692 replies to this topic

[Charons Little Helper]

Technoviking, on 08 August 2014 - 09:53 AM, said:

The PuG queue (the place I have most of my games, btw) is too freaking random to test ANYTHING other than whether or not the server can handle X or Y shouldn't test anything whereby the metric is win/loss/damage.

Just because it's more random doesn't make it totally not useful. It just means that you'd need to take a larger sample size to cut out the variables. Law of large numbers my friend!

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Charons Little Helper, on 08 August 2014 - 10:17 AM, said:

Just because it's more random doesn't make it totally not useful. It just means that you'd need to take a larger sample size to cut out the variables. Law of large numbers my friend!

Their testing is a total disaster. Period.

And now it's already influencing weapon changes.

[Charons Little Helper]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 08 August 2014 - 10:19 AM, said:

Their testing is a total disaster. Period. And now it's already influencing weapon changes.

How do you know? They haven't said what their testing is?

[Yokaiko]

Charons Little Helper, on 08 August 2014 - 10:20 AM, said:

How do you know? They haven't said what their testing is?

We KNOW what their testing is, a couple hours in the middle of the workday where they put clans vs IS.

Literally the WORST way to go about it.


If they are going to make (more) jackhammer balancing descisions like that there is no need to further support them.

[Blood Knight]

Why doesn't PGI just use combat values? Every mech has one in TT and it keeps the game balanced. Forget obscure "ELO" type systems...focus on the combat value and the problem of "balancing" is solved.

[Green Mamba]

Missapropriated Hate ....This Looks Like a JOB for FASA to take over

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Yokaiko, on 08 August 2014 - 10:21 AM, said:

We KNOW what their testing is, a couple hours in the middle of the workday where they put clans vs IS.

Literally the WORST way to go about it.


If they are going to make (more) jackhammer balancing descisions like that there is no need to further support them.

^^^^

[Davers]

I think it is interesting how ECM had such a little effect on the Clan's victories. Using my completely amateurish system of looking at people's screenshots and adding up mechs, it seems the Clans only had 1.2 light mechs per match. Some of which were Adders.

[Yokaiko]

Be Rough With Me Plz, on 08 August 2014 - 10:24 AM, said:

I'm not the one who got confused over simple English. I appreciate your input though. Totally irrelevant and wrong, but sweetly succinct.



Because there is only 1 timezone in the entire world, right?

yeah, and US prime has ALWAYS been the busy period, I've worked off hours (in fact I am right now) for years. I can tell you for a fact a LOT more players are on US prime than noon PDT.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Be Rough With Me Plz, on 08 August 2014 - 10:24 AM, said:

Because there is only 1 timezone in the entire world, right?

Only one that matters. Why do you think they haven't bothered to open new servers elsewhere to help foreign players who have latency issues?

Only area that matters is North America in this case.

[Ultimax]

Be Rough With Me Plz, on 08 August 2014 - 10:15 AM, said:

...because there is nothing to refute their numbers...

We've already told you, and others repeatedly why the tests were flawed.

Flawed testing is bad, it leads to bad conclusions and bad decisions.

If something is over performing you need to know exactly what is the root cause, you need clean data for this not polluted data.


What we have is completely polluted data, drawing conclusions from it are pointless.



Here's what there is to show why the testing is flawed (this doesn't mean "clans are fine" it means "testing was flawed".

1) Public Queue, 0 controls

2) No accounting for ECM in MM. More ECM on teams often leads to wins. Clans only have 2 choices of lights, one of them sucks really hard, the other one has ECM. Most clan teams probably had multiple ECM units.

3) No accounting for tonnage differences. Clan mechs are all at, or near their weight bracket tonnage limit. This is not the case IS side. Higher tonnage often skews towards winning matches.

4) Along with number 3, Clans only have 2 assaults. One is really popular, weighs 100 tons and brings 50 tons of raw firepower, the other is not as popular. This is both potentially a weight, and raw firepower advantage.

5) Clan mechs have fixed engines, most travel at the same speed (except for Super Fatty). If you ever watch competitive teams, you'll see this is actually something they build into their drop decks. It's a very subtle advantage, as the whole team moves together.

6) IS side is the only side with trial mechs.


What all of this says, and I'm going to spell this out for you, is not "clans are fine - nothing to see here".

It spells out:


The testing was flawed.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Ultimatum X, on 08 August 2014 - 10:29 AM, said:

We've already told you, and others repeatedly why the tests were flawed.

Flawed testing is bad, it leads to bad conclusions and bad decisions.

If something is over performing you need to know exactly what is the root cause, you need clean data for this not polluted data.


What we have is completely polluted data, drawing conclusions from it are pointless.



Here's what there is to show why the testing is flawed (this doesn't mean "clans are fine" it means "testing was flawed".

1) Public Queue, 0 controls

2) No accounting for ECM in MM. More ECM on teams often leads to wins. Clans only have 2 choices of lights, one of them sucks really hard, the other one has ECM. Most clan teams probably had multiple ECM units.

3) No accounting for tonnage differences. Clan mechs are all at, or near their weight bracket tonnage limit. This is not the case IS side. Higher tonnage often skews towards winning matches.

4) Along with number 3, Clans only have 2 assaults. One is really popular, weighs 100 tons and brings 50 tons of raw firepower, the other is not as popular. This is both potentially a weight, and raw firepower advantage.

5) Clan mechs have fixed engines, most travel at the same speed (except for Super Fatty). If you ever watch competitive teams, you'll see this is actually something they build into their drop decks. It's a very subtle advantage, as the whole team moves together.

6) IS side is the only side with trial mechs.


What all of this says, and I'm going to spell this out for you, is not "clans are fine - nothing to see here".

It spells out:


The testing was flawed.

Keep reading this. Not saying Clans are fine. Saying the testing methods, like all of PGI, were dumb.

[Egomane]

This is going in circles and there were already some bad posts in the mix. Still, I'm amazed at how civilized this discussions seems to flow. Please keep it like this (except the bad post stuff).

*thumbsup*

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Egomane, on 08 August 2014 - 10:35 AM, said:

This is going in circles and there were already some bad posts in the mix. Still, I'm amazed at how civilized this discussions seems to flow. Please keep it like this (except the bad post stuff).

*thumbsup*

This is perhaps more shocking than the actual testing.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Egomane, on 08 August 2014 - 10:35 AM, said:

This is going in circles and there were already some bad posts in the mix. Still, I'm amazed at how civilized this discussions seems to flow. Please keep it like this (except the bad post stuff).

*thumbsup*

It's because we have such low expectation of PGI at this point.

[Suko]

DV McKenna, on 08 August 2014 - 10:09 AM, said:

Proving my point of you can't read? Because I didn't say you did say they were; you possibly want to re read what I actually wrote.

What the HELL are you talking about? Seriously, I have no idea anymore. You accuse me of saying they're "OP on an order of 90/10". I say "Nope, go check". You say I can't read.

F*cking brilliant. You, sir, win the internets.

Your words make zero sense now and I'm pretty confident that you're just doing nonsensical trolling.

Edit: Oh yeah, with sentence structure like this "Because I didn't say you did say they were", reading your posts is extremely difficult, if not impossible.

Seriously, does ANYONE know what McKenna is getting at? because I sure as hell don't!

Edited by ShadowVFX, 08 August 2014 - 10:42 AM.

[Lightfoot]

Well, they removed the Inner Sphere's best matched weapons vs Clan tech, the Gauss Rifle and the PPC, and I told you those nerfs would crush the Inner Sphere and have almost no effect on Clan tech.

So Read em and weep I.S., those are the cards you were dealt when the newbs whined for nerfs to the, "O-M-G, I bin cored by PPC+Gauss meta and PGI does nothing", last year.

The mechs should have just been made tougher. Now MWO is in this spiraling tailspin where all weapons and mechs are OP. Heat Scale for all. 100 kph AC20's. PPCs fire in loop-de-loops.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

ShadowVFX, on 08 August 2014 - 10:39 AM, said:

What the HELL are you talking about? Seriously, I have no idea anymore. You accuse me of saying they're "OP on an order of 90/10". I say "Nope, go check". You say I can't read.

F*cking brilliant. You, sir, win the internets.

Your words make zero sense now and I'm pretty confident that you're just doing nonsensical trolling.

Again re read what I wrote at no point does it say you said or do I accuse you of having said they are OP by 90/10

Honestly reading comprehension

[Coolant]

did the OP even respond? Clans are more powerful than IS, if you think it was otherwise do your homework. PGI did limit Clan weapons by streaming AC, longer beam durations, and streaming missiles and longer recycle times. OP just wanting to complain

[MischiefSC]

The testing wasn't flawed specifically because these pretty much are the Clan mechs for the foreseeable future - it took years to get IS mechs up to a reasonably wide stable and Clans will likely go the same route if not even more slowly.

Two things don't have to be equal to be compared. Also any sort of '10 v 12' will never work because the moment you say 'Clans are OP and will stay that way, we'll just have less in a match' you have just made Clans the superior mech/tech and the biggest draw for the population. Almost everyone will only want to play Clan tech, so you'll never population the 12 IS mechs for every 10 Clan mechs.

10 v 12 is fundamentally flawed and won't work. It doesn't matter if the concept is balanced - you know what would be balanced? A complete rework of the heat and convergence system for weapons and a complete rework of how hitboxes are sized for all mechs. That will never happen. It doesn't matter if it's a good idea, it's not real.

Discussing the viability of 10 v 12 is like discussing the viability of everyone in the world going pacifist and how society would change. Great, have fun discussing it. It's your time to waste. Pretending that it's a viable approach for how to build a society is just silly though.

Clan mechs need to be balanced with IS mechs. If the only Clan assault people are taking is the Dire Whale then the Warhawk seriously, SERIOUSLY needs some work. There are now and for a very long time only 2 Clan assaults. Those 2 Clan assaults and the weapons, as they exist now, need balanced to work against the whole range of IS assault mechs -

Because those 2 Clan assaults, 2 Clan heavies, 2 mediums and 2 lights are ALL THAT EXIST OR WILL FOR A VERY LONG TIME EXIST FOR CLAN MECHS.

They could always make the Warhawk and Summoner suck less... no. No, that's madness I know! Better to just nerf all the weapons based on how the superior chassis work. That way the marginalized ones are even worse. Clans need a bunch of nerfs - no question at all. IS needs a wide batch of buffs - the Awesome was a good start.

I am strongly, *STRONGLY* of the opinion that the Timber Wolf absolutely flat out needs to be the baseline. Everything needs balanced to it. The Orion? Should be every bit as good in every single way, just in an IS flavor. Cataphract? Little lighter but close. Victor? Tiny bit heavier but comparable. See what I mean? If that means going absolutely insane with buffing things like the QD (like cutting its size/hitboxes by 40%) then freaking do it.

Why is it that PGI only goes apeshit with terribad nerf ideas but fixing totally broken things they'll flip a penny at a $100 deficiency every few months?

ARGH. Just... ARGH. Doing so well, then decided to be terrible. I don't get it.