692 replies to this topic

[Cavendish]

I was obviously wrong when it comes to the PUG queue, so I will man up and admit that.

Now, lets do test in the form of a tournament with the top teams please. That would give you more valuable data then relying on the PUG queue where bottomfeeders like me stick a toe in now and then to try out fun builds.

There are too many variables in these numbers that are not accounted for:

1) 90 Elo diff, but what was the average Elo of the typical player? Was it the bottom half or House of Lords that made up the standard player?

2) Clan side was limited to the mechs released, what was the average make-up of the IS groups? Are we talking DS teams or Quickdraws with a smattering of Oxide?

3) What was the average loadout on the diffrent sides? Did IS bring meta or 8xSL? What did the Clans use to face-roll them so badly?

[Noth]

Cavendish, on 08 August 2014 - 04:11 AM, said:

I was obviously wrong when it comes to the PUG queue, so I will man up and admit that.

Now, lets do test in the form of a tournament with the top teams please. That would give you more valuable data then relying on the PUG queue where bottomfeeders like me stick a toe in now and then to try out fun builds.

There are too many variables in these numbers that are not accounted for:

1) 90 Elo diff, but what was the average Elo of the typical player? Was it the bottom half or House of Lords that made up the standard player?

2) Clan side was limited to the mechs released, what was the average make-up of the IS groups? Are we talking DS teams or Quickdraws with a smattering of Oxide?

3) What was the average loadout on the diffrent sides? Did IS bring meta or 8xSL? What did the Clans use to face-roll them so badly?

It doesn't matter! They are all OP thus must all be nerfed into the ground *sarcasm*

[Willard Phule]

Jman5, on 07 August 2014 - 09:03 PM, said:

Sorry but this was debunked by PGI.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

Oh...that made my side hurt.....ohmygod that was funny. PGI can't even figure out how to do anything without making it so complicated that noone can understand it...how can they possibly debunk anything?

Jman5, on 07 August 2014 - 09:03 PM, said:

They accounted for Elo differentials and it was still insanely out of wack. Going by skill it should have been 60/40 worst case scenario. The fact that it was 90/10 means there is imbalance.

Dude...please...stop....I can't breath here.....

This whole Elo thing was cobbled together as a temporary fix in the first place, then it just snowballed out of control. Russ and Bryan have no clue what "balanced" is....especially when it comes to skill or experience. Remember, they're the ones that redesigned the matchmaker so that the better you are, the more new players you have to carry.

The data they're working with is suspect in the first place, the methods they use to analyze it are questionable and the results they spew at everyone are ludicrous.

Basically, it all boils down to money. New players aren't spending the $30 a piece like they used to, older players are sick of the crap and aren't spending money on the game either. This is just another pathetic attempt to appease the most vocal group on Twitter or Reddit.

Boohoo! The clan mechs kill me too fast! Nevermind that I stand in the open, zoom in and then get killed....it has nothing to do with my experience or lack of skill. The enemy shouldn't be able to kill me. Turn their lazors into pillows or I'll leave!

[Be Rough With Me Plz]

Willard Phule, on 08 August 2014 - 04:20 AM, said:

The data they're working with is suspect in the first place, the methods they use to analyze it are questionable and the results they spew at everyone are ludicrous.

Why is the data suspect? Do you have access to the data they collected?

Why are the methods they use to analyze the data questionable? Are you part of the Dev team so you have actual knowledge on the procedural aspects of PGI?

Why are the results announced by PGI ludicrous? Seems like they match with what was being reported on the forums during the testing.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Be Rough With Me Plz, on 08 August 2014 - 04:24 AM, said:

Why is the data suspect? Do you have access to the data they collected?

Again see variables such as trial mechs and champions that would seriously hamper IS teams performance for each present on the team.

When you conduct uncontrolled tests...then data becomes suspect..

Edited by DV McKenna, 08 August 2014 - 04:26 AM.

[Be Rough With Me Plz]

DV McKenna, on 08 August 2014 - 04:26 AM, said:

Again see variables such as trial mechs and champions that would seriously hamper IS teams performance for each present on the team.

Duh

And those variables would account for the 90/10 win ratio? 90% of the matches, the IS side just sucked?

How about the variables on the Clan side?

Increased survivability, maneuverability, mobility through the Clan XL Engine.
60-75% increase in effective engagement envelope.
Impulse shake from CAC's and no-min CLRM's.

But hey, it's all about Trial Mechs and "bads"

Duh, right?

Edited by Be Rough With Me Plz, 08 August 2014 - 04:31 AM.

[Noth]

Be Rough With Me Plz, on 08 August 2014 - 04:27 AM, said:

And those variables would account for the 90/10 win ratio? 90% of the matches, the IS side just sucked?

Duh, right?

It's the combination of variables (which would include what clan mechs, and what weapons are used on them) that together would account for the 90% win ratio. Basically it would allow you to see how much the clan mechs influenced the outcomes when compared to the other variables. Clan mechs alone did not account for all that 90%.

[Be Rough With Me Plz]

Noth, on 08 August 2014 - 04:31 AM, said:

It's the combination of variables (which would include what clan mechs, and what weapons are used on them) that together would account for the 90% win ratio. Basically it would allow you to see how much the clan mechs influenced the outcomes when compared to the other variables. Clan mechs alone did not account for all that 90%.

More hypothetical arguments to rationalize your position. Yay!

Now we've got a party. Blanket statements/assumptions, Rationalization, False equivalencies, Ad Hominem, Informal fallacies, Argumentum ad ignorantiam.

What's next?

Edited by Be Rough With Me Plz, 08 August 2014 - 04:37 AM.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Be Rough With Me Plz, on 08 August 2014 - 04:27 AM, said:

And those variables would account for the 90/10 win ratio? 90% of the matches, the IS side just sucked?

How about the variables on the Clan side?

Increased survivability, maneuverability, mobility through the Clan XL Engine.
60-75% increase in effective engagement envelope.
Impulse shake from CAC's and no-min CLRM's.

But hey, it's all about Trial Mechs and "bads"

Duh, right?

They would account for some of the victories, if the IS team for example had 3 Champion mechs and 1 trial, that's 4 inferior mechs in this setting, essentially providing a 4 mech advantage to the clan team, that heavily dictates the outcome.

You do seem to be ignoring the variables that would effect the whole outcome of the test.
Instead choosing to beleive the clan advantages made the 90% win ratio what it was.

Be Rough With Me Plz, on 08 August 2014 - 04:33 AM, said:

More hypothetical arguments to rationalize your position. Yay!

Not hypothetical, the winning team 9/10 is the one who opens up and exploits the numbers advantage, if your team starts with a handicap, that makes it worse.

And just how it is.

If your going to conduct a meaningful test, to draw data from, you need to minimise the variables that can effect the outcome.

Edited by DV McKenna, 08 August 2014 - 04:37 AM.

[Noth]

Be Rough With Me Plz, on 08 August 2014 - 04:33 AM, said:

More hypothetical arguments to rationalize your position. Yay!

Again, if you read that, I basically say that clan mechs are stronger. The entire reason for wanting more data is to get a better idea of by how much. There are many variables involved in each match in this game, we can't know how much those variable play a role without the data for it. The data likely would not magically make the clan mechs not appear more powerful than IS mechs, but simply help show by how much. In essence it gives a better picture of the balance issues occuring with the clans.

Have you ever actually taken statistics or even conducted tests in a science class? I ask because a lot of what McKenna and I say is pretty basic stuff in such classes.

Edited by Noth, 08 August 2014 - 04:39 AM.

[POWR]

Seeing as how clans are just damage machines, I am not surprised. It's not so bad when you can hide and such, but the moment you're alone with a clan mech of equal or greater mass, you're probably dead.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Noth, on 08 August 2014 - 04:37 AM, said:

Again, if you read that, I basically say that clan mechs are stronger. The entire reason for wanting more data is to get a better idea of by how much. There are many variables involved in each match in this game, we can't know how much those variable play a role without the data for it. The data likely would not magically make the clan mechs not appear more powerful than IS mechs, but simply help show by how much. In essence it gives a better picture of the balance issues occuring with the clans.

One of the biggest balance issues for the clans will always be XL engines. which is something that will need looking at, less so the weapons.

[Noth]

DV McKenna, on 08 August 2014 - 04:39 AM, said:

One of the biggest balance issues for the clans will always be XL engines. which is something that will need looking at, less so the weapons.

Very true, but that too needs to be tread on carefully as what I've seen suggested for it would make it so losing a side torso is worse than getting legged.

[Kubernetes]

Good grief, it's amazing how some people simply refuse to acknowledge that Clan tech is superior at the moment. You can see it in the game and you can see it in the numbers. I don't understand how you can play this game for any appreciable amount of time and not immediately see the impact of mechs like the TBR and DW and the Clan weapons.

I played 10+ matches on that day, and I was lucky enough to have switched from Clan to IS after 6-7 matches. On the Clan side I only own a TWolf--my teams won every match, and not a single one was close. My kdr soared in those matches because I didn't die. I think the worst result was 12-3, which meant you actually had to work hard to die to an IS mech.

I then switched to a Jager S with three UACs. In two games I managed to get one assist and we got massively stomped in both. Switched to meta Phract 3D for two games. And YAY we actually won a game on Terra, 12-6. For some reason our IS team stayed concentrated and the Clan was spread out all over the place, so in any given engagement our big blob faced at most 3 enemy. Of course we lost the other. I then switched to an Orion VA LRM boat for two games and got absolutely stomped.

I think I played more at least one or two more matches, but still, one IS victory in over a dozen matches. The discrepancy isn't just big, it's massive. Each Clan mech may only hold a small marginal advantage over its IS adversary, but 12 v 12? All that accumulated advantage and boom, you see 12-1 results and even good IS pilots doing <200 damage. Yeah, it's hard to do good damage when you're getting hit by 20+ ERLLs and ERMLs every time you leave cover.

[Hardac]

Noth, on 08 August 2014 - 04:41 AM, said:

Very true, but that too needs to be tread on carefully as what I've seen suggested for it would make it so losing a side torso is worse than getting legged.

A slight nerf to speed wouldn't be too bad, when losing a side torso. But some of the numbers I've seen suggested are a bit loopy.

[El Bandito]

If Clan XL engine side torso blows, half the engine heatsinks should go with it.

Edited by El Bandito, 08 August 2014 - 04:47 AM.

[Hardac]

Kubernetes, on 08 August 2014 - 04:44 AM, said:

Good grief, it's amazing how some people simply refuse to acknowledge that Clan tech is superior at the moment. You can see it in the game and you can see it in the numbers. I don't understand how you can play this game for any appreciable amount of time and not immediately see the impact of mechs like the TBR and DW and the Clan weapons.

I played 10+ matches on that day, and I was lucky enough to have switched from Clan to IS after 6-7 matches. On the Clan side I only own a TWolf--my teams won every match, and not a single one was close. My kdr soared in those matches because I didn't die. I think the worst result was 12-3, which meant you actually had to work hard to die to an IS mech.

I then switched to a Jager S with three UACs. In two games I managed to get one assist and we got massively stomped in both. Switched to meta Phract 3D for two games. And YAY we actually won a game on Terra, 12-6. For some reason our IS team stayed concentrated and the Clan was spread out all over the place, so in any given engagement our big blob faced at most 3 enemy. Of course we lost the other. I then switched to an Orion VA LRM boat for two games and got absolutely stomped.

I think I played more at least one or two more matches, but still, one IS victory in over a dozen matches. The discrepancy isn't just big, it's massive. Each Clan mech may only hold a small marginal advantage over its IS adversary, but 12 v 12? All that accumulated advantage and boom, you see 12-1 results and even good IS pilots doing <200 damage. Yeah, it's hard to do good damage when you're getting hit by 20+ ERLLs and ERMLs every time you leave cover.

Some Clan mechs are superior. The problem with weapon nerfs is that they also effect the mechs that aren't.

[Noth]

El Bandito, on 08 August 2014 - 04:46 AM, said:

If Clan XL engine side torso blows, half the engine heatsinks should go with it.

That is reasonable.

[Madner Kami]

orin, on 07 August 2014 - 10:57 PM, said:

FFS did anyone read the fiction? The Clans are hundreds of years ahead technologically. Of course they are stronger than IS units. Up until Tukkayid, how many even battles were won by the IS? The only time the IS won was when it had overwhelming numbers.

It sounds as though what a lot of people want is just to play in the 3025 era.

I came here to play a competative online game, where I sit in a mech and try to kill other mechs. I'm not here to play a game that has predetermined outcomes of every battle fought and I am 100% certain that few to noone have any interest in getting repeatedly curbstomped because lore dictates it. If you are into that, I don't mind, but have the decency to ask PGI for a historical campaign or reenact battles with your RP-friends in some sort of optional environment (Customizable "Training" Rooms for example) and don't force this down my throat.

[Be Rough With Me Plz]

Noth, on 08 August 2014 - 04:37 AM, said:

Again, if you read that, I basically say that clan mechs are stronger. The entire reason for wanting more data is to get a better idea of by how much. There are many variables involved in each match in this game, we can't know how much those variable play a role without the data for it. The data likely would not magically make the clan mechs not appear more powerful than IS mechs, but simply help show by how much. In essence it gives a better picture of the balance issues occuring with the clans.

Have you ever actually taken statistics or even conducted tests in a science class? I ask because a lot of what McKenna and I say is pretty basic stuff in such classes.

Even with all the variables you can think of, Clan Mechs won 90% of the time. Have you taken statistic classes before? Do you understand just how significant a 90% success rate it? You all cherry-pick possible weaknesses in IS Tech, but you never address the advantages Clan Tech provides and how it will affect the numbers. Why is that?

Science classes are offered through K-12 so nice attempt at Ad Hominem. Have you ever taken logic classes? They don't offer them as general courses so you would have to major in a field that required logic.