12 replies to this topic

[Scatterplot]

As posted in the command chair, PGI is abandoning 10v12 as a possibility for clan vs IS balancing. I believe this is a departure from the lore of the mechwarrior universe as clan stars are composed of five points, not six and not four. It follows then that a star of clan mechs will continue to be separated into an IS lance of four with one member unable to see star-only commands given by the star commander.

That sucks.

[Ihasa]

Gameplay > Lore

[Xarian]

Pretty sure "lore" battles involved more than 24 mechs at any given time. But don't let that stop you from whining...

[verybad]

The base size issue (lance vrs star) isn't the main concern in my opinion. Military units, while often built as particular sizes, have always been able to operate under different sizes due to losses, logistic issues, etc. That's not the worst of the things in the announcement.

The main issue is that it does not seem to be making clan vrs is units mean anything. While it wants to balance the individual mechs against each other, it refuses to due so in the manner that allowed the IS to win their defensive war against the clans.

The meta. IS won because they had better economies. Individualy, the inner sphere pilots and mechs were no mach for clan pilots or technology.

MWO developers consistently refuse to go beyond the individual game. They balance only for skirmish, and don't seem to understand that all long lasting FPS games require a form of advancement beyond just individual games.

They've been lackluster at best in CW support (oh great, now you can pay to make a named unit *whoopty effing doo!)

If they made the economy matter more than buying baubles and new mechs for the grind, then it might be more interesting.

How about something like making heavily damaged or destroyed mechs get a CB/XP penalty in the next game with Clan mechs having a worse penalty?

How about making more interesting decisions than to balance the mechs 1:1

They can abandon the background and make it their own FPS, i'm fine with that, but then they need to not call it mechwarrior.

Clan mechs ARE better. THey're SUPPOSED to be better. They're also communist warriors that can't operate well as a team. Make the background differences matter and it's interesting.

Why is it so hard for them to make 10v12 work? a simple multiplier in terms of player skill level would work as a basis, I KNOW computers can multiple x1.2

It's just disappointing. I know they're trying to make the game work asa balanced, fun game for everyone, that's a good goal, but why call it mechwarrior if that's not what it is except for the mechs lookng how they are?

[verybad]

Ihasa, on 05 September 2014 - 01:29 PM, said:

Gameplay > Lore

Agreed, but don't call it mechwarrior, or Clans vrs IS, if that's not what it is. They may look right, but the lore is the basis for the game, and the two aren't meeting well.

Even the TT game Battletech uses a points system to balance games,. It's based on unequal technologies and vastly different tactical operations, so balancing them 1:1 does it no service.

[-Natural Selection-]

I think its total crap that its going to be 12 v 12. Time to meta up and beat the brakes off the IS.

[Gallowglas]

I've speculated for some time that eventually once factions are segregated for CW, we'll see a mixed queue only in solo drops. This would accommodate IS players to play Clan chassis and vice versa while still keeping things pure for CW drops. You could even score minor faction points at the individual chassis level in these solo drops to make the drops somewhat meaningful. In this context, 10v12 as a balancing tool won't work. In essence, you'd end up with balanced group games and totally imbalanced solo queue games.

Not that this is necessarily the way things will be implemented, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if this was a factor in the decision.

[Ryvucz]

10 vs 12 would be more balanced than the crazy things they are doing here.

[Sorbic]

verybad, on 05 September 2014 - 01:31 PM, said:

Clan mechs ARE better. THey're SUPPOSED to be better. They're also communist warriors that can't operate well as a team. Make the background differences matter and it's interesting.

Why is it so hard for them to make 10v12 work? a simple multiplier in terms of player skill level would work as a basis, I KNOW computers can multiple x1.2

It's just disappointing. I know they're trying to make the game work asa balanced, fun game for everyone, that's a good goal, but why call it mechwarrior if that's not what it is except for the mechs lookng how they are?

I doubt it's as much an issue with making 10vs12 work as it is with how they feel it would impact the game. 10vs12 would clearly indicate that Clans are more powerful. Now, some folks would stay hardfast with IS for reasons of lore and whatnot. However as is evident in many games, a greater number of people would want to play with whatever is the most powerful big number mechs. I wonder if they worry that we would see a queue breaking shift of most folks trying to play Clans. And before someone says "well clanners would get frustrated of having to wait for a game and run IS..." Stop and think about that statement.

Personally I would be happy with 10vs12 and don't mind fighting bigger, badder mechs. Of course the Locust is one of my favorites so maybe I'm a masochist.

[Heffay]

Clan lore sucks. Abandoning it is the right thing to do. It's time for a clan lore reboot. If you want to maintain the "lore" of their superiority, stick to "they were better pilots, in newer gear with better maintenance and far better training."

[verybad]

Sorbic, on 05 September 2014 - 01:51 PM, said:

I doubt it's as much an issue with making 10vs12 work as it is with how they feel it would impact the game. 10vs12 would clearly indicate that Clans are more powerful. Now, some folks would stay hardfast with IS for reasons of lore and whatnot. However as is evident in many games, a greater number of people would want to play with whatever is the most powerful big number mechs. I wonder if they worry that we would see a queue breaking shift of most folks trying to play Clans. And before someone says "well clanners would get frustrated of having to wait for a game and run IS..." Stop and think about that statement.

Personally I would be happy with 10vs12 and don't mind fighting bigger, badder mechs. Of course the Locust is one of my favorites so maybe I'm a masochist.

There is always the option of 10v10 clan and 12v12 is also. Clans fought each other even during their IS invasion, they're tactical geniuses and strategic morons... So PUD players could pick their preferences and still find a game.

Heffay, on 05 September 2014 - 01:56 PM, said:

Clan lore sucks. Abandoning it is the right thing to do. It's time for a clan lore reboot. If you want to maintain the "lore" of their superiority, stick to "they were better pilots, in newer gear with better maintenance and far better training."

IF you don't want to play as the Communist Individual warriors believing it is their destiny to reforge the Star League and rule the glaaxy from earth, then WHAT the hell do you care about the lore in any case?

Edited by verybad, 05 September 2014 - 02:03 PM.

[Fajther]

The last I checked we were playing a game called mwomercs. I guess that means no matter how much you want to call yourself a clanner you will always just be freebirth mercenary. And so it will always be lance vs lance.

[Egomane]

Please leave your feedback in the official feedback thread for this topic.