15 replies to this topic

[Alexander Diaz]

Oppossing post. BV is necessary. Pilot levels an in known.

How do we rectify?

I say; Take K/D into account.

BV on mechs is brilliant, but how do we modify considering pilot skill?

K/D plus wins/Plus Team score? Do we take a Battlefield response?

Are we wanting a strong commander role?

Commanders. Something worth defending, or throw always?

[Alexander Diaz]

Lone Wolf or Faction? Mercs say we should pick a side; Some say, even if that means profit.

[Rejarial Galatan]

idk honestly. I agree, Clan Tech is perfect, some sort of system needs to show up to stop the QQ that does not turn down the clan tech. How this can be done, ive no idea.

[Alexander Diaz]

I actually believe in bv 2.0, but we need a way to gauge pilot skill in order to calculate bv. The game is about skill but so many factors calculate skill. Besides spotting, dmg dealt, dmg absorbed (as a tank), what else should we factor in?

Faction Strength is a point. What faction strength do we need?

[Rejarial Galatan]

I really could not begin to guess on this.

Edited by Rejarial Galatan, 29 June 2012 - 10:47 PM.

[Creel]

I don't think we need to worry about balancing pilots. Mechs have a base BV (calculated at 4/4) that will do fine for balancing tech. balancing pilot skill as well brings in too many complications with existing teams. an elite squad that is accustomed to dropping together shouldn't be penalized for skill and coordination.

[Alexander Diaz]

As a TT/FPS hybrid Sim, most of us can't. But we need to speculate. What do you want ultimately from this franchise? Loyalty to the lore? Bealivability to the sci-fi? All of the above?

[Keylan Carlyle]

BV is a great thing for tabletop, but you cant use it for a video game.

Why? Cuz things work diffently. In Tabletop you get better chances to hit an target 120m away by using a PPC than a med laser. In video game you dont.
In Tabletop you get the same chance hitting if an enemy runns 50mph stright up to you or circling. In videogames its a huge diffrence.

In tabletop a pulse laser has a -2 to hit modifer, and oh great we get homing laser^^

The mechanics ars quite diffrent, and BV ist made to compare Mechs based on tabletop mechanics.

Edited by Keylan Carlyle, 29 June 2012 - 10:53 PM.

[Alexander Diaz]

Mass Effect 3 reclently expanding on their lore, which was eye-opening.

How can we open Clan Lore to the IS, in a fair way?

TT works differently in real time strategy, but how different is it?

Can an FPS be considered an RTS???

[Alexander Diaz]

The Timberwolf is a pirated dream of an IS Marauder and Catapult.

Clanners have lite originality.

[Alexander Diaz]

We should allow for a trial of bloodname, in a super secret circle, and award a player with a secret bloodname he can not announce until the invasion.

[Alexander Diaz]

Good point. How do we account for actual skill?

After all, the devs state That as the equalizer.

How do we gauge skill?

[Aethon]

I'm not sure balancing player skills is necessary; skill should be rewarding, not detrimental, to one's team. By skills, I mean the player's ability to play the game well, not in-game character skills/traits.

[Alexander Diaz]

I believe skill should be as much of a skill as a bane.

How are we challenging ourselves?

No bonus XP. Bonus CB and face higher ranks.

[Aethon]

Just my perspective, but...I've always found the changing 'landscape' of players to be the most interesting thing in online games. For example, the tactics in World of Tanks have changed significantly from month to month.

Take Himmelsdorf for example; if you've never played World of Tanks, it's a city map with a large, open park in the center, a hill on the Eastern edge of the map (more like a mountain) with a keep and its grounds to fight on, and a railway yard on the Western edge of the map, and things have changed drastically over the time I've played it. Initially, everyone just sought out whatever path they thought might give them an advantage. Then, it became two heavy groups trying to steamroll one another down the 'alley', while everyone else kind of took potshots, and just held off the other team while they waited for the 'alley' fight to decide the match. Then, it became a hill rush, with the 'alley' being a defensive, not offensive, position. Then it became a railyard rush. The last time I was playing, it was a hybrid of rushing the square, rushing the hill, and sending some tanks down the railyard while putting a couple heavy defensive units in the 'alley'.

This is what keeps things interesting, to me; players acquiring experience, learning from their mistakes (and the mistakes of others), and changing their tactics, which forces the community to either change along with them, or come up with a countertactic. This is how I find ways to challenge myself.

Also, if I want to continually challenge myself, I could always grab some sort of terrible mech like the Charger, and try to make it work. There are many ways of challenging one's self.

[Broad5ide]

Alexander Diaz, on 29 June 2012 - 11:22 PM, said:

I believe skill should be as much of a skill as a bane.

How are we challenging ourselves?

No bonus XP. Bonus CB and face higher ranks.

As much as I love the idea of a rating system to fight people at my skill level there are problems with that. What if I'm just learning a new mech or testing out wacky builds? What if I'm tired and just want to unwind with a non-competitive match? What If I'm playing in a cyber-cafe or on a friends computer that I'm not familiar with? all issues with a rating system if it's put in place all the time. Not to mention that rating differences will increase que times especially during non-peak hours.