362 replies to this topic

[Mechteric]

Budor, on 26 September 2014 - 11:33 AM, said:

I was refering to a 200t limit. 1/1/1/1 is simply the better option.

Its worse for the light pilot specialist. Or the assault pilot specialist.


Most of the elite light pilots I know are just not good in assaults, and same goes for the reverse. Some of us may be somewhat comfortable across the board, but that certainly doesn't define many out there, and that is why I think 1/1/1/1 is the worst option. You're getting a choice to pick what you're at your best in, as opposed to being required to take a mech or few you aren't at your best in.

Edited by CapperDeluxe, 26 September 2014 - 11:38 AM.

[elismallz]

EvilCow, on 26 September 2014 - 11:35 AM, said:

Real life kind of "clanners" would QQ crying for the unfair conditions but I like the idea.

Maybe there would be less QQ from this than there is from all the clan nerfs? Unlikely I know, but a man can dream.

[Bilbo]

CapperDeluxe, on 26 September 2014 - 11:37 AM, said:

Its worse for the light pilot specialist. Or the assault pilot specialist.


Most of the elite light pilots I know are just not good in assaults, and same goes for the reverse. Some of us may be somewhat comfortable across the board, but that certainly doesn't define many out there, and that is why I think 1/1/1/1 is the worst option.

Problem is, the tonnage option only really addresses the wants and needs of the lighter specialists. At least 1/1/1/1 has no inherent bias.

[Budor]

CapperDeluxe, on 26 September 2014 - 11:37 AM, said:

Its worse for the light pilot specialist. Or the assault pilot specialist.


Most of the elite light pilots I know are just not good in assaults, and same goes for the reverse. Some of us may be somewhat comfortable across the board, but that certainly doesn't define many out there, and that is why I think 1/1/1/1 is the worst option.

Good players will do ok in anything, thats not the point though, the point is that if you bring 2 mechs while the enemy brings 4 only because you think you are an "elite assault pilot" i dont want you on my team.

Edited by Budor, 26 September 2014 - 11:42 AM.

[Sudden]

I WILL JUST SAY THIS, the respawn idea is crap. it has no place in MechWarrior.

EvilCow, on 26 September 2014 - 11:26 AM, said:

Assuming one single mech in the middle of each class (rounding to lower ):

90 + 65 + 45 + 30 = 230

May be that on important planet the limit could be increased. What about giving planets a class?

For example:
capital = 280
advanced industrial = 250
industrial = 230
agriculture = 210

Everybody happy.

very good idea

[hybrid black]

Lyoto Machida, on 25 September 2014 - 05:37 PM, said:

PGI will probably give surviving defenders full ammo and armor/structure. You know...for balance, and all.

balance would not be doing that its the price for taking LRMs and ballistics and why lasers are there for prolongs engagements


*Edit to add one more thing*

and give a reason for more balance builds that don't cont on ammo

Edited by hybrid black, 26 September 2014 - 11:46 AM.

[Jeon Ji Yoon]

I like the 1/1/1/1 dropship idea and I'd benefit the most from a tonnage limit as a medium pilot lol and it almost makes me consider using that Locust (P) for the last light slot I wonder if the loyalty bonuses will then be stackable? LIke if I took all 4 Phoenix mechs I'd get +40% loyalty points or if I'd only ever have to take 1 (like just my Shadowhawk {P} and just take my favorite light, heavy and assault) and get +10%...

I am glad that logistics aren't being implemented yet but it makes me feel kinda stupid for saving up 280 mil c-bills for that purpose. Guess I'll go buy all those modules now lol

[Ozric]

Bilbo, on 26 September 2014 - 11:40 AM, said:

Problem is, the tonnage option only really addresses the wants and needs of the lighter specialists. At least 1/1/1/1 has no inherent bias.

This is a totally valid point. A minimum tonnage value along with a maximum (240) seems like the easiest way around this.

[Blaike]

Ive just jumped in right at the end of this so bear with me. I must choose 1 light 1 medium 1 heavy and 1 assault for CW.
I only have IS med and heavy and Clan light and med, So would I have to choose a trial mech and be at a disadvantage.
I can afford the the missing mechs with cbills but prefer not to master those mechs.

[Jeon Ji Yoon]

hybrid black, on 26 September 2014 - 11:45 AM, said:

balance would not be doing that its the price for taking LRMs and ballistics and why lasers are there for prolongs engagements


*Edit to add one more thing*

and give a reason for more balance builds that don't cont on ammo

Thats an awesome point and it would finally make my super slow Misslemaster with 15 tons of ammo viable again

Blaike, on 26 September 2014 - 11:51 AM, said:

Ive just jumped in right at the end of this so bear with me. I must choose 1 light 1 medium 1 heavy and 1 assault for CW.
I only have IS med and heavy and Clan light and med, So would I have to choose a trial mech and be at a disadvantage.
I can afford the the missing mechs with cbills but prefer not to master those mechs.

No, they said they'd inject trial mechs into any you didn't have ;_;

[Bilbo]

Ozric, on 26 September 2014 - 11:51 AM, said:

This is a totally valid point. A minimum tonnage value along with a maximum (240) seems like the easiest way around this.

Agreed. Though I still don't like the idea of someone taking 2 or more of the same chassis.

[Kain Demos]

elismallz, on 26 September 2014 - 11:33 AM, said:

Could tonnage limits replace the 10v12 solution to the "Clan OP" discussion? Rather than 10v12 with slightly stronger clans, maybe clan drops would have 185 tons vs IS getting 200. This would somewhat match lore in that clans would bid low for honor.

I like 200 vs 240/250.

[elismallz]

Kain Thul, on 26 September 2014 - 11:54 AM, said:

I like 200 vs 240/250.

For Sure, the numbers could certainly be played with. 185/200 was just an example. If the player only took 3 mechs instead of the 4, that player's respawns would obviously be limited, further supporting the lore of there having been less clanners in the fight. I'm not much of a lore junkie, but it's nice when a game feature supports the lore.

Edited by elismallz, 26 September 2014 - 12:04 PM.

[Christof Romulus]

CapperDeluxe, on 26 September 2014 - 08:43 AM, said:

Tonnages are easier to deal with, plus "tiers" indicates something that is a potentially dynamically changing value over time as players gravitate to particular mechs. I would say tonnage is a start at least, and much more interesting and flexible than the 1/1/1/1 anyway.

I'm not talking about 1/1/1/1 - I was referring to the point system for mech tiers that would accomplish several goals at once, including but not limited to stopping every heavy mech being brought from being the freaking timberwolf.

In a sliding tier model, the mechs that are in the meta cost more and therefore COST MORE to bring - the Tw vs ALL OTHER HEAVY MECHS, for example.

DEMAX51, on 26 September 2014 - 08:44 AM, said:

The "points-based" thing does nothing to encourage the use of lighter-in-their-weight-class 'Mechs though, like the Locust or the Quickdraw. It's basically just a very simplified version of Battle Value.

You clearly did not read my post, because the system I proposed SUPER DOES.

Summary:
Mechs will be classified into Tiers based on *Mech effectiveness* (This can be Kills/Deaths or Damage or wins, any metric we want)
To load a mech onto a drop ship, it will cost a number of points CONSUMMATE TO ITS TIER as follows:
Tier 1: 4 Points
Tier 2: 3 Points
Tier 3: 1.5 Points
Tier 4: 0.5 Points
Trial Mechs: 0.5 Points

YOU HAVE 9 POINTS.

So, Timberwolves, for instance, might be Tier 1, and therefore cost 4 points to load - you bring two, and you can choose TWO MECHS OF 0.5 VALUE - this can be ANYTHING, whatever is classified as Tier 4! ALL THOSE UNPOPULAR MECHS that you are referring to RIGHT HERE. ALSO you could bring a trial mech if you are so bold.

This also means that Tier 1 mechs that are LIGHT, say maybe the ECM Raven, or Kitfoxes (Possibly Tier 2) have a point cost that would be consummate to their actual value in battle.

The Awesome, long time thought to be bad, let's say it's Tier 4 - you could bring dual timber wolf and dual Awesomes - giving those 'bad mechs' a reason to be brought.

[Edit]
Oh, and Mech Tier could be based on each individual VARIANT - the ECM raven being worth more than a regular raven, etc.

Edited by Christof Romulus, 26 September 2014 - 12:15 PM.

[Karamarka]

LordKnightFandragon, on 25 September 2014 - 05:47 PM, said:

Respawns in MW games is always very meh...I played a similar mode in MW4 vs my uncle once, we each respawned and each time the one who freshly respawned would win....simply because its a badly beaten mech vs a fresh one...it will be the same meh kinda crap here. Unless of course we also get a repair bay somewhere in teh base camp or something.....

Probably, but it's also a team game so your supposed to have team mates to back you up. I mean it wiill only be horrible if they can shoot into the drop zone or something haha, but than that would be realistic.

Also, if the defenders have repair bays there should be some sort of evac repair point for attackers too? IDK lots to think about.

[SirLANsalot]

Russ Bullock, on 26 September 2014 - 08:33 AM, said:

I admit I read very little of the entire thread - too little time in a day.

I will say this - in a perfect world we would have our groups limited to 4, 8 and 12 in CW and make each lance of a light, medium, heavy and Assault pilot with their drop ships full of those types of mechs - that way our MM can very easily put together matches.

But we know the players wouldn't like this concession they would prefer to have their groups of 5,6,7,9,10....

When you have group sizes like this it gets very difficult on the MM as seen in the public Group Queue - one group of 10 might not even fit with some of the groups of 2 based on all the heavy or assault slots being taken and it goes from there.

1 of each weight class gets past this and ensures variety.

However internally we are now discussing tonnage limits for CW and I am pushing this notion pretty strongly. It will end up providing more flexibility to players who want to perhaps take nothing but their Jenner's out for instance. But will become more restricting as you go higher, for instance nobody is going to take 4 Direwolf's - in fact if they take 2 their last two mechs are going to be pretty dang light.

But Tonnage restrictions does allow us to change it per planet if we desire.

I know players would like to push the tonnage limit up as high as possible so they can take as many of their favorite heavy mech as possible but I currently like the number of 240 tons.

Very nice to see a post from the main dev/boss himself

I hope you did read some of my secondary posts as well as the first. I am advocating for the 200t limit, as the 240 might be a little too much. Reason for this is as many others have already stated, since we all can do the quick math in our heads. 240t allows for too many heavies, if players wanted to stack purely heavies in there decks. It allows for 3 timbers or even 3 victors, which are perceived to be some problematic mechs in terms of balance.
At 200t this puts a hard limit on the number of heavies and assaults that are able to be brought to the field. Only 2 can be brought, with maybe a light or a lighter medium strung in. At most you would see 3 60/65 ton heavy mechs, which actually gets people to think about those mechs. Right now not many people consider to bring a Dragon or a Quickdraw to the field. The Catapult gets used all the time, but thats fine, since its the premier LRM mech for the IS, like how the Mad Dog is for the Clans. It gets people to think outside of the box a little, when they go to think on what they want to bring in there deck. They have to think on weather they want to maximized there re-spawns at the cost of having to run lighter mechs, or do they want to maximize there damage output, at the cost of being able to not show back up as often.


Now I did mention in one of my posts about the Attack and Defend game mode, which is where this Drop Ship Deck is really best suited for. The attackers could get a bonus to there deck. So the Defenders at 200t and the Attackers would be at 220 or 240 depending on what map it is, and what kind of defenses the defenders have and how many. This brings in a "balance" to something that inherently is not balanced. Since its more important to balance out the tonnages players are fighting up against, rather then the mechs themselves.

The Drop Ship mode does throw out the 3x4 MM system, as its a system all to itself. So for CW, 3x4 shouldn't be used at all, its a war and as far as I know, even in the books, the fights were not balanced in any way. For normal game play outside of CW, its fine to have, but within CW, the Drop Deck system is what should be used.

[Russ Bullock]

DEMAX51, on 26 September 2014 - 08:57 AM, said:

Your argument assumes that players will be able to take more than 4 'Mechs. I don't think that's how it'd play out. I think a more likely scenario, if they go with tonnage limits, is that you'll still be required to take 4 'Mechs into the fight - no more, no less (well... possibly less, but definitely no more. I don't even think more than 4 mechs per person would be technically possible, considering the Engineers were already worried that each player having 4 'Mechs would put too much strain on the servers)

This is correct you will be limited to 4 and you will have to take 4 as well. You can't give your excess tonnage to a team mate so he can take 4 DW mechs.

Everyone takes 4 - so the Timberwolf pilot will have a tough time even taking two unless since he has 70 tons left for the final 2 mechs.

Yes I guess it is possible that someone takes out 4 commando's and taking only 100 tons into battle is going to be tough on your team but this is really no worse of a problem than using 1/1/1/1 since people will still tend to Min/Max and make sure they are taking 35 ton lights, 55 ton mediums etc.

We just can't feasibly share tonnage, 1) there is a limitation to 4 mech's each technically 2) if CW was a mode for just 12 mans or even only preset groups but it is available to solo players as well.

We need a system that works for anything from Solo players, groups of 2-12 all getting formed into a 12 man unit within a couple of minutes of launching into an attack or defense, they will not be able to coordinate drop tonnage together and if you do not allow them to when full 12 mans have? the 12 man will absolutely demolish them.

EvilCow, on 26 September 2014 - 09:02 AM, said:

Tonnage limit is definitely the way to go. Having a parameter to work with will help balancing the CW and give also lesser mechs in each class a reason to be.

If someone wants to drop 2 assaults and 2 locusts, why not? the global balance of the drop will be preserved anyway.

Yes this is where I am at.

TexAss, on 26 September 2014 - 09:11 AM, said:

Players should be able to maximise their tons (be it 200 or 240) or otherwise, if you want to bring 4 spideys, you are 100 tons too light, and thus can get yout team into a ton-disadvantage.

if, however, you can maximise - say - your 200 tons, you can bring 4 spideys and 2 cicadas.

Its important to field nearly equal amount of tons as the enemy, not equal amount of mechs to get a balanced match.

Not technically feasible - getting everyone a 4 mech Dropship is pushing the limits to the very edge. Everyone will need to take 4, no more or no less.

Bhodi Li773, on 26 September 2014 - 09:43 AM, said:

A big question is this.Do we get to pick which mech deploys of the four or is it random?Which means no 12 light mechs swarming/legging everything in sight.

Goal is to let players decide the order on the fly as they are about to drop back in. So based on how the battle seems to be going you can choose what to take out next.

elismallz, on 26 September 2014 - 11:33 AM, said:

Could tonnage limits replace the 10v12 solution to the "Clan OP" discussion? Rather than 10v12 with slightly stronger clans, maybe clan drops would have 185 tons vs IS getting 200. This would somewhat match lore in that clans would bid low for honor.

Yes maybe. We will see, but at least we have this to play.

[BARBAR0SSA]

Oh man, I'm going to have fun if this is the case mwahah.

Btw 12 Man ECM PPC Spider party's shall happen. I really do believe limiting to 1 max per mech is way to go.

Also does this count as Used tonnage or just mech max tonnage, eg. If I take an Atlas but shave 10T off it can it be reused.

240/235 is that's the number isn't so hard to pick well

2 TW, 1 MD, and then you still have 30T/25T Kit/Lynx. That's quite the arsenal

Edited by shad0w4life, 26 September 2014 - 01:25 PM.

[Kain Demos]

YES, **** YES to Russ' last answer.

If our limit is 200 tons vs 240 or whatever for the IS I better buy a 4th Nova. Otherwise I don't see any ways to bring 4 'mechs into fight since we can't just take 2-3 of a heavier chassis.

[Metus regem]

Russ Bullock, on 26 September 2014 - 01:17 PM, said:

Yes maybe. We will see, but at least we have this to play.

uugh.... I may have to find new mechs to work with id I've only got 185 tons to work with.... hey here comes the Hell Bringer pack....(sorry wife!)

Damn even at 185 tons, I can't fit one of each weight class... Most I can cram in there is 3 mechs for the Clans at that weight.