692 replies to this topic

[IraqiWalker]

MischiefSC, on 09 August 2014 - 04:43 PM, said:

A variance of 40 to 90 Elo pts equates to a 5 to 10 percent swing in win/loss.

I get the desire to say that the 90/10 figure is somehow inaccurate.... but its not. Clans are indeed op overall. Just realize that a small overall per mech advantage can equate to a large overall w/l swing.

I would agree, i this game had a respawn system, and the elo spread across the teams was reasonable. Neither of those cases are true, leading to as you said, a small advantage (being good at long range engagements, the no1 favored tactic on PuG drops), equating to an almost secure win.

Ace Selin, on 09 August 2014 - 04:59 PM, said:

Everyone knew the Clan mechs were OP, the only people who were saying any different were the people who had Clan mechs, knew they were OP but still wanted to keep that advantage as long as they could.

What reason do I have to keep the advantage? I'm a dedicated IS pilot. I will be dealing with clan mechs during CW, I will be facing them. In fact, my best interest is served by them getting nerfed HARD. The difference is that I actually piloted both sides, and unlike most, I learned the tactics to beat the clan mechs (Hint: Rushing headlong out in the open, is NOT the tactic to use. Then again, that was true when it was just IS mechs, and people still did it for 4 years straight.)

Edited by IraqiWalker, 09 August 2014 - 05:02 PM.

[yalk]

Meh, it's PGI...why would anyone trust anything they say anymore...or trust them to do what needs doing without over doing it?

....UI 2.0


Doesn't matter to me, nerf the sh*t out of the clan mechs...I'm still going to use them exclusively now as I really got into Mechwarrior and Battletech with MW2:31cc, to me they ARE Mechwarrior...do what you will PGI...

[bobF]

Phaeric Cyrh, on 09 August 2014 - 04:30 PM, said:

Ok, you are right.. It's a bad comparison. My point being that there is a way for PGI to make money without MWO being P2W. The hero chassis don't really seem to qualify since there are many c-bill meta builds that compete with any of the heroes IMO.

People will spend plenty of money on paint schemes, swag, war horns, premium time, premium consumables and early access to mech chassis that are not out of balance. What PGI needs to focus on is content that will not only bring in new players, but keep the base they have.. The more players making micro-exchanges the better..

The worst thing you can do to keep your player base playing and making those micro-exchanges is what is happening right now. Alienation of paying customers by making their previous (and even recent) purchases obsolete by introducing superior technology behind a paywall while play stagnates in a state of arena team death match on a sparse few maps.

It's great that CW is coming.. It's absolutely necessary to keep this game alive.. But the only way that is going to work is by balancing the sides. Going to 12-10 or whatever is not going to work because most players are going to want the "upgrade" and switch to clans.. That will leave the IS with a dwindling base of noob pilots that are still saving up for their "upgrade".

I agree with everything here. In my view, the thing PGI did immediately wrong was monetize mechs. They should've monetized the lore.

You should've been able to first choose a House or merc company, and that gives you access to a basic tier of mechs, relevant to that house (merc companies would get a mixed bag). This would've immediately made faction choice matter. Then through a persistence mechanic (i.e. "rank" or w/e) you get access to other tiers of mechs, let's say 4 (elisted, non-com, officer, elite). This makes sense from lore as you'd get standard issue mechs as an elisted member of a house army, all the way up to prototype designs at elite. This could be done for weapons/equipment as well. All that could be diced up with bundling and offers and xp boosts, w/e. You could sell a customization upgrade (and/or available to ranked officers) that represented a "salvage rights contract" with your house, that enabled you to earn c-bills and be assigned the upgraded tech team to fit custom upgrades. I'd have clan mechs and comstar mechs as paid content, and balance them with house/merc elite tier mechs.

Using the system above I could insidiously break that up into all kinds of bundles, along two persistence mechanisms (rank and cbills) have desirable but non-game breaking paid content (clans, comstar), balance the highest tier of play along a consistent line of mechs for all factions, not cut off anyone from any level of play (you could grind your way up to customized elite house/merc and the only thing it cost you was time) while maintaining some semblance of faction identity, pride and positive community rivalry within the lore.

PGI, you can do this game with both passionate nerds and corporate machine-men in place, with profit and fun for everyone.

[IraqiWalker]

bobF, on 09 August 2014 - 05:31 PM, said:

I agree with everything here. In my view, the thing PGI did immediately wrong was monetize mechs. They should've monetized the lore.

You should've been able to first choose a House or merc company, and that gives you access to a basic tier of mechs, relevant to that house (merc companies would get a mixed bag). This would've immediately made faction choice matter. Then through a persistence mechanic (i.e. "rank" or w/e) you get access to other tiers of mechs, let's say 4 (elisted, non-com, officer, elite). This makes sense from lore as you'd get standard issue mechs as an elisted member of a house army, all the way up to prototype designs at elite. This could be done for weapons/equipment as well. All that could be diced up with bundling and offers and xp boosts, w/e. You could sell a customization upgrade (and/or available to ranked officers) that represented a "salvage rights contract" with your house, that enabled you to earn c-bills and be assigned the upgraded tech team to fit custom upgrades. I'd have clan mechs and comstar mechs as paid content, and balance them with house/merc elite tier mechs.

Using the system above I could insidiously break that up into all kinds of bundles, along two persistence mechanisms (rank and cbills) have desirable but non-game breaking paid content (clans, comstar), balance the highest tier of play along a consistent line of mechs for all factions, not cut off anyone from any level of play (you could grind your way up to customized elite house/merc and the only thing it cost you was time) while maintaining some semblance of faction identity, pride and positive community rivalry within the lore.

PGI, you can do this game with both passionate nerds and corporate machine-men in place, with profit and fun for everyone.

Nice idea, but I honestly hate it simply because it's a tier system. Meaning my low tier Commando is never going to face a higher tier mech. Which is just bad in my opinion. An Atlas is usually considered a higher tier mech than my Commando, however, I can solo it easily. That goes double for the dire whale.

[bobF]

IraqiWalker, on 09 August 2014 - 05:35 PM, said:

Nice idea, but I honestly hate it simply because it's a tier system. Meaning my low tier Commando is never going to face a higher tier mech. Which is just bad in my opinion. An Atlas is usually considered a higher tier mech than my Commando, however, I can solo it easily. That goes double for the dire whale.

If it was me implementing this idea, I would seriously work out what mechs belong in what tier, using an objective scoring methodology as possible, based on loadout and equipment and not necessarily weight, and everybody can fight if they want to join a general queue. I personally think lances should work based on such a scoring system instead of raw tonnage/weight class, so we can play whatever we want and groups have varied compositions while still maintaining balance. Just ideas.

There's no reason why all tiers can't have a commando, using your example, just with different variants and access to equipment. If you happen to have a few million lying around, we could always license the IP and make our own game, jus puttin that out there.

Edited by bobF, 09 August 2014 - 07:52 PM.

[IraqiWalker]

bobF, on 09 August 2014 - 07:49 PM, said:

If it was me implementing this idea, I would seriously work out what mechs belong in what tier, using an objective scoring methodology as possible, based on loadout and equipment and not necessarily weight (I personally think lances should work based on such a scoring system instead of raw tonnage/weight class, so we can play whatever we want and groups have varied compositions while still maintaining balance).

There's no reason why all tiers can't have a commando, using your example, just with different variants and access to equipment. If you happen to have a few million lying around, we could always license the IP and make our own game, jus puttin that out there.

If I had a few million dollars laying around ... This world would not be the same.

As for what you recommend, the problem becomes in role warfare. My Commando has a higher rating as an escort mech than it does as a striker/brawler, however I use the same loadout for both. It can get obscenely tricky to use your system. However, I would like to see it more fleshed out, since what you have proposed seems to be the beginning of something curious.

[Chagatay]

@Bobf

You could do something like that. I do like the whole role based queuing. You could have several role types as follows which are not necessarily tied to one class:

Front line infantry
Sniper
Brawler
Scouting / Spotter
Escort
Etc

But then again, don't want to homogenizes stuff by force saying you need X of this or Y of that. I would much rather have the game sort of make you want to have a balanced force with a loose queuing mechanism. Large maps where speed matters a great deal. Objective modes that are simply not part of area Deathmatch such as:

Protect the VIP -- (I think someone already stated this as kill the Khan or whatever) -- Random mech on your team is the "Khan" and you need to protect your Khan and kill theirs.

Escape -- One side is deliberately setup so that they are in a very bad position. Objective is simple, gtfo alive. If more than X mechs survive (i.e. get to the dropsite) mission accomplished.

More maps of course but I do dream big, haha.

[William Knight]

NonCedo, on 07 August 2014 - 10:07 PM, said:

Old stats and new stats, I have logged over 8000 matches, and am all IS player atm. From many many matches in the vs. drops, IS got mechanically outclassed, that is it. For those who disagree (clan), I know you dont want your smooth victory streak to end and would like to give all the credit to your super elite skills, but get over it. You got your feel good stomping in, say thank you to those who supplied it. Its been a hell of a fight for victories from the IS side, well done those who have fought the good fight.
The clan mechs are superior mechs atm, but im still not going to buy any.
Now can we move on to the annoying mouse over sound in the mech lab, Russ, you need to fix that before karma seeks you out. I bet yours is able to be toggled off, come on...admit it.

IS for life!

[MischiefSC]

IraqiWalker, on 09 August 2014 - 05:01 PM, said:

I would agree, i this game had a respawn system, and the elo spread across the teams was reasonable. Neither of those cases are true, leading to as you said, a small advantage (being good at long range engagements, the no1 favored tactic on PuG drops), equating to an almost secure win.




What reason do I have to keep the advantage? I'm a dedicated IS pilot. I will be dealing with clan mechs during CW, I will be facing them. In fact, my best interest is served by them getting nerfed HARD. The difference is that I actually piloted both sides, and unlike most, I learned the tactics to beat the clan mechs (Hint: Rushing headlong out in the open, is NOT the tactic to use. Then again, that was true when it was just IS mechs, and people still did it for 4 years straight.)

The point though is that overall, clan mechs have an advantage. It's not huge and crushing but in 12 v 12 it's significant enough to drive 90% wins. Back before Elo came out just being in a 4man of even vaguely competent players would get you a 90% win rate. It wasn't that 4 people not even using comms were a massive advantage... just enough of one to cascade into victory match after match.

That's why I don't think the Clans need 'nerfed hard'. I think the IS needs un-nerfed and Clan lasers needed dialed back some. Not a ton, but some. That conversation has its own thread.

[amisu]

rageagainstthedyingofthelight, on 07 August 2014 - 08:41 PM, said:

The stats on the IS vs Clan queues came in with clan wining 90% of the time. 90%.

So I thought I'd start a thread where everyone who said Clan mechs weren't more powerful could apologize, you know, to keep it all in one place. You were wrong, there's no shame in that, but you were wrong.

Obviously clans should be more powerful and they should be balanced by less clan mechs vs more IS mechs game mode.

Or everybody just tell your IS noob friends to learn to play.

[ArmandTulsen]

I don't remember saying this so far, but now I can say it with confidence and assuredness:

Clans are OP.

[Hades Trooper]

rageagainstthedyingofthelight, on 07 August 2014 - 08:41 PM, said:

The stats on the IS vs Clan queues came in with clan wining 90% of the time. 90%.

So I thought I'd start a thread where everyone who said Clan mechs weren't more powerful could apologize, you know, to keep it all in one place. You were wrong, there's no shame in that, but you were wrong.

Perhaps also a lot of clan players have been playing since closed beta and thus have just a little bit of skill and thus can use our clan mechs correctly?

thanks never crossed your train of thought now has it?

i know the smoke jauars russina group melts my mech if there driving clan or IS

[Hades Trooper]

John1352, on 07 August 2014 - 09:03 PM, said:

Question: Why do players get less than 200 damage?
Answer: They were killed before they were able to do 200 damage.

Why: Clans have superior weapons, heatsinks, engines, endo steel, ferro fibrous and AMS.

Yet IS have dynamic endo and ferro slots. they have custom engine sizes, Clan mechs like the summoner, oh it's 5 locked in JJ's at 1 tonne each, has locked in ferro, yet every summoner build i have has between 14-17 crit slots open and i can't put in endo instead of ferro or even add endo.

Thus my clan 70 tonne mech is 5 tonnnes of wasted JJ with the JJ nerf, wastes 3 tonnes of weight using ferro over endo. thus it's on par with a IS mech of 62 tonnes.

oh wait there's more, your atlas can put ammo in it's legs to avoid ammo explosions? Sure i got in built case but my friggin torso and arms are just waiting for an ammo explosion to rip those to bits.

What really is the cause is the IS players haven't learnt to adapt, they have learnt if they whinge enough that there dragonslayer or <insert another hero mech's name> can't still do the same tactics from months ago it's not fair,

Warfare has been and always will be about adapting, adapt or die,m but no, the adpation is whinge enough and PGI will come save you cause it's not fair. Yet i hear a lot of IS players saying, why can't i use my clan mechs in CW, what do you mean i follow house davion and you expect me to drive an IS mech, i want clans, whine whine more moaning and groaning will win the day as PGI will save me.


don't get me started on about those who now attack clan mechs on there own team like the other night. 5 house liao players start of the match without saying a word, the firestarter and raven instantly start attacking my buddies back, so you know what, i turned on them they alpahs a 2nd time, so i alpha killed 2 of them, there buddies start wailing in on me, i killed a awesome for my 3rd team kill then a catapult for my 4th in the one match.

You IS want to whine and play dirty then say hello to my 6 ultra ac/5's

As for those who say Clan mechs are pay to win, well where was the whinging about hero mechs then? surely the dragonslayer and hero cataphrat are pay to win also then. oh thats right, your driving them vs inferior mechs thats ok, but qwhen i decided yay i finally can have my clan mechs i've been waiting for 2 years to get it's now pay to win.

why don't you have another whinge also, oh thats right you IS did, now the deploy zones are so close why even bother to nerf ER lasers when you can engage ins a brawl in under 20 seconds now.

[John80sk]

locust, commando, hunchback, trebuchet, dragon, thunderbolt, orion, awesome, highlander. These mechs are all awful.

blackjack, centurion, hunchback, kintaro, wolverine, catapult. These mechs are all pretty bad.

The problem isn't that Clan's are overpowered, it's that the IS has so many doo-doo mechs, and most that aren't doo-doo mechs require specific builds to not be doo-doo.

Firestarter vs Kitfox
Shadowhawk vs Stormcrow
Phract 3D vs Timberwolf
Victor vs Direwolf

In that match up I wouldn't put serious money on either side, but throw in a few Dragons and Hunchbacks and things get out of hand. Clan mechs don't need a nerf, bottom tier IS mechs need a buff.

[keith]

John80sk, on 11 August 2014 - 03:16 AM, said:

locust, commando, hunchback, trebuchet, dragon, thunderbolt, orion, awesome, highlander. These mechs are all awful.

blackjack, centurion, hunchback, kintaro, wolverine, catapult. These mechs are all pretty bad.

The problem isn't that Clan's are overpowered, it's that the IS has so many doo-doo mechs, and most that aren't doo-doo mechs require specific builds to not be doo-doo.

Firestarter vs Kitfox
Shadowhawk vs Stormcrow
Phract 3D vs Timberwolf
Victor vs Direwolf

In that match up I wouldn't put serious money on either side, but throw in a few Dragons and Hunchbacks and things get out of hand. Clan mechs don't need a nerf, bottom tier IS mechs need a buff.

this. now if every clan player rolled in thors/adders pretty sure ever match the IS would win. ppl like to play mechs they have fun in. clan mechs just have better slots then 90% of IS mech because of omni system. right now we are getting alot of knee jerk reactions. lets nerf everything down to unusable lvls plz

[eraser]

This is why there should have been a clan beta test where they could have gotten this information before release. You could have taken several hundred players and had them play both sides and see what the numbers come out as. Then you could have the side switch and see how much player skill was the factor vs mech.

[Doctor Proctor]

Hades Trooper, on 11 August 2014 - 02:57 AM, said:

Perhaps also a lot of clan players have been playing since closed beta and thus have just a little bit of skill and thus can use our clan mechs correctly?

thanks never crossed your train of thought now has it?

i know the smoke jauars russina group melts my mech if there driving clan or IS

That was accounted by player ELO. There was only a 90 point variance between the two sides, which should have produced approximately a 60/40 win ration, NOT 90/10 as was actually seen.

[Blacksoul1987]

keith, on 11 August 2014 - 03:24 AM, said:

this. now if every clan player rolled in thors/adders pretty sure ever match the IS would win. ppl like to play mechs they have fun in. clan mechs just have better slots then 90% of IS mech because of omni system. right now we are getting alot of knee jerk reactions. lets nerf everything down to unusable lvls plz

yeah quite a few of the IS mechs are just bad like most of the energy heavy mechs (except stalker) reducing medlas heat would help a lot I feel.

[Roadkill]

MischiefSC, on 09 August 2014 - 04:43 PM, said:

A variance of 40 to 90 Elo pts equates to a 5 to 10 percent swing in win/loss.

From 55.73 to 62.67, to be precise. But as you well know, that's actually a huge swing when compounded by 12 players on each side.

It is the nature of multiplayer games that the outcome is going to snowball pretty quickly once the fighting begins. What looks like a relatively minor 7% change in the win probability for the better team is actually enough to virtually guarantee a stomp in most games.

[Roadkill]

MischiefSC, on 11 August 2014 - 12:21 AM, said:

The point though is that overall, clan mechs have an advantage. It's not huge and crushing but in 12 v 12 it's significant enough to drive 90% wins. Back before Elo came out just being in a 4man of even vaguely competent players would get you a 90% win rate. It wasn't that 4 people not even using comms were a massive advantage... just enough of one to cascade into victory match after match.

That's why I don't think the Clans need 'nerfed hard'. I think the IS needs un-nerfed and Clan lasers needed dialed back some. Not a ton, but some. That conversation has its own thread.

This. Clan Mechs (or more realistically, Clan weapons) need tweaking, not nerfing. It won't take much to bring the balance back in line.