14 replies to this topic

[stealthraccoon]

I've never really understood why the teams are staggered to the 3 Lights, 3 Mediums, 3 Heavies and 3 Assaults - it doesn't seem very strategic.

In my mind it should be more along the lines of 6 Lights, 3 Mediums 2 Heavies and 1 Assault.

Another option might be 4 Lights, 5 Mediums 2 Heavies and 1 Assault.

Heck, it might even be interesting to do a 12x12 battle dedicated to a single weight class - imagine 24 Assaults opening up on each other!

Anyone else interested? (I'll leave the Urbie Derby comments to someone else)




full disclosure - I am totally biased in favor of Light mechs

Edited by stealthraccoon, 27 March 2015 - 10:12 PM.

[WrathOfDeadguy]

4/5/2/1 would be TT values for average force composition, wouldn't it? Nice as that would be, it's not likely to fly in a game where the heavy and assault queues each waver between 30-50% with about 15-30% mediums and 5-15% lights.

A huge part of the problem is that every single MW title to date has provided a linear progression from light to assault in its SP modes, leading players to treat assaults as endgame content... and not without reason, because balance between classes frankly sucked despite the quality evident in the rest of each game. MWO balance, much as everyone rags on it- still with good reason- is way better. If this were MW3 or MW4, you'd see about 1 light or medium for every five heavies and assaults. Unfortunately, allowing equal numbers of each weight class with a soft cap for each results in the game still strongly favoring heavier classes. Old habits die hard.

My thought on the subject would be to implement a soft 3/4/3/2 ratio to start with, concurrent with additional gradual balancing measures. Things like a global +1sec cooldown nerf on every single weapon in the game save flamers and MGs, and a global heat gain increase on a per-weapon basis rather than via ghost heat (such that it would only become burdensome with very large alphas, but would equally affect all large alphas rather than just particular weapon combinations if boated in quantities over Arbitrary Number X). Both would have the effect of increasing TTK while subtly buffing lights and mediums, whose mobility means that they fire their weapons less often anyway and thus would be relatively unaffected by small changes in heat gain or weapon cooldowns.

There have got to be incentives for lights and mediums to crank the force ratios all the way over to their TT values, though. Players will still gravitate towards heavies and assaults until they have a way to sustain the same profits with the lighter classes. That means role warfare, restricting certain consumables to specific classes, and a lot of other stuff that's not likely to happen. Sadly.

Edited by PS WrathOfDeadguy, 27 March 2015 - 10:50 PM.

[El Bandito]

Just match team tonnage instead of 3/3/3/3. Let people play whatever class they want without choking them with longer queue. Use other means to incentivize Lights, such as doubling the scouting bonuses.

Edited by El Bandito, 28 March 2015 - 05:20 AM.

[PurpleNinja]

I never really liked this class restriction.
I'd rather have the old version (no class restrictions) based only on Elo.

[Reitrix]

El Bandito, on 28 March 2015 - 05:19 AM, said:

Just match team tonnage instead of 3/3/3/3. Let people play whatever class they want without choking them with longer queue. Use other means to incentivize Lights, such as doubling the scouting bonuses.

Other means to incentivize Lights?

Like ... Perhaps reducing the amount of damage that can be planted into a single location virtually instantly?

Lights get the least mileage in the queues because few people want to pilot a 'mech that gets 1 shot on a regular basis while carrying minimum firepower. (Firestarters don't count.)

Scout bonuses happen exactly once, anyone can get them and our maps have guaranteed spawn locations. Add to those well known spawn locations the fact that both teams will sidle up to a specific point on the map and fight there. Like Saddle/Tunnel in Crimson and River/Tunnel for Forest to name a couple.

You don't need to scout because enemy positions and numbers are advertised, the classes are matched per side (if i have 4 assaults, so will the other guys). The closest we have to scouting is when a Light teams up with an LRM boat to rain on people.

Fix the maps and the damage levels and you fix lights.

Edited by Reitrix, 28 March 2015 - 05:50 AM.

[Mad Porthos]

Didn't one of the reasons for part of why forces were not always just heavy on assault and heavies have to do with DROPSHIPS not all being able to handle the heavier weights? I could swear that my vague memories in table top mechwarrior campaigns and tournaments of old often had an "in universe" reason that very often the lighter drop ship classes could handle full lances of the lighter mechs, giving you more "bodies on the ground" - but the assaults needed heavier dropships, so the real logistics defined there being more lights and mediums than heavies and assaults.

If you are establishing a beach head it seems you often are trying to get the most numbers through, and when getting one dropship safely to the ground gets you 4 operating units (lance) in the theatre of operations, rather than just 2 assaults... you are in much better positon. I think this actually was one of the things that did and should effect available drop weights and would interestingly vary different modes and scenarios.

Certain situations, where you have an established and well defended base would justify more assaults who do not have to go do long range reconaissance or traverse much ground quickly without being spotted - whereas if you are the assaulting team there may only have been a small window of time when you and your force were able to get down onto the surface, FAR from the location you are attacking (under radar) and much distance that had to be covered quickly. This would dictate lights and medium mechs, perhaps a few of the faster heavies. The mode could actually state these requirements for launch, varying from map to map, situation to situation.

With asymetric modes this then might be defined as attackers vs. defenders having 4/4/4 l/m/h vs. defenders getting 2/4/3/3 l/m/h/a with the situation being "asymetric" not in player numbers but composition of attacking and defending forces.

If not defined by opening script or matchmaking screen in this way, perhaps instead it could be a commander decision as matchmaking is beginning - where the first to become commander could decide a slight tweak... setting the tone of the match by deciding that a floating slot goes to one or another class of mech, such that you have by default the 3x3x3x3... but can decide to shift it by one into any particular class. Many will just derp it and say 2x3x3x4 and get that extra assault, but that happens anyways alot with standard matchmaker fails. If it's instead a decision to bring an extra light to create a full "light" lance" or to have greater numbers of mediums... even to go so far as something like 2x4x4x2 where you can take away from lights or assaults to increase the middle two classes, then I think you will find some interesting tactical possibilities, because groups can decide to try tactics depending on something LESS dedicated to having the MOST ASSAULTS, where you have an ability to tweak to a small degree your force composition to allow OTHER options. Players still will have to fill in these slots, so if they bring weird mediums when you are trying to go manuverable and you find all thier mediums move at 64kph rather than 89...er, well then it's still a planning and team work fail. The tonnage is still there and bringing less than full tonnage might also have some other advantages, perhaps in allowing some degree of other on field equipment if that is ever developed, such as AI tanks, or consumable refills due to an in theatre artillery unit etc.

Just ideas.

[DivineEvil]

The whole idea of such class equation is to make as many different mechs to participate in a match. Matchmaker still has to ignore the rule to build up the matches, that's why it's quite common to see 4 Assaults or Heavies in a fight despite the rule.

Simple solutions would be to increase the raw reward for playing lighter mechs sucessfully, which would apply a multiplier or a static reward for a Light (or Medium to a lesser degree) mech pilot for performing Damage+Assists and OverKill results, uncommon for a lighter-armed vehicle. Another thing is to reward running the lighter mech withing the weight-class, i.e. Locusts, Cicadas, Quickdraws, Victors, etc. since in a four-of-threes rule framework it's always better to have the opposite.

Aside from that, in my opinion, it is a good idea to scale each Mech's Sensor range on it's weight, thus making Light and Medium mechs more efficient at providing awareness and targeting data on a field. Finally, I'd be open to an option of adding "dodge/ricochet" chance to the mechs depending on their current speed, so that high speed mechs and builds would affect the survivability in greater extent.

[Euklides]

I would recommend anyone who is making a suggestion to increase light and medium play time to refrain from using arbitrary gains as incentive as a balancing factor.

Most of us play the game to have fun and/or relax the mind, if the majority does not find lights and mediums fun to play then no score or cbill increase is going to change that, the only case I can see it resulting in more lights and mediums would be for the grinding factor in order to make gain to acquire what is thought to be fun quicker. But this is more likely to provide frustration along with it.

Though I must add, I seem to not see heavies and assaults in the same light as everyone else, I have my most fun in piloting lights and some mediums. But they fact still stands that more players play primary heavies, then assaults and mediums. And lastly lights. Why this is can be concluded to be that it reduces their fun, the primary goal then is to locate what makes lights and mediums "unfun" not immediately assume that an arbitrary reward is lacking.

[El Bandito]

Euklides, on 28 March 2015 - 06:58 AM, said:

I would recommend anyone who is making a suggestion to increase light and medium play time to refrain from using arbitrary gains as incentive as a balancing factor.

Most of us play the game to have fun and/or relax the mind, if the majority does not find lights and mediums fun to play then no score or cbill increase is going to change that, the only case I can see it resulting in more lights and mediums would be for the grinding factor in order to make gain to acquire what is thought to be fun quicker. But this is more likely to provide frustration along with it.

Though I must add, I seem to not see heavies and assaults in the same light as everyone else, I have my most fun in piloting lights and some mediums. But they fact still stands that more players play primary heavies, then assaults and mediums. And lastly lights. Why this is can be concluded to be that it reduces their fun, the primary goal then is to locate what makes lights and mediums "unfun" not immediately assume that an arbitrary reward is lacking.

You simply cannot see the correlation between Lights and rewards. Few people play Lights because it is not rewarding in terms of C-Bills and XP. Lights generally do less damage, and require consumables such as UAV and Strikes to be effective--which costs them 40-80K C-Bills per match. Why should I play a Light and get 60K per match after deducting consumables, when I can just play as the Whale, spam CUAC5s, and get 150K per game without single use of consumables?

If my Lights earn 150K per match even if it does not survive the fight, then I would play Lights far more than currently. We need class specific skill trees--something like 50% less consumable cost for Light mechs--along with increased reward in Scouting and Hit-and-Fade bonuses.

Edited by El Bandito, 28 March 2015 - 07:33 AM.

[LordKnightFandragon]

3x3x3x3 gives an equal spread of each of the weight classes. And given that assaults are not the assaults we all know and think about, it wouldnt make sense to give each side only 1 assault. PLus, some assault pilots like to laden their assaults down with LRMs, not very....lead from the front......

[Hotthedd]

I love the idea of having drops with all combatants in the same weight class. Back before weight-based MM, when drops were balanced by matching forces on the number of mechs in each class being equal, I had some of my favorite games with 2/3 of the drop being mediums all over the field.

The only reason I remember it being changed was because of the chance that one teams assaults might be 3 or 4 AWS, while the others might be 2 Stalkers and 2 DDCs...

[Vandul]

This thread is sooooooooooooooo 2013

[Euklides]

El Bandito, on 28 March 2015 - 07:32 AM, said:

You simply cannot see the correlation between Lights and rewards. Few people play Lights because it is not rewarding in terms of C-Bills and XP. Lights generally do less damage, and require consumables such as UAV and Strikes to be effective--which costs them 40-80K C-Bills per match. Why should I play a Light and get 60K per match after deducting consumables, when I can just play as the Whale, spam CUAC5s, and get 150K per game without single use of consumables?

If my Lights earn 150K per match even if it does not survive the fight, then I would play Lights far more than currently. We need class specific skill trees--something like 50% less consumable cost for Light mechs--along with increased reward in Scouting and Hit-and-Fade bonuses.

Perhaps I fail to see the gravity of in game monetary gains as an incentive, but to have fun playing lights/mediums is that not enough for one to enjoy playing it?
Sure, I do not use UAV/strikes in pugs due to the costs, but that does not limit my fun. I might hamper me and my teams ability to win compared to one who does use it. But losing is not going to ruin my fun, simply trying to win is enough. Successful or not. But I might be one of the few were winning or losing is just a side effect, but fun is guaranteed.

[Wrathful Scythe]

I wish we had gamemodes where not every class was present. Like gamemodes with a max tonnage of 40 tonnes or min tonnage of 80 tonnes. Or a medium only queue. Something like that to break the monotony. That would be pretty amazing and not to hard to implement. With 6v6 with only mediums River City could become fun. Sadly, the playerbase just isn't strong enough to fill many queues. It can even be hard to find games on our 3 seperate queues let alone CW.

Implemented in CW where lesser important planets only allow to have mediums and lights because the faction won't allow us to drop in expensive and valuable mechs could also be interesting. A max tonnage of 100 or something could achieve a similar outcome, if we don't force the players to have 4 mechs. Someone wants to have 1 Atlas? Fine. Be the champ on the field. Someone wants to use 2 Cicadas and a Locust? Yes, do it!

Of course it' would bring problems again but I think this game would benefit from it.

[FupDup]

I wish that each weight class was better balanced against one another so that we wouldn't feel such a need to restrict what robots you can use in the first place...