102 replies to this topic

[Asmudius Heng]

Deathlike, on 09 October 2014 - 06:06 PM, said:

Links or it didn't happen.

FINE!!!

[Mcgral18]

Deathlike, on 09 October 2014 - 06:06 PM, said:

Links or it didn't happen.

https://twitter.com/...391075538960384

Asmudius Heng, on 09 October 2014 - 06:10 PM, said:

FINE!!!

Ninja'd...by 2 minutes apparently...

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Asmudius Heng, on 09 October 2014 - 06:00 PM, said:

beta season.

lol

[Whatzituyah]

Mcgral18, on 09 October 2014 - 06:13 PM, said:

https://twitter.com/...391075538960384



Ninja'd...by 2 minutes apparently...

The one thing Sonic the Hedgehog does not want to hear HA! Anyways that is pretty cool hes thinking of weight limits instead of just 1 light 1 medium 1 heavy and 1 assault.

[Koniving]

Elizander, on 09 October 2014 - 12:51 PM, said:

One reason why it is 240 might be to prevent people from bringing 3 Timberwolves and a Dasher (Whenever said Dasher comes out).

I'm fine with 240 to force the clammers to use their light mechs.

Though someone above you does mention they want it higher, the original poster was saying 240 is too high because you can run all heavies or even 2 assaults with 1 medium and a light, so why run anything less?

I kinda wish it wasn't an arbitrary 4 mech setup. Sure, 4 mechs forces you to do something in addition to 2 100 ton assaults, like 2 Dire Wolves and 2 Locusts... But if it allowed a dynamic assortment it really would be a tough choice.

Say you get 115 tons to work with.
You can use 100 tons on an Atlas and have nothing else.
You can get 95 tons and a 20 Locust.
90 tons and a Myst Lynx.
85 tons and a Spider.
80 tons and a Hollander.
75 tons and a Cicada.
70 ton Cataphract and a Blackjack
65 ton Jagermech and a Hunchback
60 ton Mad Dog and a Stormcrow.
From here it goes in full circle. Then combinations.
Hunchback, Blackjack and a Flea.
Shadowhawk and two Firestarters.
Three 35 tons and a Vindicator.
3 commandos and a Cicada.
3 Locusts and 2 Fleas. (or 5 locusts, 5 fleas, etc.)

So a max of 5 mechs, good flexibility, and a canon rarity of assaults on the field.
You want the most damaging and armored mechs? You do so at the risk of not having additional waves to include yourself in. Hopefully you can hold out while additional reinforcements come.

Edited by Koniving, 10 October 2014 - 09:01 AM.

[Triordinant]

FrupertApricot, on 09 October 2014 - 12:06 PM, said:

With 240 tons per drop you can still literally pack nothing but heavy mechs. The standard mech size of the IS is 55 tons (griffon, shd,wolverine etc.) and mediums are the most common, so why not a slightly more conservative and lore friendly 220 total tons reflecting average space of 4x55.

The reason why it's 240 tons is because the minimum 'mech weight is 20 tons and maximum is 100, which means the average is 60 tons. Therefore, 60 x 4 = 240 tons.

[yeshim]

I'm not a big fan of forcing people to bring exactly 4 mechs.

For a multi-mech match I would prefer to see a straight up tonnage limit, hopefully with the earlier mentioned variation of the limit, setting it at different values different depending on certain conditions(planet in question, map being played, change each week etc). I could reasonably see the limit being set anywhere between 120 and 295 tons.

120 is a reasonable absolute lower limit. It's very close to the 115 number mentioned earlier, allowing you to take 2 mechs of various combination or possibly more smaller mechs. I don't however like the notion of punishing someone with having a wasted 15 tons just for choosing to bring a 100 tonner over a 95 tonner, which is why I suggest 120 instead of 115. The limit always allows you 2 mechs, even if you choose to bring a 100 tonner. Perhaps a maximum limit of 4 mechs is in order though just to keep things somewhat reasonable, because to be honest 4 mechs with an average tonnage of 30 should be fine for someone preferring to bring higher numbers of lighter mechs. 6 20 tonners is approaching the realm of silly.

As for the the upper limit of what could possibly be reasonable to me 295 seems like a good absolute upper limit. Normally I would say 300, as it is a nice and round number roughly in the right spot for a reasonable upper limit, but placing it at 295 is just below the magic number that would let someone bring 3x100 or 4x75. This should lead to a bit more diversity even if we are talking of nothing but heavies and assaults as 295 does not perfectly fit 3x anything, 4x anything or even any 2+2 combination.

Edited by yeshim, 09 October 2014 - 07:53 PM.

[Felicitatem Parco]

Triordinant, on 09 October 2014 - 06:35 PM, said:

The reason why it's 240 tons is because the minimum 'mech weight is 20 tons and maximum is 100, which means the average is 60 tons. Therefore, 60 x 4 = 240 tons.

Stop being so damned reasonable.

[Xtrekker]

Sorry, no time to read the whole thread. But just in case it wasn't mentioned.

Drop tonnage should depend on the drop type. If it's a legitimate assault I wouldn't want a bunch of 3L's pecking at the gate. Just as there should be no reason for a whale to stomp around for recon/patrol.

Mediums should be the workhorse. I think I agree with OP.

[Pjwned]

I don't see a problem with bringing 4 of the lightest heavy class mechs, none of which are noted for being good except the mad dog, and if the limit is too low it could interfere with the intended goal of people bringing 1 of each weight class.

Maybe there is an actual problem that I really don't see, but for now it seems fine, it's probably going to cause problems if the limit is lower.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Xtrekker, on 09 October 2014 - 08:40 PM, said:

Sorry, no time to read the whole thread. But just in case it wasn't mentioned.

Drop tonnage should depend on the drop type. If it's a legitimate assault I wouldn't want a bunch of 3L's pecking at the gate. Just as there should be no reason for a whale to stomp around for recon/patrol.

Mediums should be the workhorse. I think I agree with OP.

I think drop tonnage should depend on the type of dropship you have.

IE purchasable drop ships for units.

Xtrekker, on 09 October 2014 - 08:40 PM, said:

Mediums should be the workhorse. I think I agree with OP.

And ppl that dont play mediums shouldnt play this mode

right?

[Bilbo]

Koniving, on 09 October 2014 - 06:31 PM, said:

Though someone above you does mention they want it higher, the original poster was saying 240 is too high because you can run all heavies or even 3 assaults with 1 medium, so why run anything less?

I kinda wish it wasn't an arbitrary 4 mech setup. Sure, 4 mechs forces you to do something in addition to 2 100 ton assaults, like 2 Dire Wolves and 2 Locusts... But if it allowed a dynamic assortment it really would be a tough choice.

Say you get 115 tons to work with.
You can use 100 tons on an Atlas and have nothing else.
You can get 95 tons and a 20 Locust.
90 tons and a Myst Lynx.
85 tons and a Spider.
80 tons and a Hollander.
75 tons and a Cicada.
70 ton Cataphract and a Blackjack
65 ton Jagermech and a Hunchback
60 ton Mad Dog and a Stormcrow.
From here it goes in full circle. Then combinations.
Hunchback, Blackjack and a Flea.
Shadowhawk and two Firestarters.
Three 35 tons and a Vindicator.
3 commandos and a Cicada.
3 Locusts and 2 Fleas.

So a max of 5 mechs, good flexibility, and a canon rarity of assaults on the field.
You want the most damaging and armored mechs? You do so at the risk of not having additional waves to include yourself in. Hopefully you can hold out while additional reinforcements come.

How is anyone going to run 3 assaults and a medium with a 240 ton limit?

[Kirkland Langue]

Bilbo, on 10 October 2014 - 06:38 AM, said:

How is anyone going to run 3 assaults and a medium with a 240 ton limit?

By naming one of their cicadas "Assault".

[Morang]

Triordinant, on 09 October 2014 - 06:35 PM, said:

The reason why it's 240 tons is because the minimum 'mech weight is 20 tons and maximum is 100, which means the average is 60 tons. Therefore, 60 x 4 = 240 tons.

I adressed it a couple of pages back. Simple average leads to overemphasis of the Assault class influence on the result, as Assaults have 5 entries, while other classes 4.

[Kirkland Langue]

Morang, on 10 October 2014 - 06:53 AM, said:

I adressed it a couple of pages back. Simple average leads to overemphasis of the Assault class influence on the result, as Assaults have 5 entries, while other classes 4.

err, that doesn't have anything to do with what you quoted.

Whether there are 100 Assault Chassis, or zero, (100+20) / 2 = 60

[WarHippy]

Deathlike, on 09 October 2014 - 04:37 PM, said:

TBH, we're pretty much playing what amounts of AssaultWarrior. While I personally don't care about the tonnage limit, if everyone is allowed to take a generous tonnage amount, it would reinforce that notion of AssaultWarrior. The more tonnage available, the more Timberwolves, Dire Wolves, or whatever people most whine about are going to be played.

There needs to be a set of choices made here to not make each CW match one dimensional... even though most of the top players/units will optimize it to death. It's not going to be an enjoyable CW if I could field 4 Timberwolves... the mech that's probably complained about the most... next to the Dire Wolf.

Sometimes balance on both ends have to be made, so that the outcome isn't strictly decided by the optimal choices.

That's just it though we are all talking about personal opinions and what we personally find enjoyable. The drop weight being low or the drop weight being high isn't going to stop the outcome from being decided by the optimal choices as their will be an optimal load out for either. However, of the two the lower drop weight is the only one that punishes one group of players in a poor attempt to avoid optimal drop decks which it will not do as there will always be an optimal drop deck. We need a better way to do this because while you are not going to enjoy CW fielding 4 Timber Wolves I'm not going to enjoy piloting or seeing endless waves of Shadowhawks or whatever mech ends up as the best bang for your buck..

[WarHippy]

Asmudius Heng, on 09 October 2014 - 06:10 PM, said:

FINE!!!

I'm actually pretty ok with this so long as there are some planets that the drop weight is much higher than 240. Could be interesting in that setup. I also am curious on any attack and defend mode if the attackers will have a higher drop weight seeing as they have to fight a fortified position?

[Kirkland Langue]

The answer is simple: PGI can just measure the drop rates for each mech and buff the ones which don't see enough play. By "enough" I don't mean that every mech should see the same amount. What I mean is that PGI should have some notion of the percentage they would like to see of each mech. Maybe they want 1% of mechs dropped to be Hunchbacks, if Hunchbacks are being under represented then PGI can simply give them more perks.

To be honest, they really should come up with a dynamic way to auto tweak mechs based upon drop rates. Maybe at the end of every season, calculate the CW drop rates for each mech, compare to a spreadsheet of "desired drop rates" and give +/- structure % = to the % difference between actual and desired drop rates.

Or it could be on a per drop - give CBill bonus for mechs which were underrepresented during the previous day. .. There really are ways to create dynamic systems to offer incentives and would lead to an ever changing battlefield as players try to capitalize on these changes.

[Deathlike]

WarHippy, on 10 October 2014 - 07:51 AM, said:

That's just it though we are all talking about personal opinions and what we personally find enjoyable. The drop weight being low or the drop weight being high isn't going to stop the outcome from being decided by the optimal choices as their will be an optimal load out for either. However, of the two the lower drop weight is the only one that punishes one group of players in a poor attempt to avoid optimal drop decks which it will not do as there will always be an optimal drop deck. We need a better way to do this because while you are not going to enjoy CW fielding 4 Timber Wolves I'm not going to enjoy piloting or seeing endless waves of Shadowhawks or whatever mech ends up as the best bang for your buck..

I don't see fielding 4 Timberwolves as a bad thing for me personally...

Look at it this way...

1) If you're specializing in Lights, it's not really a penalty. Tonnage limits are not your enemy. Assaults are.

2) If you're specializing in Assaults, you're probably going to be limited to 2 or so regardless. You'll probably be better off running a Heavy (like a Timberwolf) or "lighter Assault" (like a Victor) to consolidate as much firepower as you can, while minimizing the use of a "more fragile mech".

Either way.. Assault pilots kinda need to learn a few other weight classes to "diversify" their firepower. Lights suffer as is on their naturally low TTK and high risk. Going bigger as a Light pilot is "less of a penalty" as a result.

Edited by Deathlike, 10 October 2014 - 08:35 AM.

[Koniving]

Bilbo, on 10 October 2014 - 06:38 AM, said:

How is anyone going to run 3 assaults and a medium with a 240 ton limit?

Typo. 2 assaults and a medium. It was supposed to be "all heavies or even 2 assaults and a medium" (with a 25 to 30 ton light).