Jump to content

Why I Think 10 Vs 12 Might Work.


109 replies to this topic

#1 Gyrok

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 5,879 posts
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationPeriphery of the Inner Sphere, moving toward the core worlds with each passing day.

Posted 05 March 2015 - 07:05 AM

Looking at a few things the last few days, I came to the following conclusions that 10 vs 12 might work, and hoped to open a discussion that would advance this idea to the community as a whole.

The 1st myth about 10 vs 12: No one would play IS "horde" if Clans were the low numbered "heroes"

The reason this is false is the following: Clans have a very high initial cost, meaning that many new players would have to grind out for a while to get enough clan mechs to matter. During this time frame, they would literally be locked into being the "horde" until they worked up the cbills (or spent the $ IRL) to have enough mechs to be Clans. This would be true of all incoming new players, and would just be a facet of the game. There is already another online game that does this particular style of implementation, and it works very well for them. Additionally some of the players that do work to be Clans will like the feel of the IS better because PP FLD and more customization. You will have some that play both sides because they want a challenge, and you would have some who refuse to go to Clans (or IS) because <reasons>. So, no, not everyone would go Clans.

Second myth about 10 vs 12: 1v1 would be imbalanced.

Not necessarily. Consider this...if Clans were made to be DPS heavy, and IS were PP Alpha strike builds, as was original intent, then would it not be quite possible to 1v1 a mech, especially considering that in 1v1 scenarios it is not actually DPS you want, but alpha strike damage and PP FLD damage above all else? Essentially, you need much less damage if you can put it all on one panel. Any top tier comp player can confirm this, as they understand the mechanics of the game.

Third myth about 10 vs 12: Solo queue/group queue would be imbalanced.

No, it would not...you would just have solo/group clans on one side, and solo/group IS on the other. They do this now for CW, why is it so hard to fathom this could be done across the board?

Fourth myth about 10 vs 12: You would be forcing people to choose a tech tree to play together.

Well, somewhat yes and no. First, you could always sit in teamspeak and talk like people do now all the time and even play *gasp* different games. However, if you want to be in the same group, yes. Though, I would point out to anyone who has paid any attention to online games lately, that in, literally, *every other game with factions* 2 factions cannot team up together to do anything. So, what do those guys do? Join the same faction, or make an alt account to play together depending on the game.

Fifth myth about 10 vs 12: Unequal numbers on each side would be too difficult to balance.

Not necessarily, there are a number of ways to approach this in terms of defining things. I personally think it would work if they basically took the nerfs clans have had to this point off and just left them as Wave 1 was when it dropped. Nothing further needed, truthfully. However, you could simply balance 5 vs 6 which would leave you making DPS about ~16.7% higher than IS to compensate. That would balance slightly uneven groups without drastically changing balance one way or the other for equal numbers encounters later in the game or via private lobby. There would also need to be some buffs for under performing stuff, like ACs.

Thoughts?

Edited by Gyrok, 05 March 2015 - 07:09 AM.


#2 Kjudoon

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Rage
  • Rage
  • 7,636 posts
  • LocationWisconsin

Posted 05 March 2015 - 07:09 AM

10 v 12 in CW is a must. If not that, then an 3/4 drop deck imbalance weighted towards the IS. This also simulates local resupply and power balancing.

10 v 12 in PQs is something that should be made a choice since mixed units (although the side with the most clan almost always wins) offers balance. Well it would if you had equal mixes of Clan/IS mechs on both teams. The same way they should consider ECM IMHO.

On a personal note.... Clan "Heroes"? well I guess the villains need to paint themselves in that light. ;)

Edited by Kjudoon, 05 March 2015 - 07:10 AM.


#3 Gyrok

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 5,879 posts
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationPeriphery of the Inner Sphere, moving toward the core worlds with each passing day.

Posted 05 March 2015 - 07:10 AM

View PostKjudoon, on 05 March 2015 - 07:09 AM, said:

10 v 12 in CW is a must. If not that, then an 3/4 drop deck imbalance weighted towards the IS. This also simulates local resupply and power balancing.

10 v 12 in PQs is something that should be made a choice since mixed units (although the side with the most clan almost always wins) offers balance. Well it would if you had equal mixes of Clan/IS mechs on both teams. The same way they should consider ECM IMHO.

On a personal note.... Clan "Heroes"? well I guess the villains need to paint themselves in that light. ;)


I used that phrasing because that is how someone else portrayed it in another thread...

#4 sycocys

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Moderate Giver
  • Moderate Giver
  • 7,700 posts

Posted 05 March 2015 - 07:48 AM

While I don't know how imbalance Clan wave 1 was, I do really feel like having the clan mechs be more powerful and undermanned rather than the forced gear balancing would offer a far more interesting game for both sides.

One thing it would do is invoke the need for more strategy, and at least to some extent bring roles to CW on both fronts.

#5 Simbacca

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 797 posts
  • LocationCanada

Posted 05 March 2015 - 07:50 AM

View PostKjudoon, on 05 March 2015 - 07:09 AM, said:

10 v 12 in CW is a must.

I agree with this. Both sides get 240 ton drop decks. But I believe 3 lances vs 2 stars is probably the best way to balance things out in Community Warfare.

In the case of solo queue (assault, conquest, skirmish) - leave it as is. The mixed teams and the weight class limits work very well.

#6 Bigbacon

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 3,108 posts

Posted 05 March 2015 - 08:09 AM

Why don't they just work on making CW not suck in every other way before messing with this stuff?

#7 Summon3r

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,291 posts
  • Locationowning in sommet non meta

Posted 05 March 2015 - 08:34 AM

my thoughts are along these lines expanding on the 10v12 ...

1st things FIRST, any half decent IS 12 man i have played against in CW vs our 12 man are always good well balanced fights, that said:

go big or go home, 4 IS lances (16mechs) vs 3 clan stars (15mechs) keep the 10ton boost or push it to 20tons since we are adding another lance/star

since the clans have been introduced teh 10v12 thing has been proposed i think by probably 75+% of players, you rarely see people that dont agree with SOMETHING along these lines.

#8 Davers

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 9,886 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationCanada

Posted 05 March 2015 - 09:48 AM

10 v 12 would just be a nod to lore. It has nothing to do with balance in TT, where you use a point system. Without extensive testing there is no reason anyone should accept this as an acceptable solution.

#9 Gyrok

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 5,879 posts
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationPeriphery of the Inner Sphere, moving toward the core worlds with each passing day.

Posted 05 March 2015 - 10:16 AM

View PostDavers, on 05 March 2015 - 09:48 AM, said:

10 v 12 would just be a nod to lore. It has nothing to do with balance in TT, where you use a point system. Without extensive testing there is no reason anyone should accept this as an acceptable solution.


Which could be tested in CW beta, to determine viability and options...

#10 Davers

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 9,886 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationCanada

Posted 05 March 2015 - 10:23 AM

View PostGyrok, on 05 March 2015 - 10:16 AM, said:


Which could be tested in CW beta, to determine viability and options...

It's still not the right way to go though. Unless you want PGI to admit that the team with the most Clan mechs will win in public queue.

#11 Necromantion

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 1,193 posts
  • LocationBC, Canada

Posted 05 March 2015 - 10:43 AM

Big problem right off the bat.

PGI has indicated that they are implementing 4v4 and 8v8 battles eventually too. 10 or 5 mechs for Clans would leave them kinda hooped.

Also as ive mentioned before what would merc units do when they swap from IS to Clan? Suddenly a small unit with 12 players or so has to have 2 sitting every match? Not really a good idea for PGI.

I doubt that we will ever see anything other than multiples of 4.

Edited by Necromantion, 05 March 2015 - 10:43 AM.


#12 Leeroy Mechkins

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 582 posts

Posted 05 March 2015 - 10:46 AM

Give IS towers and minion mechs!!!
Also shop by the side for consumables and a big mech beast at one side you can kill for Aegis invulnerability module.

#13 Davers

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 9,886 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationCanada

Posted 05 March 2015 - 10:55 AM

View PostLeeroy Mechkins, on 05 March 2015 - 10:46 AM, said:

Give IS towers and minion mechs!!!
Also shop by the side for consumables and a big mech beast at one side you can kill for Aegis invulnerability module.

PGI can learn a lot from LoL in map design/objectives/role warfare.

#14 MischiefSC

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Benefactor
  • The Benefactor
  • 16,697 posts

Posted 05 March 2015 - 11:04 AM

I vets all go Clans and farm be players in is mechs. That will go well. Some vets may try to start is inherently inferior is mechs for a bit but that is intentionally designing a system based, literally, on vets using superior gear to farm nubs.

Bad idea is bad. Clans and is need balanced ton for ton.

#15 pbiggz

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 4,873 posts
  • LocationOutreach

Posted 05 March 2015 - 11:24 AM

nope

#16 Gyrok

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 5,879 posts
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationPeriphery of the Inner Sphere, moving toward the core worlds with each passing day.

Posted 05 March 2015 - 12:20 PM

View PostMischiefSC, on 05 March 2015 - 11:04 AM, said:

I vets all go Clans and farm be players in is mechs. That will go well. Some vets may try to start is inherently inferior is mechs for a bit but that is intentionally designing a system based, literally, on vets using superior gear to farm nubs.

Bad idea is bad. Clans and is need balanced ton for ton.


No, the system is not meant to be farming noobs.

However, the constant stream of new players into the grind would end up playing the drastically more populous side. Even then, you would still end up with many vets who never go Clans.

#17 Voivode

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hungry
  • The Hungry
  • 1,465 posts

Posted 05 March 2015 - 12:29 PM

I have both Clan and IS mechs, plenty of each. I think they are fairly well balanced against each other and don't regard either set of mechs I own to be the "superior" group. Outside of CW, I see IS mechs pump out kills and damage just as much as Clan mechs.

Within CW, however, clan mechs are dominating. This has everything to do with the game mode. Generator zerg rush is a game the clans will win because they have superior XL engines. That's it. That's all there is to it. More guns on fast packages that can survive losing a torso.

There's a simple solution to this. Put more game modes in CW so there's a greater variety of objectives and methods of achieving these objectives and you'll see the IS keep up with the clans much better. So long as zerg rushing generators is the name of the game, the better engines will win.

#18 Revis Volek

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 7,247 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationBack in the Pilots chair

Posted 05 March 2015 - 12:46 PM

View PostDavers, on 05 March 2015 - 09:48 AM, said:

10 v 12 would just be a nod to lore. It has nothing to do with balance in TT, where you use a point system. Without extensive testing there is no reason anyone should accept this as an acceptable solution.



Not to mention anyone with no understanding of the came wont play clans because who wants to be outnumbered? or vice versa people will see the clans as having less mechs and think they are OP when 3/4 of the arsenal is horribly UP.

Also, Russ has stated this sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo many times and i have quoted him sooooooooooooooooooooooomany times im sick.

10 v 12 would be a re do of the MM and could result in down time. Its also WAAAAAAAY more work then quirks so they took the path of least resistance!

View PostVoivode, on 05 March 2015 - 12:29 PM, said:

I have both Clan and IS mechs, plenty of each. I think they are fairly well balanced against each other and don't regard either set of mechs I own to be the "superior" group. Outside of CW, I see IS mechs pump out kills and damage just as much as Clan mechs.

Within CW, however, clan mechs are dominating. This has everything to do with the game mode. Generator zerg rush is a game the clans will win because they have superior XL engines. That's it. That's all there is to it. More guns on fast packages that can survive losing a torso.

There's a simple solution to this. Put more game modes in CW so there's a greater variety of objectives and methods of achieving these objectives and you'll see the IS keep up with the clans much better. So long as zerg rushing generators is the name of the game, the better engines will win.



Clans are the only ones? I guess you dont play CW as clans much because Light ZERG ZERG ZERG is all u see from them as well. To say the CLANS and there XL's are at complete fault shows me you are pretty biased.

#19 MischiefSC

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Benefactor
  • The Benefactor
  • 16,697 posts

Posted 05 March 2015 - 12:58 PM

View PostGyrok, on 05 March 2015 - 12:20 PM, said:


No, the system is not meant to be farming noobs.

However, the constant stream of new players into the grind would end up playing the drastically more populous side. Even then, you would still end up with many vets who never go Clans.


Why would vets stay? A masochistic pleasure at being dropped in inherently ton for ton inferior mechs alongside noobs against vet players in superior gear?

Vets would move Clan or quit, majority anyway. You don't want to call it vets in l33t gear farming nub swarms in trials but you also acknowledge that it's what would happen. You just want to pretend that vets would stay in the scrub patch with inferior mechs because... Reasons. Things are mostly balanced and most comp teams acknowledge the advantages of clan mechs, if only in the perks of pug farming.

Unbalance it note and anyone who stays is is only fooling themselves. What you would not have is any sort of balance


#20 Jaeger Gonzo

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 1,219 posts

Posted 05 March 2015 - 12:58 PM

View PostMischiefSC, on 05 March 2015 - 11:04 AM, said:

I vets all go Clans and farm be players in is mechs. That will go well. Some vets may try to start is inherently inferior is mechs for a bit but that is intentionally designing a system based, literally, on vets using superior gear to farm nubs.

Bad idea is bad. Clans and is need balanced ton for ton.

You dont understand idea. You dont get what asymmetrical balance is in fact. Described situation by you we got just now.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users