for by requiring Clan teams to field less numbers, such as 10v12 (2 stars vs 3 lances).

Really wish people would get over trying to balance everything 1-for-1. Mainly because it will never, ever happen. Besides, PGI has a knack for over-adjusting things. I would be lying if I said Clans were perfectly fine right now. They do need some adjustments. Thing is, those adjustments are small tweaks that need to be slowly honed in on.

I stay away from IS mechs now because they all feel nerfed. Every single one, down right miserable to pilot because they feel so incredibly useless after getting nerfed since closed beta, but they've felt that way even before Clans got released.



^This. Absolutely this. We should be readjusting IS mechs to make them more enjoyable to play in-line with Clans. Not nerfing Clans into the same uselessness as the IS mechs currently stand.


Here's the issue with Clan mechs -

By making them inherently 'better' in ways that literally can not be matched by Clans (Clan XL, endo and ff are in fact illusionary perks - because of locked format for engines, endo and FF all that really matters is available tonnage, slots and hardpoints to use that with) but more expensive you make them the superior meta. I get the concept of what you're saying - that Clan mechs should be expensive because of what they offer.

However there is no commensurate price reduction for their limitations. You can't remove or change FF, Endo or engine size. This is clearly a 'negative' to the design compared to IS mechs, but where's the cost savings there?

The issue comes back to making Community Warfare work. There needs to be a solid balance between Clan and IS mechs and equipment or else the player population will not be balanced, either in total population or skill distribution. If one faction is inherently superior but more expensive, clearly the 'elite upgrade' of the other factions, the result is not a balance of factions in a war but a ladder climb to join the elite faction.

This results in highest skill players in highest performance gear trouncing newbies. This can't really be balanced by '10 v 12' or whatever would result in a balanced format (more like 8 v 12 or even 5 v 12 if Clans essentially comprise all the best players and IS the newbies and a small handful of diehards) because you don't have a population split that puts the majority in the IS camp.

Instead what you've got is a situation custom designed to make it unenjoyable for new players.

So, to clarify - if CW is going to work and ever exist, Clans need to be balanced 1 for 1 against IS mechs, in performance, firepower, function and cost. You can give them different looks and feels but for equal skill (from nub to golden master race) they need balanced.

Otherwise you're sowing the seeds of failure into the foundation of the game. You need to player population to split not just in numbers but skill distribution as evenly as possible among not just IS and Clans but each IS house and each Clan. Nobody can start with an advantage in any regard, even if it's offset with 'skill requirements' or 'higher costs' because all that does is make it a status symbol of wealth and skill, ergo something to be taken in replacement of other things. An upgrade.

Make sense? If the game is never going to be other than exactly what it is now, no big deal I guess. It's all mixed deathmatches and the only difference between Clans and IS is cost to upgrade then sure. You create a ladder progression, start with IS trial mechs and work your way up to Clan tech gear.

You ever want CW though, that can't work.

#518 MischiefSC

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Benefactor
  • The Benefactor
  • 16,697 posts

Posted 01 August 2014 - 06:11 PM

View PostMystere, on 01 August 2014 - 03:56 PM, said:


Are you aware of all the underlying conditions on which those matches were made? I am asking because so-called "data" without context is worthless.


It won't even be possible to start to gather viable data on that though until about February, when cbill versions of all Clan mechs are integrated into the population.

At that point will there be enough people in IS mechs to even fill IS vs Clan matches? At a minimum buyin of $55 per mech, Clan mechs are already 1/2 the game population. We are probably looking closer to April for anything like viable telemetry on population and mech balancing across skill ranges, and that's only if all the new mechs between now and then are nifty IS mechs.

The Vindicator ain't gonna do that.

#519 Yokaiko

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 6,775 posts

Posted 01 August 2014 - 06:12 PM

View PostMischiefSC, on 01 August 2014 - 06:11 PM, said:


It won't even be possible to start to gather viable data on that though until about February, when cbill versions of all Clan mechs are integrated into the population.

At that point will there be enough people in IS mechs to even fill IS vs Clan matches? At a minimum buyin of $55 per mech, Clan mechs are already 1/2 the game population. We are probably looking closer to April for anything like viable telemetry on population and mech balancing across skill ranges, and that's only if all the new mechs between now and then are nifty IS mechs.

The Vindicator ain't gonna do that.


That is a pretty sad testament to the population, they are doing a bang up job.

#520 MischiefSC

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Benefactor
  • The Benefactor
  • 16,697 posts

Posted 01 August 2014 - 06:20 PM

View PostYokaiko, on 01 August 2014 - 06:12 PM, said:


That is a pretty sad testament to the population, they are doing a bang up job.


It's hard to speculate on overall game population. It speaks well to adoption of Clan mechs, but the fundamental issue is 'fun to play' imbalance between the two.

Get an IS mech? Great, you get to GXP through 2 variants or grind intentionally garbage mechs in the goal of getting double basics on 1 variant that generally has 1, at most 3, decent builds.

Get a Clan mech? Double basics are nice, but you can roll the same loadout in all 3 chassis. Each of them can mix up hardpoints and loadouts to do a wide range of things, letting you play whatever way is fun for you while you grind. It's awesome, start to finish. Unlocking efficiencies is more like a reward to make something fun better, not some hopeful escape from the frustrating grind of having to pilot trash for 40 matches.

That's a good place to start fixing.





21 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 21 guests, 0 anonymous users