439 replies to this topic

[Kjudoon]

Ghostwolfe, on 05 October 2014 - 10:51 AM, said:

And don't even get me started on the sync drops PGI. I saw one game that was 5 from one unit and another game that had 7 from one unit on one side and 3 more of their guys on my side. They even helped their buddies beat us.

For these solo challenges can't you prgram the matchmaker to NOT place players from the same unit on the same team? That would end the sync drops or at least reduce them. Now that players can be part of a unit at least that can be factored into the matchmaker's calculations I would think.

How long of wait times do you want? 2 minutes? 4? 10? Keep in mind that if you are forcibly keeping people from the same unit apart you are going to depopulate the Solo Queue even in tournaments because many units have guys dropping and they just might... MIGHT end up in the same match even by accident. I've had a few matches where I've seen teammates I never knew were dropping on both sides. You want to penalize them or start team killing just because they happened to end up that way? I know some already are, and they'll get banned. Which of course doesn't help your cause either.

Of course, if we had a Lance Queue for groups of 2-4 and any solos who didn't care, the Solo queue would be even more sparse, but at least it'd be free of the make believe boogie man of sync droppers.

[3xnihilo]

I think you could go a long way towards helping lights out with a formulas like this:

(Killsx20) + (assistsx10) + (spotting/uav/c-ecm/etc.x5) + (dam-team dam/15)

Or just divide light and medium damage points by 10 instead of 15. Would have made a big difference in my rounds.

If you make lights and mediums competitive you don't flood the mm with assaults and heavys and can maintain better 3/3/3/3 matches. This should make it more like everyday pugging. But it doesn't matter what you do if people think they can exploit something someway they will.

[Kodyn]

Of course people are going "exploit", ie sync-drop, if they can, because it's based on wins. When you can't rely on most pugs to even respond to an enemy in front of them, and you do have friends on, and you want to win, of course you'll use those tools.

I've been going it solo, just because sync-dropping is more trouble than it's worth, and the times I lose, it's almost always because the team just scattered and didn't listen to any intelligent suggestions, by anyone. If sync-dropping were more convenient, I'd sure as hell be doing it, just to avoid the crappy teams, since the points are very easy to attain when the team is actually backing each other up.

Now if they made it more about assists again, like the lance challenges, you'd see less sync-dropping, but everyone would whine that they're being discouraged from killing, and that no matter how many kills they get it, it doesn't add up. You're not going to get a perfect scenario, so I don't really get why everyone is expecting that...what in life is balanced and fair to everyone? Never seen that, myself, ever...anywhere.

[3xnihilo]

Kodyn, on 05 October 2014 - 01:09 PM, said:

Of course people are going "exploit", ie sync-drop, if they can, because it's based on wins. When you can't rely on most pugs to even respond to an enemy in front of them, and you do have friends on, and you want to win, of course you'll use those tools.

I've been going it solo, just because sync-dropping is more trouble than it's worth, and the times I lose, it's almost always because the team just scattered and didn't listen to any intelligent suggestions, by anyone. If sync-dropping were more convenient, I'd sure as hell be doing it, just to avoid the crappy teams, since the points are very easy to attain when the team is actually backing each other up.

Now if they made it more about assists again, like the lance challenges, you'd see less sync-dropping, but everyone would whine that they're being discouraged from killing, and that no matter how many kills they get it, it doesn't add up. You're not going to get a perfect scenario, so I don't really get why everyone is expecting that...what in life is balanced and fair to everyone? Never seen that, myself, ever...anywhere.

I think I agree with you for the most part. I don't think there is a way to make everyone happy because some people just are never happy. But I do think if you could give a little more encouragement to lights and mediums it would fix a lot of the general complaints being made. In all honesty I have played a lot of good close games. I just find that my good games total about 120 pts in a light which I suppose is my own fault for not getting more kills, assists or damage. But since the light que is almost non existent it seems to be a widely spread problem.

[HARDKOR]

Dawnstealer, on 03 October 2014 - 02:10 PM, said:

If someone pulls that off, I never, ever, ever want to play against them.

We've got a guy with a pretty normal mech thats done it ten times this weekend.

Don't hate.

[HARDKOR]

Two things...


1. These solo and small team play contests kill the team play and I've had trouble getting mote than a 2 man group all weekend. Last weekend sucked, too.

2. Anyone who whines about sync dropping needs to go back to playing in kids soccer leagues where they don't keep score. Next thing, you're going to be asking for stock mechs only on competitions.

3. Stop moving so I can shoot you.

[FlipOver]

(Kills × 20) + (Kill Assist × 10) + ((Damage Done - Team Damage) ÷ 15)

Can someone explain to me what's the "Team Damage" about? Is it the total team damage but your own? Is it the FF we made on that match?

[Kodyn]

Team damage is simply friendly fire. If you shoot teammates, that damage is subtracted from your total. I think they added this because FF is extremely common in solo queue, so they're trying to encourage people to play smarter, take aim, and not just spray and pray for the high damage scores.

Unfortunately it doesn't work, people still spray and pray, but that's just the learning curve of the game, everyone will get better or quit, either way, evens out at higher elo and in group queue.

[C A R N A G E]

lol i stopped playing in it after very long searches and when i did get in the lrm spam was really bad.the worthy adversaries2 is more like LRM SPAM2,i think they should only award a fourth of the credit for lrms and uacs just to keep some of the boating down a bit to actually make a tourny more fun.i did get in faster with using a medium but im a heavy player and an IS pilot at that.i just threw the towel in and got my lance mates for 4 man drops.
Hey on a side note if they wont cut the credit back for lrm spam,maybe they could give credit for running ams to shoot missles down,just a thought.
Be cool all.

[Mochyn Pupur]

Shame that Tied Matches weren't figured in, seen 6 of my best scores go down the pan this weekend because of ties and folk running off an hiding/powering down and dc'ing. Yep, surely makes for a poor weekend's challenge.

On the plus side, I've stripped out the backs of so many "friendly" mechs desperate to rush in front of my twin gauss as they are released, pretty sure I lost a scoring match due to friendly fire penalty, although luckily not killed anyone on my team so far, but bound to happen sometime soon through trying to grab the last shot.

Please, can any future events be thought out to support the "Team" players who play their weight class as intended rather than catering to the meta gamers who quite fairly and hats off to them, have built up their mechs/cbills enough to have the best already and now cream off more rewards, than those who are still trying to get there in the first place who end up feeling like cannon fodder?!

[Acid Monkey]

It would be nice if they fixed the IFF bug before they ran this challenge. I've missed out on 1 million C-bills and scored a tk today simply because I was badly damaged and wasn't about to let the unmarked mech that just came around a corner, guns pointed in my direction, shoot first.

[Kodyn]

I will openly admit that while I do not think the balance of the tournament is an issue, it does have a way of engendering bitterness. Normally I don't care if i win or lose, as long as I do my personal best and have fun, but the weekend crew of pugs is so casual/new that the latter half of the tourney has become a bit of a grind. Either people just don't care about trying, or are simply that bad, but either way, it's rough out there right now. Makes me really reconsider my "not-sync dropping" thing lol.

One thing these types of event certainly do illustrate is the vast amount of differences there are in skill level/effort among players of this game, and it is honestly hard to stay calm sometimes when you feel like you're alone in trying to complete a tourney and no one else seems to care or be trying to do anything productive, period.

The only suggestion I could make as to help that would be to maybe make it so that somehow those who opted in aren't forced to team up with those who don't care. Maybe make it a separate queue just for these events, if that's doable, or just stick to team events having wins as a requirement, since you can't make pugs win, if they simply aren't very good or don't care to try.

EDIT: Also, the reason for the Lurmageddon people are bemoaning is the fact that most pugs really aren't very good...so it's both those poor players using lurms to try and compete, and the good guys who are getting frustrated by seeing no teamwork, and plenty of lurms on the other side, so they switch to lurms themselves just to make up for their pugs. I normally am stuck on ballistics, but can't just solo brawl everything myself, so if I can't have any team play, I may swap over to lurms myself just to finish the tourney, since sometimes the only way to get pugs to win is to give them plenty of lurm support. Otherwise everyone just turtles or scatters, it's been about 50/50.

Edited by Kodyn, 05 October 2014 - 02:36 PM.

[OznerpaG]

after playing 40 games with mediums i think the formula is completely unfair to the lighter classes of mechs - it was taking me a LOT more work to achieve the 130 (if i got a win) than when i switched to my Battlemaster, which i could easily achieve the minimum 130 almost every game win or lose

if you create a formula that counts on firepower to achieve results, then the smart people will play assaults just to get the pure cash in FAST. yeah you have to wait longer to get in a match, but i'd rather spend 2min waiting for a match and get my cash in 30-35 tries than wait 30sec for a match but have to play 50+ to get my cash

[Motörhead]

Interesting numbers in top tier pilot, is mechs and clan mechs stats are much more on par now

Edited by Nello Flavio Fiore, 05 October 2014 - 03:29 PM.

[Chrithu]

JagdFlanker, on 05 October 2014 - 02:34 PM, said:

after playing 40 games with mediums i think the formula is completely unfair to the lighter classes of mechs - it was taking me a LOT more work to achieve the 130 (if i got a win) than when i switched to my Battlemaster, which i could easily achieve the minimum 130 almost every game win or lose

if you create a formula that counts on firepower to achieve results, then the smart people will play assaults just to get the pure cash in FAST. yeah you have to wait longer to get in a match, but i'd rather spend 2min waiting for a match and get my cash in 30-35 tries than wait 30sec for a match but have to play 50+ to get my cash

Too true. I didn't even bother trying to do it in anything but my Jester (my best Damage Dealer at the moment). I don't have any Missile packing mechs right now otherwise I would have readied up a LRM Boat for the challenge.

On the other hand I've had some pretty awesome matches this weekend. Especially Saturday morning was a blast, had a lot of very good teams and close matches.

Edited by Jason Parker, 05 October 2014 - 02:51 PM.

[Eglar]

JagdFlanker, on 05 October 2014 - 02:34 PM, said:

after playing 40 games with mediums i think the formula is completely unfair to the lighter classes of mechs - it was taking me a LOT more work to achieve the 130 (if i got a win) than when i switched to my Battlemaster, which i could easily achieve the minimum 130 almost every game win or lose

if you create a formula that counts on firepower to achieve results, then the smart people will play assaults just to get the pure cash in FAST. yeah you have to wait longer to get in a match, but i'd rather spend 2min waiting for a match and get my cash in 30-35 tries than wait 30sec for a match but have to play 50+ to get my cash

you are obviously no medium player

[draiocht]

I'm guessing PGI had some statistics that show a big dropoff just before 130 points. It's been interesting [-ly frustrating] how a relatively "good game" can fall short on points by a little or a lot (and incentivize playing like a jerk!).

[Motörhead]

In the game I unlocked the 10m bonus I got Philanthropist , and a team kill.

[Madcap72]

IDK, I like this go around*, because it shows off who can put together the most dangerous mech. I liked the last adversaries one as it showed who could play as a team well.



*Then again having been sitting in the top ten the first day and a half, take it with a grain of salt...

[Kodyn]

I do take it with a grain of salt Madcap lol, i was doing really well the first day and a half, with heavies, but then teamwork went the way of the dodo...Switched to a LurmHawk just to get some damage in as the team scatters and dies to the other teams lurms, figure I'll just farm today, and if I get a winning match, then great, if not, will go back to heavies tomorrow when better players are on trying to finish the tourney.

I've decided Sundays are just a bad day to work on challenges/tourneys, as it does seem to be the casual crowd out.