139 replies to this topic

[Noth]

Jman5, on 06 August 2014 - 02:38 PM, said:

No one is going to take you seriously when your burden of proof is so ridiculously high and downright strange. "Time and spatial based dynamic models?" Come on do you even know what you're saying? Can you even create a test example model?

This is exactly like something you hear out of those climate change denying cranks.

His burden of proof is too high. Myself, I'm just looking for people blaming the clans for the stomps to at least look at their team as that has nearly as much or more to do with the loss.

[vettie]

Wow, lots of complaining about this.

Really not surprised.

I havent found it that bad, (Clanner stomp the poor IS, that is).
Sure I only played 3 matches (so far) that were IS v Clan.
1st Match - (I am IS player) we lost 10 v 12 after being down by 4 within 3 minutes of launch (Caustic Valley). We never recovered being down 4 but gave the Clanners a hellofa good game.

2nd match - Loss 9 v 11 (both had a disco so I guess that didnt get completely fixed. Again a good game. fairly even for start to finish.

3rd match we won - 12 v 8. Yes the IS won. Close again but fun too.

Had to stop to make dinner and i suspect when i get back on the test will be done (maybe).

I agree that the Clanners may be 'more experienced' players willing to drop cash. I know of some players that the Clan Pack were their intro to MWO so they never played an IS mech. I spent lotsa money. Phoenix Pack, Heros, Paints, Mech bays, soem Prem time here and there but I didnt buy the Clan Stuff (timing has been bad for me $ wise). I have been here since closed beta when we had 1 or 2 maps. Just an average pilot. The test was fun. Only a few in the game realized they were part of test. Really doesnt matter if we were or not. The games were FUN and that is what this is about, FUN.

Edited by vettie, 06 August 2014 - 02:43 PM.

[Bartholomew bartholomew]

I experienced about the same thing with IS, a loss, a win, and a loss.

Then went clan for a match, waited forever. And had a win.

So I guess there isn't that much clan out there yet.

[_NARCoMAN_]

Mcgral18, on 06 August 2014 - 01:58 PM, said:

Yet again, I'll call BS.

Spider beats Cute Fox, Phract beats Thor. Stalker has a fair chance of beating PeaceDove.


Care to revise your statement?

Nope, since I disagree with all that.

[Bongo TauKat]

Why not a maximum of a binary (10 clan mechs) vs a full company of IS mechs? With no weight balancing increase for the clans it would make for a more fair engagement and keep true to Battletech lore.

[Bishop Steiner]

KOMMISSAR KITTY, on 06 August 2014 - 12:14 PM, said:

Pretty close if PGI had coded in the point system for every mech. It would translate perfectly. That would also give people a tool for only a certain amount of Battle Value alongside 3v3v3v3 instead of being stuck with only that drop limitation. The machines and equipment are essentially the same. Same with 12VS10 as a handicap for Clans. Each method would translate fine.

BV was broke as crap and never worked in TT (Still doesnt and is being reworked). Add in pilot skill, instead of dice?

LOL.

[MadSapper1234]

I would gladly sign up for stomping if PGI promised to share the data and results...

LOL that made me giggle.

[Bishop Steiner]

Zen Hachetaki, on 06 August 2014 - 12:40 PM, said:

I have NEVER been more disgusted with PGI than at this moment. I have always been saying wait and see, be patient.

GODAMMIT!!!

I have limited play time between family and work obligations. I saw a new patch and decided to take some time and play. Where the HELL did this IS vs Clan 12 v 12 at same tonnage bullsh1t come from??? Seriously who the HELL decided this was a good idea. Go ahead, waste my time and make me hate the game. Good luck seeing me play this again for a few months, never mind spend money on it. I enjoyed the mixed tech, but this is just stupidity. Test - my a$$. It is buy or be gone. If you could even buy a clan mech with C-bills this would not be as insulting but this is a brazen attempt to get people to buy, buy, buy MC.

Go to hell PGI from a founder.

cry harder? Because the world revolves around you? No matter when they test, someone is inconvenienced. Grow up.

[Sembrin]

MadSapper1234, on 06 August 2014 - 02:53 PM, said:

I would gladly sign up for stomping if PGI promised to share the data and results...

LOL that made me giggle.

And that's really going to be the rub. What's the chance we actually get to see the data on these matches? I won't hold my breath on that.

[_NARCoMAN_]

Mystere, on 06 August 2014 - 01:56 PM, said:

How about a comprehensive end-to-end analysis to prive your statement, including, but not limited to, the following:

• chassis analysis, including all variants and IS/Clan configurability
  
• weapons analysis, including damage, rate of fire, duration, burst vs single-shot, weight, slots, ammo, impulse
  
• equipment options analysis, especially those that affect speed, agility, and heat efficiency
  
• time and spatial-based dynamic models of how the above interact in 1 vs. 1, 1 vs. N, lance vs. star, and team vs. team encounters

Perhaps you'd like to explain the intricacies of motor point function as they apply to Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis stage II? Specifically with transmission along the Lateral Horn inferior to the dessicants of pyramids and how Wallerian degeneration along the motor tracts will affect the remaining ability to transfer membrane potential.

OR we could just not try to act scholarly on a website forum and not pretend that this stuff is balanced?

Fluid models...WTF man




Forget it, too easy to just put on ignore

Edited by Asheron Realaidain, 06 August 2014 - 03:02 PM.

[Orbit Rain]

ok, just played a few on both sides, IS and clan (haven't read most of this thread btw) ....

My take is that there are some terribad "mechwarriors" piloting mechs...I put that in quotes because it's mostly been crying little girls...little girls that don't have a clue about how battles play out, where to go, where to position, situational awareness and the like...then cry about clan mechs Sure, anecdotal, but there it is...I would say though, if PGI wants to drive new players away, this would be a decent way to get it done.

[Bartholomew bartholomew]

Twiiter says test ends at 1630 Pacific time

[Sean von Steinike]

Axeface, on 06 August 2014 - 12:32 PM, said:

This is the garbage is find dispicable. It is irrelevant. The clan mechs are better.

FULLSTOP.

Some are better, some are not. And all IS teams need to work on their tactics more. They know they are out ranged so they can't go marching out where the clans can use that range to their advantage. If you cannot close the distance very fast, have to take a more conservative approach I think and draw the clans in.

[Hillslam]

rolling warhawk part of the day: 1200 dam and straight wins
rolled IS assaults later in the day: 400-800 and mostly losses.

I am going to laugh in the face of most of the clan apologists when PGI comes back with *gasp* DATA *gasp* that shows the clan mechs are more powerful. Data.

I predict deluges of salty tears when they nerf the mechs and the clanners whine.

I'll save you time and tell you what they'll say:

- the tests were rigged, only bd players played IS mechs (a huge steaming pile of BS that makes me laugh every time I read it)
- IS mech with FLD are far more proficient at killing than clan mechs
- clan mechs do more damage BECAUSE they spread it around (this cracks me up too)

and so forth.

Clan mechs are better. Its not the players, its the mechs. Anyone saying otherwise is rationalizing, clueless, or lieing. Period.

[Axeface]

Sean von Steinike, on 06 August 2014 - 03:10 PM, said:

Some are better, some are not. And all IS teams need to work on their tactics more. They know they are out ranged so they can't go marching out where the clans can use that range to their advantage. If you cannot close the distance very fast, have to take a more conservative approach I think and draw the clans in.

So umm.
In order to defeat your superior opponent you need to avoid them and then attack them where your disadvantage is as least as possible (and they are JUST AS GOOD).

And you dont see why people are complaining about exclusive superior mechs?

Edited by Axeface, 06 August 2014 - 03:21 PM.

[Hillslam]

BTW - in every IS vs clan match I played during this test today where I was clan we didn't have a single loss. Not one.

Any time these tests are run the Premium Time clock should be paused or refunded.
(having said that I made a buttload of cbills farming in my warhawk)

Edited by Hillslam, 06 August 2014 - 03:24 PM.

[Mystere]

Jman5, on 06 August 2014 - 02:38 PM, said:

No one is going to take you seriously when your burden of proof is so ridiculously high and downright strange. "Time and spatial based dynamic models?" Come on do you even know what you're saying? Can you even create a test example model?

Of course I do. I used to create simulations of quantum mechanical events, as well as of air-to-air missiles tracking their targets.

As such, those "Time and spatial based dynamic models" are just geek-speak for "simulations of mechs in action".

Jman5, on 06 August 2014 - 02:38 PM, said:

This is exactly like something you hear out of those climate change denying cranks.

I doubt those climate change denying cranks have anything close to what I can do.

Asheron Realaidain, on 06 August 2014 - 03:00 PM, said:

Perhaps you'd like to explain the intricacies of motor point function as they apply to Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis stage II? Specifically with transmission along the Lateral Horn inferior to the dessicants of pyramids and how Wallerian degeneration along the motor tracts will affect the remaining ability to transfer membrane potential.

OR we could just not try to act scholarly on a website forum and not pretend that this stuff is balanced?

Well, the burden of proof that Clans are indeed OP is on you since you declared them to be as such. And you did not even offer any proof that remotely had any basis in science. I was just pointing you in the right direction.

Noth, on 06 August 2014 - 02:41 PM, said:

His burden of proof is too high. Myself, I'm just looking for people blaming the clans for the stomps to at least look at their team as that has nearly as much or more to do with the loss.

Well, as a scientist ... you get the picture.

[Noth]

Hillslam, on 06 August 2014 - 03:16 PM, said:

Clan mechs are better. Its not the players, its the mechs. Anyone saying otherwise is rationalizing, clueless, or lieing. Period.

So those people that put up good number in IS mechs versus clans don't show that IS mechs can stand up against clan mechs? Skill is extremely important in the game. And yes, IS does have more new players and less skilled players.

Axeface, on 06 August 2014 - 03:21 PM, said:

So umm.
In order to defeat your superior opponent you need to avoid them and then attack them where your disadvantage is as least as possible (and they are JUST AS GOOD).

And you dont see why people are complaining about exclusive superior mechs?

First, they are not just as good as the IS in pinpoint front loaded damage. The builds for them that are, very hot and poor dps. The one that doesn't fall into the very hot, poor dps is on a mech with the worst maneuverability in the game and is dead in the water again a competent light.

Edited by Noth, 06 August 2014 - 03:29 PM.

[oldradagast]

I still find the defense of the Clan mech superiority both sad and hilarious at the same time:

1) "If you lost in IS mechs, it is because you/your team/both must be terribad." Right.. because the matchmaker carefully only places teams of skilled people (in Clan mechs) against teams of unskilled people (in IS mechs.) Except we know it doesn't do that, and for all the matchmaker's faults, the skills of the two teams are roughly equal. So, when the IS team loses over and over again vs. the Clans, it simply doesn't follow that the "real cause" must be that the IS players alone are terrible in those matches (while the Clan players are just very skilled and certainly don't have superior mechs.)

2) “Clan mechs have weaknesses, so they are not more powerful.” Again, no logic there at all. All mechs have weaknesses – that doesn’t mean a Quickdraw is as good as a Cataphract. Also, Clan weaknesses are not unique, as we’re led to believe with the endless justifying of things like the Direwolf. “Oh, it’s slow, so who cares that it has insane firepower and assault level armor.” Except that all its competition has comparable armor and hitboxes, far less firepower, and about the same mobility. Sure, you CAN up-engine an Atlas to high speed, but who cares? The resulting mech will have so little firepower it won’t be useful.

3) “IS mechs have front-loaded damage, so they are the best!” Not all IS weapons are front-loaded, and apparently the Clan Gauss Rifle and Clan PPC don’t exist… Also, while front-loading is nice, if a mech can vastly out DPS a foe, it can still win.

I’m not saying Clan mechs are broken, nor are they all equally high in power, but to claim that they are NOT noticeably more powerful than nearly all IS equivalents is either wishful thinking or an attempt to avoid having one’s purchases nerfed.

[Jman5]

Mystere, on 06 August 2014 - 03:25 PM, said:

Of course I do. I used to create simulations of quantum mechanical events, as well as of air-to-air missiles tracking their targets.

As such, those "Time and spatial based dynamic models" are just geek-speak for "simulations of mechs in action".




I doubt those climate change denying cranks have anything close to what I can do.




Well, the burden of proof that Clans are indeed OP is on you since you declared them to be as such. And you did not even offer any proof that remotely had any basis in science. I was just pointing you in the right direction.



Well, as a scientist ... you get the picture.

Tell you what. You provide me $50,000 in grant money and I'll do your ridiculous analysis.